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.