ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Thursday, March 19, 2015

Equality in sentencing

A Michigan judge bucks the trend to let female sex criminals off the hook:
Saying there is no room for double standards, an Oakland County judge sentenced a 30-year-old female teacher to spend the next six to 15 years in prison for having a sexual relationship with a student.

Kathryn Ronk, who taught Spanish at a Catholic high school, could have been sentenced to as little as a year in jail, but Oakland County Circuit Court Judge Nanci Grant opted for prison time Tuesday, noting the boy was 15 at the time.

Grant was dismayed by letters asking for leniency for Ronk, a former teacher at Bishop Foley High School in Madison Heights, but making no mention of concern for the boy.
Attractive woman. Female judge. And what conclusions can we likely draw from this?  It is certainly unusual, given that attractive women usually receive less jail time than unattractive women in these situations.

Labels:

124 Comments:

Blogger dw March 19, 2015 11:05 AM  

"And what conclusions can we likely draw from this?"

Judge: At last I will have my revenge!

Blogger Lovekraft March 19, 2015 11:07 AM  

she should not be called a teacher any longer, but a pedophile. Let's call a spade a spade.

The judge's decision is a reflection of the state of pc's failures: many transgressions were excused and minimized and the offenders were watched very closely by the sober-minded. Many chances were given for these people to voluntarily clean up their act but didn't happen, as demonstrated by the judge stating pleas for clemency failed to mention the damage to the young boy.

Like society in general that can take only so much, leftists/progs whatever are starting to reap the fruits of their sick harvest.

Anonymous Eric Ashley March 19, 2015 11:10 AM  

That the movie 'Smoky and the Bandit' was correct.

Anonymous Soga March 19, 2015 11:10 AM  

I like this equality thing. It seems to piss off equalitarians.

Anonymous hausfrau March 19, 2015 11:17 AM  

So clearly women do have a place in professional positions. Maybe female judges should specialize in cases involving female defendants? The crime rate among women would certainly drop. Very funny and predictable.

Anonymous Aquila Aquilonis March 19, 2015 11:20 AM  

Wouldn't be surprised if the judge has a son around the same age or younger.

Anonymous Will Best March 19, 2015 11:21 AM  

Judge: At last I will have my revenge!

I thought that too, but the judge isn't unattractive, and was probably a looker in her youth (assuming she wasn't obese).

My thought is the judge has probably seen enough of these go through her court room to realize its an epidemic. Either that or she is the alpha widow of a man serving 15 years for diddling a 17 year old.

Blogger Nate March 19, 2015 11:26 AM  

well... ya did call it...

OpenID cailcorishev March 19, 2015 11:29 AM  

That the movie 'Smoky and the Bandit' was correct.

Isn't that "Cannonball Run," where the two hot chicks' entire racing strategy is to drive as fast as they want and flash their cleavage to get out of tickets, until they run into a female cop? Sounds like that might have been the dynamic here. Envy sometimes trumps herd loyalty.

Anonymous CJ March 19, 2015 11:29 AM  

The judge isn't as attractive as the defendant, but she isn't a cow. So much for my "punish the hottie" theory. Maybe she's a truly principled judge?

Blogger James Dixon March 19, 2015 11:36 AM  

> And what conclusions can we likely draw from this?

She turned down the judge's pass at her?

Anonymous Soga March 19, 2015 11:36 AM  

Seriously, look at the comments on the article Vox linked to. So much butthurt over this.

"But, but, sexual dimorphism!"

I thought gender was a social construct. I liked the chick telling people that "rape is rape." That's how you black knight this, folks. Wave the feminist flag and call it rape. Boom, feminism discredited; people know emotionally that it's not rape.

Blogger dw March 19, 2015 11:37 AM  

"Wouldn't be surprised if the judge has a son around the same age or younger."

In all likelihood that's probably it. She probably has a son or has friends who have boys around that age and has seen this shit before. It's telling how the nation would call for a 30 year old man sleeping with a 15 year old girl to be burned at the stake, but reverse the sexes and all of sudden it's "he wanted it anyway!" Kinda like how women who dress provocatively ask to be raped, right?

Anonymous kfg March 19, 2015 11:38 AM  

Don't teach boys not to fuck their hot teachers, teach hot teachers not to rape.

Blogger Joel C. Salomon March 19, 2015 11:38 AM  

Aquila Aquilonis “wouldn't be surprised if the judge has a son around the same age or younger.”

I wouldn’t have guessed at the age, but I also guessed she was the mother of a son. And sure enough…

From Judge looks forward to new role as chief, Oakland Press News 2010-01-09: “Grant and her husband, attorney Mark Frankel, have two sons.”

Blogger swiftfoxmark2 March 19, 2015 11:38 AM  

Given that the teacher is attractive, she'll appeal and get a reduced sentence.

Blogger Marissa March 19, 2015 11:38 AM  

The judge wasn't the total beast I was expecting, however she needs to lose about 50 pounds. That being said, it's probably better for the justice system that any young, attractive female defendant have an older, less attractive woman as a judge. And young, attractive male defendants should never have a female judge or majority jury.

Also, the comments on these articles from thirsty men are gross.

Anonymous James Schardt March 19, 2015 11:40 AM  

Not unusual at all. Women are generally harder on each other.

Blogger Joshua Dyal March 19, 2015 11:43 AM  

Given how many of these young attractive female teachers and underage teenage boys cases have popped up in the last year, I think we've actually found a true example of "rape culture" in America.

Blogger Joshua Dyal March 19, 2015 11:43 AM  

Sorry; meant last years.

Blogger dw March 19, 2015 11:47 AM  

Yeah, looking at the judge's picture she definitely had her day in the spotlight.

"Given that the teacher is attractive, she'll appeal and get a reduced sentence."

Female teachers caught in these situations don't appear to have even the slightest quantum of guilt for their actions.

Anonymous Eric Ashley March 19, 2015 11:53 AM  

Calicorshev, I was guessing. You're probably right. And that was the scene I was referencing, although in that scene the cop is hot too.

Blogger Cogitans Iuvenis March 19, 2015 11:53 AM  

I liked this comment, posted by a women to boot.

"Tina Bruce Seymour suggests rape is ok so long as a woman does it. #FeminismEpicFail"

Anonymous hausfrau March 19, 2015 12:01 PM  

I've always wondered why these attractive teachers go after teenage boys. I didn't find teenage boys attractive when I was a teenager. Teenage boys are awkward socially and generally don't come into their own physically until their early 20's. It's not the normal dynamic at play here.

Anonymous kfg March 19, 2015 12:03 PM  

"Female teachers caught in these situations don't appear to have even the slightest quantum of guilt for their actions. "

They are perfectly aware that the second set of books is the one that best reflects reality.

Blogger IM2L844 March 19, 2015 12:04 PM  

Why do all the headlines read "teacher had sex with..." rather than "teacher raped..."? She was just pleasuring the boy? Giving him favors?

Blogger Marissa March 19, 2015 12:06 PM  

Given how many of these young attractive female teachers and underage teenage boys cases have popped up in the last year, I think we've actually found a true example of "rape culture" in America.

Is it really rape though? I wouldn't consider it rape either if it were a 15-year-old girl and her attractive 30-year-old teacher--I wanted to sleep with some of my just-out-grad-school teachers. It should still be a punishable crime, but calling it rape diminishes the term. I don't even like the term "statutory rape". What is the right way to handle these situations? In a traditional state, how would these situations be treated?

Anonymous kfg March 19, 2015 12:12 PM  

"In a traditional state, how would these situations be treated? "

In the traditional Christian state the age of consent for girls was 12-14, and the age of consent for boys was when they could manage it.

And that is the second set of books.

Blogger CM March 19, 2015 12:13 PM  

Women are generally harder on women than men are. Most of those lenient sentences were ruled by male judges.

Men, even feminist men, have some innate desire to protect women... or they are just afraid of them.

Women don't have those same hang ups.

Blogger CM March 19, 2015 12:15 PM  

I wanted to sleep with some of my just-out-grad-school teachers. It should still be a punishable crime, but calling it rape diminishes the term.

I had a crush on the Am. History teacher my freshman year. He had twin boys in college at the time...

Anonymous Feh March 19, 2015 12:20 PM  

I've always wondered why these attractive teachers go after teenage boys. I didn't find teenage boys attractive when I was a teenager.

I had a teacher come on to me in high school and it creeped me the hell out. "Ewwww, you're totally old!" was my gut reaction (at 17, even 20 seems horribly ancient). I got away from her as fast as I could and made sure I wasn't alone with her again.

Blogger CM March 19, 2015 12:21 PM  

I've always wondered why these attractive teachers go after teenage boys. I didn't find teenage boys attractive when I was a teenager. Teenage boys are awkward socially and generally don't come into their own physically until their early 20's. It's not the normal dynamic at play here.

From one case that could've gone here but didn't, it was a young, fresh out of college girl in a new town, her bf had broken up with her and she was lonely.

She didn't do anything, but she was pushing boundaries with some of her students without, i think, really realizing it.

It is a boundary issue... and most women in today's culture are adequately versed in boundaries... recognizing, setting, and observing. Once you cross one, its easy to cross more.

Not trying to excuse this behavior. Its awful and women need to exercise better judgement and wisdom in many areas. But most won't because society tells us what feels good is good.

Anonymous Musashi March 19, 2015 12:22 PM  

Equal time for equal crime, bitches.

Blogger CM March 19, 2015 12:23 PM  

Aren't*

Blogger Derrick Bonsell March 19, 2015 12:24 PM  

I did my part.

Anonymous Feh March 19, 2015 12:24 PM  

I've always wondered why these attractive teachers go after teenage boys. I didn't find teenage boys attractive when I was a teenager.

Here's an answer.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3002412/Married-teacher-27-arrested-engaging-sex-act-17-year-old-student-car-told-school-rumored-relationship.html

Look at her husband. Fat beta Churchian. Tingle factor zero.

Anonymous Will Best March 19, 2015 12:25 PM  

I've always wondered why these attractive teachers go after teenage boys. I didn't find teenage boys attractive when I was a teenager. Teenage boys are awkward socially and generally don't come into their own physically until their early 20's. It's not the normal dynamic at play here.

If you put a woman with a group of men, eventually she will find one of them attractive. It would be interesting to do a study on the types of boys these women are screwing.

Blogger Marissa March 19, 2015 12:28 PM  

In the traditional Christian state the age of consent for girls was 12-14, and the age of consent for boys was when they could manage it.

And that is the second set of books.


The Second Set of Books

I didn't know what that was, so here is a link about it.

The age of consent you mention is for marriage.

Blogger Ghost March 19, 2015 12:30 PM  

Yeah, but then you read about the mother sending her daughter off to daycare with 249 bags of heroin, which the daughter hands out to her friends, thinking it's candy. She gets probation, not jail time, and she retains custody of all 3 of her kids.
It's over on mediaite dot com. If a father has been given the same leniency, I haven't heard of it.

Blogger Chris Mallory March 19, 2015 12:37 PM  

"she should not be called a teacher any longer, but a pedophile. Let's call a spade a spade."

Ok, we should call a spade a spade. You can call her a sexual predator, but since I would guess the boy was past the age of puberty and had developed secondary sex characteristics, she is not a pedophile. If the boy had been five instead of fifteen, then you call her a pedophile.

Anonymous Steve March 19, 2015 12:37 PM  

What James Schardt said.

Ask any woman who has ever had a female boss.

Blogger Doom March 19, 2015 12:37 PM  

Nah, wasn't an equality thing. It was a Catholic thing. Not that I mind, as a Catholic. However, this was just telling those who are presumed to have a faith that we are more guilty already. We are second class citizens in this country, already, at this point.

Blogger Stuart Paul March 19, 2015 12:39 PM  

She isn't a pedophile (or, to be more precise, this doesn't qualify her as one). Pedophiles are attracted to prepubescent children. Prepubescent is a subgroup of underage.

I'm not taking up for her, but I don't think it's appropriate to paint with broad brushes here.

Anonymous kfg March 19, 2015 12:42 PM  

12 is for marriage, 14 is for sex for girls, although there has been some variation in that from time to time. For instance, in Mexico it is 12 for both, although that is Federal law which can be modified upward by the states.

And with the caveat that the aristocracy was sometimes permitted a younger age of marriage if the match was politically auspicious.

The point is that from the outset in Victorian England these laws were never intended to apply to women and the current equalitarian laws are post WWII feminist in origin.

The idea that a horny 15 year old boy is a ped who doesn't know what he wants and can't consent to it is ludicrous, from a traditional Christian standpoint as well as any other, and the women don't show guilt because they know it.

I approve of the judges action because: Rule 4 until they choke on it and beg for mercy.

Anonymous Crank March 19, 2015 12:45 PM  

"Attractive woman. Female judge. And what conclusions can we likely draw "

Based on the photo I saw, the judge wasn't half bad, adjusted for age. Probably just that many women are less likely to be moved when a young woman defendant plays the poor little damsel card.

http://milawyersweekly.com/milwblog/files/2013/02/GRANT-Nanci.jpg

Blogger dw March 19, 2015 12:50 PM  

"The idea that a horny 15 year old boy is a ped who doesn't know what he wants and can't consent to it is ludicrous, from a traditional Christian standpoint as well as any other, and the women don't show guilt because they know it."

Women don't show guilt because they don't feel guilty for doing things they want to do. It just never occurs to them. If feelbad comes along, it's somebody else's fault.

Anonymous DMM March 19, 2015 12:50 PM  

In case it hasn't been linked yet, but the judge isn't a bad looking woman.

http://www.oakgov.com/courts/circuit/Pages/judges/grant-nanci.aspx

Blogger IM2L844 March 19, 2015 12:52 PM  

Ok, we should call a spade a spade. You can call her a sexual predator, but since I would guess the boy was past the age of puberty and had developed secondary sex characteristics, she is not a pedophile. If the boy had been five instead of fifteen, then you call her a pedophile.

I'm less concerned about the reality of it than I am about the long term effects of allowing the SJWs to always spin social perceptions in their favor. They want to have their cake and eat it too and we let them by conceding points like teenage boys are both less emotionally mature than girls of the same age, but also less emotionally vulnerable than girls of the same age to sexual predation. We should force them to be consistent in all things. Never give them an inch.

Anonymous kfg March 19, 2015 12:53 PM  

dw: That certainly plays into it as well.

Blogger Marissa March 19, 2015 12:56 PM  

Nah, wasn't an equality thing. It was a Catholic thing. Not that I mind, as a Catholic. However, this was just telling those who are presumed to have a faith that we are more guilty already. We are second class citizens in this country, already, at this point.

What on earth makes you think this? I see nothing in the story that even remotely points to this. Often the teachers at a Catholic school aren't even Catholic, even though some of them profess to be.

Blogger YIH March 19, 2015 1:28 PM  

Maybe she's seen our old friends at WND.
It's in Detrafrica, so we're probably talking mudsharking as well.
[related story link at bottom]
BTW, hope this vagitarian gets the book thrown at her too.

Blogger Vicki Hartley March 19, 2015 1:29 PM  

Double standard? Male teachers, coaches, and band directors have had relations with teenaged girls for decades and administrators have looked the other way.

Anonymous Alexander March 19, 2015 1:30 PM  

/popcorn

Anonymous kfg March 19, 2015 1:33 PM  

"We are second class citizens in this country, already, at this point."

Already? Do you know nothing of American history before JFK?
We remembered whose effigy we were burning on November 5th for a good century after the English forgot.

Blogger Joshua Dyal March 19, 2015 1:33 PM  

It's in Detrafrica, so we're probably talking mudsharking as well.
Oakland County is not Detroit. In fact, it's one of the principal destinations of the White Flight from Detroit that started in the 60s.

Blogger Joshua Dyal March 19, 2015 1:35 PM  

Is it really rape though? I wouldn't consider it rape either if it were a 15-year-old girl and her attractive 30-year-old teacher--I wanted to sleep with some of my just-out-grad-school teachers. It should still be a punishable crime, but calling it rape diminishes the term. I don't even like the term "statutory rape". What is the right way to handle these situations?

Is it rape if the sexes are reversed? Or are you saying that you don't believe in the entire concept of statutory rape actually being rape?

Anonymous Steve March 19, 2015 1:44 PM  

Kfg - it is a truism in the United Kingdom that Guido Fawkes was the only man ever to enter Parliament with honest intentions.

Anonymous ENthePeasant March 19, 2015 1:51 PM  

I'm certain Military Intel and probably the CIA, although who the hell knows for sure, never doubted for a second that this was a communist inspired revolution with totalitarian communist rule as the end game. We understood exactly what they were doing, in regards to "other" nationalistic movements within the NLF umbrella. Whenever I talk about Tet I'm told over and over by everyone who can read that in fact Tet was a great defeat for the NLF. False reality... but only once you understand that the Guerrilla forces under command of the NLF were used as assault troops and there destruction by the US/Viet forces in fact strengthened the control of the North Viet communist party who came out of it solidly in control with no real opposition from the NLF and hardly any losses at all were sustained by the NVA. As with most of America the group that couldn't get their mind around the mechanization's of the NVCP was the press. In fact a lot of people connected to the NLF worked for the US press in particular and they were shocked at the loss of friends (who the press regarded as nationalists, not communists). At the end of the day manipulating the press is easy.

Blogger Joel C. Salomon March 19, 2015 1:52 PM  

Marissa: Dante put such “seducers” (seduttori) in the Eighth Circle for a good reason. Would “criminal seduction” be a clearer phrase than “statutory rape”, or has the common meaning of the word seduction shifted too far for the phrase to be understood?

Blogger Joel C. Salomon March 19, 2015 1:52 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Anonymous ENthePeasant March 19, 2015 1:53 PM  

Sorry about that comment placement above. Trying to do ten things at once...

Anonymous Athor Pel March 19, 2015 2:00 PM  

" dw March 19, 2015 12:50 PM
...
Women don't show guilt because they don't feel guilty for doing things they want to do. It just never occurs to them. If feelbad comes along, it's somebody else's fault."



What you are describing is at worst psychopathy, meaning abnormal to absent normal emotional response, it's classed as a mental disorder for a reason.

At best it is women having no moral agency which means they should be under the authority of a father or husband at all times and if those don't exist then she needs to be a ward of the state under the authority of something like a parole officer.

My gut level reaction to a person unable to feel guilt is to kill them outright or exile them to a penal colony. They're too dangerous to have around.

Blogger Marissa March 19, 2015 2:01 PM  

Is it rape if the sexes are reversed? Or are you saying that you don't believe in the entire concept of statutory rape actually being rape?

I say no to your first question. To your second question, I do think it should be a criminal offense and punished by the law, but is it a form of rape? In some states, marriage is allowed at 15 or 16, sometimes at age 14 or lower if pregnancy is involved and/or judicial approval is given. Thus, someone at that age is capable of consenting to sex. However, I doubt these states allow the age gap we're talking about (I can't actually find information on that, though).

Blogger YIH March 19, 2015 2:04 PM  

Is it really rape though? I wouldn't consider it rape either if it were a 15-year-old girl and her attractive 30-year-old teacher--I wanted to sleep with some of my just-out-grad-school teachers. It should still be a punishable crime, but calling it rape diminishes the term. I don't even like the term "statutory rape". What is the right way to handle these situations?
YouTube video #1: Autobiographical? The world may never know.
Being a decade ago in FL was Debra LaFave (of course there's a Wackopedia page!) who was boning a 14-yo boy - wound up getting probation.
There was quite a bit of debate about it, most saying (if serious) ''if the sexes were reversed, (he) would have been nailed to the wall'' (or if not) ''that kid was consenting, you would be too!''.
If you'd seen her, you can figure out how she got caught...
The kid was bragging about it, of course.
YouTube video #2.

Blogger Marissa March 19, 2015 2:04 PM  

Marissa: Dante put such “seducers” (seduttori) in the Eighth Circle for a good reason. Would “criminal seduction” be a clearer phrase than “statutory rape”, or has the common meaning of the word seduction shifted too far for the phrase to be understood?

You know, seduction used to be the name of a crime in this country. There is a mug shot of Frank Sinatra I always see floating around with that charge (not sure if it's true). But I do think that is a good phrase, much better than statutory rape. Rape is forcible sex, and taking advantage of a young person's hormones and willingness doesn't rise to that definition. I think watering down the term has made it easier for regretful co-eds and vengeful women (and their white knight criminal justice system enablers) to use it more loosely.

Blogger MATT March 19, 2015 2:08 PM  

Im going Roosh sytyle here..Age of consent should be 14.

Anonymous kfg March 19, 2015 2:10 PM  

" I doubt these states allow the age gap we're talking about . . ."

I'm not current to the last legislative session, but I know of no state that has a restriction on age gap for marriage, although a judge may well take that into account. In fact, in some states there is no explicit age restriction at all, the matter resting entirely in the hands of the judge, who is expected to use, ya know, judgement.

Technically, marriage is an affirmative defence against statutory rape.

Blogger CM March 19, 2015 2:11 PM  

or has the common meaning of the word seduction shifted too far for the phrase to be understood?

The idea that 15 year old girls (or boys) would not be considered liable for criminal seduction... ever... says the entire thing needs to go.

Sorry, but i don't care about age. If you're wearing a short skirt and no panties to try and get an A in a failing class, you are guilty of criminal seduction.

We punish one party for an act that was mutual assuming 15 year olds are incapable of sexual license... while at the same time claiming its stupid to teach abstinence because they gonna do it anyway.

Can't have it both ways. Either your mature enough to make sexual choices or you aren't.

Anonymous kfg March 19, 2015 2:13 PM  

"Im going Roosh sytyle here..Age of consent should be 14."

As I've raised this issue before on his forums, he may have been put on that track by me.

Blogger Marissa March 19, 2015 2:14 PM  

Wow, Mrs. LaFave belongs in an 80s hair metal video (and nowhere near having a live, captive audience of teen boys for hours a day). The blog you linked to had the weirdest criticism of her husband:

I was curious why Owen Lafave would go on nation-wide television in order to tell his side of the story. But now I know the answer; it was for publicity. Owen Lafave is associated with a documentary film that is being made about the incident. The tentative title for this film is "After School: A study of the disturbing trend of teachers having sex with their students." You can see the documentary's website by clicking here.

We affirm that Mr. Lafave and his associates have the right to make this film. Having said that, we do not like the idea of any person or persons profiting from any crime, but especially crimes involving children.

On the other hand, maybe this picture might help parents understand the "danger signs" that are often present when one of these predators begins stalking his or her victim. Therefore, parents may then be able to intervene and spare their child the sort of long-term damage that undoubtedly has been caused to Lafave's alleged victim.

And in that context, the film may have some redeeming value.


They just can't help but take a potshot at the cuckolded husband?

Blogger CM March 19, 2015 2:14 PM  

Technically, marriage is an affirmative defence against statutory rape.

And against criminal seduction.

Anonymous Steve March 19, 2015 2:17 PM  

Matt - even in countries where the age of consent is 14 (i.e. Italy), it's still a criminal offence for teachers and other adults in a position of authority to shag their pupils.

Blogger YIH March 19, 2015 2:23 PM  

Wow, Mrs. LaFave belongs in an 80s hair metal video
When I saw the modeling shots of her the first thing that came to mind then was ''Wow, the Van Halen song come to life!''

Blogger YIH March 19, 2015 2:27 PM  

And yes, I remember the Bengals cheerleader story.
Go team!

Blogger tweell March 19, 2015 2:30 PM  

We should be splitting court cases up according to sex and race. Judges are best at getting through the BS to the truth with their own kind, IMHO. Admittedly, I have a small sample size. The one black judge I observed was relatively lenient with property crimes, relying mostly on fines and restitution orders. He was the opposite with drug dealers, calling them community poisoners, and gave them the maximum that he was allowed.

Anonymous Lawyer Guy March 19, 2015 2:30 PM  

There was a case sort of like this about 12-13 years ago in our county circuit. The judge sentenced the teacher to a long stretch (7-12?), and it stopped the female teachers from screwing students for a long time, IIRC 6 or 7 years.

I asked the judge why over a drink a few years after, and he said he decided to just follow the sentencing guidelines for the position of the offender, and age of the victim, and ignore that she was a woman. It worked.

Anonymous Gary March 19, 2015 2:31 PM  

I think a bunch of you are looking at this the wrong way. The woman is guilty of taking advantage of a minor under her care just as I'd be guilty of taking advantage of one of my staff members that I supervise. People send their children to school for (lack of better term) an education not to be prayed upon by the staff.

What if the woman gave the 15 year old AIDS or she got knocked up and the boy was on the hook for child support? It has happened before.

Blogger MATT March 19, 2015 2:36 PM  

Kfg, I was referring to his recent article about making rape on private property legal and his idea that it would lead to more women taking responsibility for their wellbeing.

Anonymous kfg March 19, 2015 2:36 PM  

"The woman is guilty of taking advantage of a minor under her care . . ."

I look at that as more feminist bilge that they actually intended to apply only to men. I think you should too. I think that 150 years ago, before you were taught to be "on the right side of history," you would have.

You are, of course, free to disagree.

Blogger YIH March 19, 2015 2:41 PM  

Steve:
it's still a criminal offence for teachers and other adults in a position of authority to shag their pupils.
Many states have laws against college staff banging coeds (even if over 18) for just that reason.

Anonymous Gary March 19, 2015 2:41 PM  

"I look at that as more feminist bilge that they actually intended to apply only to men."

I have no problem applying the enemies rules against them, and take wicked delight in doing so. So far on Facebook I have used this case to go effect with my best quote being the following-

"If women really wished to be treated the same as men then they get the same sentencing as well. Otherwise the cries for equality are just a farce and should be mocked as such."

Things are going splendid.

Anonymous Feh March 19, 2015 2:43 PM  

In some states, marriage is allowed at 15 or 16, sometimes at age 14 or lower if pregnancy is involved and/or judicial approval is given. Thus, someone at that age is capable of consenting to sex.

Marriage before 18 requires parental consent you dolt. Therefore the children are not capable of consenting to sex before this age - it requires parental consent.

None of these skanks who are getting it on with male students are asking his parents for consent, I guarantee you that.

Anonymous kfg March 19, 2015 2:45 PM  

YIH: That is so recent that in my time in academia that feminist coeds were, successfully, demanding the right to bang any professor they wanted to.

Oh, the irony.

Anonymous The Obvious March 19, 2015 2:52 PM  

I have no problem applying the enemies rules against them, and take wicked delight in doing so. .

Exactly right, like it said in Rules for Radicals, make them live up to their own rules.

Blogger professorastro March 19, 2015 2:53 PM  

I would love to see the boys who these women go after. I would bet all my money it isn't the lonely, sensitive boy in the back writing poetry and wearing all black. I have a feeling these would be the alphas-in-waiting who could get any HS girl anyway.

Anonymous 11B March 19, 2015 2:54 PM  

Any guesses as to Kathryn Ronk's ethnicity?

Anonymous kfg March 19, 2015 2:55 PM  

Jam it down their throats, with prejudice.

Anonymous Titus Didius Tacitus March 19, 2015 3:05 PM  

The Obvious: "Exactly right, like it said in Rules for Radicals, make them live up to their own rules."

Yes. Because they won't. They can't. And with social justice warriors, they never intended to.

Blogger YIH March 19, 2015 3:08 PM  

Gary:
What if the woman gave the 15 year old AIDS
Wait, what?

Anonymous Gary March 19, 2015 3:18 PM  

"Yes. Because they won't. They can't. And with social justice warriors, they never intended to."

Ah but my sallies are not aimed at them for they have no shame. My payload is aimed at the general public who is clueless to the SJW in their midst. The more they are exposed for the unreasonable buttholes they are, the more the population in general will shun them.

Paint them in a corner with their own words and slide the knife in.

This morning I came up with what I thought was a brilliant idea. The Democrats love themselves abortion do they not? I pointed out to my wife the fear-mongering they trot out every election. I also pointed out that with Reagan-Bush-Bush as Presidents don't you think if it was going to be repealed that it would be done so by now? Knowing that the bulk of abortions are by repeat offenders simply offer a change to the laws that every woman should be allowed one abortion, no more. Abortion should be safe and rare no? Watch the democrats twist themselves into pretzels trying to justify unlimited access.

Anonymous Ain March 19, 2015 3:19 PM  

"Is it really rape though? I wouldn't consider it rape either if it were a 15-year-old girl and her attractive 30-year-old teacher--I wanted to sleep with some of my just-out-grad-school teachers. It should still be a punishable crime, but calling it rape diminishes the term. I don't even like the term "statutory rape".

I'm of the same opinion. It wasn't long ago that people got married at that age. My grandma was 15. Not that I believe it is ok, especially for teachers, though I believe it to more along the lines of corrupting a minor, such as giving them drugs or alcohol. Calling it rape is ridiculous. Real child molestation ruins lives.

I'm not compelled to call someone a victim when they are an accomplice, sometimes even the instigator.

Anonymous Gary March 19, 2015 3:21 PM  

@YIH

A hypothetical of course, I could have just as easily used herpes or some other unpleasant STD.

Anonymous Nope March 19, 2015 3:27 PM  

I'm of the same opinion. It wasn't long ago that people got married at that age. My grandma was 15.

I guarantee you they did not consent themselves into that marriage. They got their parents consent. Therefore the example is irrelevant.

OpenID cailcorishev March 19, 2015 3:31 PM  

If you put a woman with a group of men, eventually she will find one of them attractive.

True, reminds me of a favorite quote from Joe Bob Briggs about co-ed dorms:

"Obviously the bureaucrat who wrote this policy has never witnessed an office romance. The girl may look like your idea of warmed-over corned beef hash, but when you spend EVERY DAY with her, there's going to be that moment when the bare shoulder, the funny laugh, or the overheard conversation with her girlfriend when she talks about getting naked at the bachelorette party, suddenly ZAPS you, and you start wondering what's under there."

So a teacher has a whipped beta schlub at home, and there's this boy (though 15 is/was a man in plenty of societies) at school who looks her in the eye like maybe he knows what she needs. Some cases may also involve a woman's desire to "mold" a man into what she wants -- how better to do that than to start with a young one?

And some of them are simply rebellious and drawn to whatever's taboo, of course.

OpenID cailcorishev March 19, 2015 3:36 PM  

What if the woman gave the 15 year old AIDS

She can't, but your point is well taken. Parents don't send their 15-year-old boys to school to have sex with the teacher. They send them there to have sex with their classmates -- and to be trained to do it safely, of course.

Blogger MATT March 19, 2015 3:37 PM  

@Nope how could you possibly know that?


"I imagine your're mistaken therefor you're wrong."

Ridiculous.

If your kids arent ready to be alone in the world by the time their bodies are ready for sex, you failed miserably.

Blogger Marissa March 19, 2015 3:37 PM  

I guarantee you they did not consent themselves into that marriage. They got their parents consent. Therefore the example is irrelevant.

So they entreated their parents to allow the marriage....because they didn't want to be married? That makes no sense. Most people from decent families prior to the 20th century had to get their fathers' consent for a marriage to happen.

Anonymous Nope March 19, 2015 3:46 PM  

So they entreated their parents to allow the marriage....because they didn't want to be married? That makes no sense. Most people from decent families prior to the 20th century had to get their fathers' consent for a marriage to happen.

The argument, you dumbass, is that people age 15 can get married, and therefore they should be allowed to consent to sex as well. This argument is WRONG because underage marriage requires the parent's consent (today just as it did in the past). If you wanted to argue that 15 year olds today should be allowed to have sex if their parents consented, then that would have merit. But I doubt such consent would be forthcoming.

Blogger MATT March 19, 2015 3:57 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger MATT March 19, 2015 3:58 PM  

According to Nope's pathetic attempt at logic, in nearly all marriages of the past, the parties getting married had no agency.

Anonymous kfg March 19, 2015 4:00 PM  

" . . . I doubt such consent would be forthcoming."

And yet, the only reason the age of consent was raised above the traditional was because parents did - and charged for it.

Anonymous Nope March 19, 2015 4:11 PM  

According to Nope's pathetic attempt at logic, in nearly all marriages of the past, the parties getting married had no agency.

What part of "parental consent" don't you understand, moron?

If you wanted to get married and they disagreed, you didn't get married.

Anonymous kfg March 19, 2015 4:15 PM  

"They gave each other a pledge?"

Blogger CM March 19, 2015 4:16 PM  

If you wanted to argue that 15 year olds today should be allowed to have sex if their parents consented, then that would have merit. But I doubt such consent would be forthcoming.

But.... parents DO consent to their children having sex. Even if not actively, certainly passively.

They may not consent to the teacher, but i seriously doubt they are giving "specific" consent. Meaning... unilateral consent to the teenager to do who they want to do with the assumption they won't want to do the teacher.

Blogger CM March 19, 2015 4:17 PM  

If you wanted to get married and they disagreed, you didn't get married.

Or you eloped.

Blogger Robert What? March 19, 2015 4:24 PM  

When I was 15 and a hot 30 year old teacher came onto me, I would have thought I died and went to heaven.

It is very unfortunate for this woman. But if women want to be treated just like men, they can't choose only the good parts.

Anonymous BigGaySteve March 19, 2015 4:41 PM  

"Many states have laws against college staff banging coeds (even if over 18) for just that reason."
Someone should tell the Vice president of Harrisburg Area Community college about that who has "safe space" parties for guys not old enough to go to gay bars. Oh wait are they just for coeds? At least college is an optional choice public school for the most part is not.

This woman could have saddled him with child support payments for 18 years ruining his life.

Blogger MATT March 19, 2015 4:43 PM  

Nope imagines namecalling is helping his case. Or at the very least, will be overlooked and not end hin him being banned. If its the case that he doesnt care about being banned, I wonder why he bothers to post here at all.

As for his absurd claim that no one under the age at which people are considered legal adults ever got married without parental consent, I dont see how he could know that. Is he talking about the time in this country before the state began issuing marriage licenses or before? Is he privvy to the recorded practices of each and every church and temple in this nation? One can only imagine.

Now I ask you directly, Nope, can a couple be forced by their parents to be married and if they are, is that a real marriage? How are you defining marriage?

Blogger MATT March 19, 2015 4:47 PM  

@Robert What? I remember wanting to bang my hot substitute teacher when I was 13. By High School I wanted to bang even the huge breasted middle aged ones when their nipples got hard in class. Disturbing

Anonymous Gary March 19, 2015 5:14 PM  

"But.... parents DO consent to their children having sex. Even if not actively, certainly passively."

Not in this house, my three children know there will be dire consequences if we find out there is any under age hanky panky going on. The Mrs and I keep a tight rein on our offspring and are in lockstep on this.

We give them rope in other areas but not this one. Kids in their teens need plenty of structure to keep from going off the rails. I hesitate to even use the term "rope" as it is stuff we use to do when we were younger without a second thought.

A few months ago my daughter asked if she could do a burnout in the truck. I was happy to instruct her on the finer points of lighting them up. Can you imagine helicopter parents doing the same? Kids are meant to get dirty and banged up, gives them grit.

Anonymous armenia4ever March 19, 2015 7:54 PM  

I'm legitimately shocked.

Note that the judge was a woman. This possibly implies that female judges may be harsher on women than male judges would be.

Let's see this newfangled legal equality really kick into full gear.

Blogger ray March 19, 2015 9:15 PM  

"I wouldn’t have guessed at the age, but I also guessed she was the mother of a son."


Also my assumption. Female rarely have an innate thirst for justice and truth. It's characteristic of masculinity, which is sourced in Father.

If the fem-judge can relate PERSONALLY to the aggrieved boy, then a chance of 'equal justice before the law' may occur. Otherwise, probly not. Males are basically bad, females basically good. This is America.

Of course, that's only one reason why females should not sit in judgment over males. There are many others, including destruction of family, mass imprisonment of males, inciting female empowerment and entitlement, etc.

The main reason against Femjudges in Equality-land, tho, is Paul's letter to Timothy:

"But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression." (1 Timothy 2)


Of course modern folks, including 'christians', hate that Paul prohibits females from assuming authority over males. They cow to their women and expect others to do likewise. But if you're an actual Christian or Hebrew, you don't rebel against the disciple of Christ, as recorded in Scripture.

Anonymous scoobius dubious March 19, 2015 9:20 PM  

Sounds like some of you ninnies need to re-read Romeo and Juliet.

I find it impossible to pass any judgment on this thing without knowing what the boy's responses and reactions were. Was he enjoying it? Was he savvy? Was he being manipulated? How did he feel about it afterwards?

I'm sure it's legitimate to regard this as a serious legal matter, but exactly HOW serious depends on the specific circumstances. It's not like she assaulted him in the stairwell with a knife, which is the sort of thing "rape" really is. This isn't rape, it's some form of inappropriate behavior that we don't have a precise enough term for.

OpenID peppermintfrosted March 19, 2015 9:28 PM  

30 year old woman. So when she gets out, she won't be able to have any more kids. Her life is over now.

Women don't think about that, though. That's why they shouldn't be allowed anywhere near power.

Blogger ray March 19, 2015 9:34 PM  

"I've always wondered why these attractive teachers go after teenage boys. I didn't find teenage boys attractive when I was a teenager."


Most females don't. Or didn't. It's a result of a full-on matriarchal culture. Instead of marrying at the heights of fertility and attractiveness (traditional culture), modern females pursue independence, 'education', careers, empowerment, material purchases, etc. Their parents usually encourage this. Western nations absolutely encourage, and in reality demand, this.

These 'independent' females hit their late twenties or thirties, realize with incremental desperation the pickings are slim or none (i.e., not the Hot Guys), so target the only males available. And easily accessible.

It's not just predictable, it's intentional.

Anonymous Apollo March 19, 2015 10:15 PM  

@scoobius dubious

I find it impossible to pass any judgment on this thing without knowing what the boy's responses and reactions were. Was he enjoying it? Was he savvy? Was he being manipulated? How did he feel about it afterwards?

The Feminist argument with regard to age of consent laws is that any person under that age is not considered capable of consenting to sex, so the circumstances don't matter. It this is going to apply to men having sex with younger women, I'm more than happy to make it apply in the exact same way to women having sex with younger men. Equality.

This isn't rape, it's some form of inappropriate behavior that we don't have a precise enough term for.

The Feminist term for this type of behavior is rape. Statutory rape. See the above argument. More Equality.

In a sensible society we would consider circumstances when determining if this type of behavior is a crime, and we definitely wouldn't be calling this type of thing rape. We don't live in such a society however, and I'm not inclined to start being sensible in this case just because the perp happens to be a woman. Equality. Equality 'til they choke on it.

Blogger The Overgrown Hobbit March 20, 2015 2:02 AM  

This site has been a real eye-opener for me. (I read it at the behest of my husband) I'd always thought the whole "kids really want sex so I should have full access to your 12 year old daughter if I can just figure out hoe to seduce her" was a libtard thing.

live and learn.

Anonymous scoobius dubious March 20, 2015 3:02 AM  

Well, it's an interesting puzzling thing. My feeling (I'm a Confucian and a Taoist, philosophically speaking, and so I believe in the good old doctrine of the "rectification of names") is that the words "equal" and "identical" do not denote the same things, and although they may have similar valences, they are not in fact the same thing. Example.......

WARNING! Alert for extended annoying biographical detail: if you're bored or annoyed by my biography, as you should be, then skip this.

I went to a highly elite high school in Manhattan. There was a league of about a dozen elite private high schools in the city who socialized with each other, and we didn't take anybody else very seriously. I had a Bucknell-level education by the time I was fourteen. Harvard in some ways was just a finishing school.

Anyway, the point I'm trying to make was that I did not become sexually sophisticated until a fairly late age, fifteen or so, which is unusually late in NYC. At one point when I was about thirteen, I was hanging around the school after hours with my friends (I'll remind you I was very naive), and this chick from one of the visiting girls' schools (we became great friends afterwards), she was very cute, and she walked up to me without saying a word, unbuttoned my shirt, and kissed my chest for about half an hour. Then she returned to her group of girls, who cheered her like she'd won a dare. I was still not sexually awakened, so I was a little puzzled, but I knew enough to think, Hey,a cute girl checked me out, that's kinda nice. If it had been a boy trying to do it, or an ugly female, I would have had enough horse sense to slap them away.

But my point is this: No sane person would think think this girl had committed a crime: she was just experimenting, and trying to understand the limits of her sexual power. I felt honored by her attention, andI would never in a million years get the idea that I had been "raped." The concept would be ridiculous.

Does that have anything useful of analysis to add to this question?

Anonymous Apollo March 20, 2015 3:17 AM  

@scoobius dubious

But my point is this: No sane person would think think this girl had committed a crime: she was just experimenting, and trying to understand the limits of her sexual power. I felt honored by her attention, andI would never in a million years get the idea that I had been "raped." The concept would be ridiculous.

You disagree with the current laws around consent and statutory rape. I gathered that the first time round. Your reasoning is not entirely unjustified.

Myself, and from what I can tell a number of other commentors, are suggesting that as long as these Feminist inspired laws are used to imprison men, they should apply equally to women. Due to that other important Feminist principle, Equality.

If we're going to talk about changing the laws, then lets do it the next time a man is in this situation.

Blogger Robert What? March 20, 2015 4:39 AM  

Don't they know they're destroying the fantasies of millions of teenage boys? I wonder how the authorities found out about it. Somebody had a big mouth.

Blogger Joshua Dyal March 20, 2015 7:45 AM  

This isn't rape, it's some form of inappropriate behavior that we don't have a precise enough term for.

Sure we do. Statutory rape. You may not like it, and you can certainly make a case that it's not "rape rape" or whatever, but the term certainly exists. Also, we have sexual assault, corruption of a minor, unlawful sex with a minor, carnal knowledge of a minor, unlawful carnal knowledge, sexual battery, and carnal knowledge.

And the notion that these are feminist laws is ridiculous; the first recorded age of consent law was from the 1200s. They have been perverted and abused by feminists (of course, as have almost every other aspect of our culture) but they are not feminist laws, and they can be "superverted" back to their original purpose by adhering to a strict interpretation of them, of course.

Blogger IM2L844 March 20, 2015 8:52 AM  

This site has been a real eye-opener for me. (I read it at the behest of my husband) I'd always thought the whole "kids really want sex so I should have full access to your 12 year old daughter if I can just figure out hoe to seduce her" was a libtard thing.

live and learn.


Overgrown Hobbit, I'm going to temporarily suspend scorn and ridicule because I think you either haven't read enough of this site to know what you think you know about it or you didn't mean what it looks like you may have meant.

One more post should clear things up.

Anonymous Ain March 20, 2015 11:49 AM  

" Nope: I'm of the same opinion. It wasn't long ago that people got married at that age. My grandma was 15.

I guarantee you they did not consent themselves into that marriage. They got their parents consent. Therefore the example is irrelevant.


I never equated it to being the same thing or else I would have said that sex with minors is fine. My point is that I don't believe statutory rape is rape.

People getting married at very young ages and starting families is obviously different from today's deleterious societal attitude that sleeping around in one's twenties to "get it out of their system" is the way to go, and starting the practice in young to mid teens makes it worse.

Anonymous Clay March 20, 2015 6:45 PM  

Huh. I'm just not sure what to say.

The first sex I ever had as at aout 13-14, with my FEMALE teacher. She was 25, and in a middle of a divorce.

She taught me things that served me well for the rest of my life, I still have a fond spot for her in my life. I used to ride my bike over to her apartment:)

I have NO regrets.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts