Reality vs. Fantasy


, ,

Joseph Epstein on the generic nature of teenage males:

I have a special regard for studies that tell us that the way to reform calls for changing human nature. This study, apparently, also demonstrates that there is probably no such thing as a bad bully, that behind every bully is a lonely, confused boy, frequently ill-adjusted….Boys, surely by now everyone knows, are brutes. Between the ages of 12 and 18, no matter what their other achievements, they are chiefly interested in sex and talk about sex, in devouring large quantities of unhealthy food, and in playing games at which they can outwit, triumph over, and otherwise humiliate their fellows. Boys exist in a near Hobbesian state of nature. Modern life isn’t, thank goodness, nasty, brutish, and short. But boys, given free rein, would make it so. (“B is for Boy -and Bullies,” WSJ, 4-30-2000)

Generally, this is true, but with many exceptions, of course, including myself, in regard to bullying. And I was not a brute nor are myriads of other males ages 12-18. And males in their 20s are just as “interested in” and obsessed with sex both in their fantasies and in practice, especially as adults from age 18 on and often as adolescent “minors,” an interest and obsession that last into their 30s and 40s and 50s and 60s and beyond with the aid of Viagra and similar drugs.

And in regard to brutes and bullies, most of what he says is just as true of most males in their 20s and many who are older and brutes and bullies even in their 40s and 50s and 60s and beyond, e.g, military officers and jail and prison guards and police and coaches and bosses and fathers.

And a large minority of males are not only bullies and brutes but low-IQ savages and predators and psychopaths, violent and recidivist criminal who commit aggravated assaults, muggings, armed robberies, burglaries, acts of vandalism, home invasions, torture, rape, gang-rape, murder, etc., especially as teenagers, or even younger, beginning at puberty, and in their 20s.

And not “everyone” knows that boys are “brutes” by nature. Not the authors of the study he mentions and not CSA victimologists, obviously, and virtually all feminists and left-liberals/”progressives,” who believe the actions of boys and men are purely or largely an effect of male socialization which can be mitigated or abolished by egalitarian and enlightened socialization. Nor MRAs, the misogynist lunatics of the soi-disant “men’s movement, who are obsessed with proving that males are as good or better than females and that females are as bad or worse than males and just as abusive and violent or potentially abusive and violent.

To CSA victimologists, biological men under age 16 or 18 (and even 18-year-olds if the women is a teacher or tutor like Abigail Simon) who are “chiefly interested in sex and talk about sex” and who often talk of wanting to  have sex with adult females -what heterosexual adolescent doesn’t fantasize about having sex with adult females, e.g., various celebrities, teachers, neighbors, strangers, their mother’s friends, etc.- must be protected from such women by draconian/Orwellian punishments, the enactment and enforcement of laws and policies to prevent the realization of their fantasies.  Or, for those few who “get lucky,” to end the intrigues, and the “victims” gratification, by crucifying the women who gave them the sex they craved and enjoyed.  Or to ruin their lives weeks or months or years after the affair or tryst ended when the “victims” are now adults but still “traumatized,” “scarred for life” by sex they assented to or initiated, knowingly and willingly, in some cases by force and/or threats, and enjoyed far more than the women who “raped” and “molested” them.

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


, , , ,

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.


An English Woman Imprisoned for Criticizing and “Harassing” Muslims can Receive Mail and Letters From People in the United States, Including me, and all other Countries, but not Abigail Simon


, ,

“Grooming” in the United Kingdom: for decades, in Rotherham, Telford, Oxford, and other UK cities, Pakistani Muslim predators, savages, and monsters have abducted, enslaved, drugged, raped, gang-raped, forced into prostitution, tortured, brutalized, and terrorized myriads of poor and working-class English girls, overwhelming adolescents but also prepubescent girls, some as young as 10 and 11. The police knew about these atrocities but did nothing lest they be vilified as “racist” and “Islamophobic” by the ruling-elites and governing-classes. And the media was complicit in it’s anti-“racist”/”Islamophobic” mendacity, fanaticism, and righteousness, suppressing and ignoring and denying the truth for decades.

Finally, a few of these sadists and savages are on trial for their heinous and horrendous crimes. And just recently, Tommy Robinson was sentenced to a year in prison for protesting these atrocities outside a courthouse where some of these monsters and subhuman beasts are being tried for “grooming.”

Many others have been punished, and imprisoned, for telling the truth about Islam, opposing massive Muslim immigration, and criticizing and “harassing” Muslims, including Jayda Fransen, a Britain First deputy leader jailed after being found guilty of four counts of “religiously aggravated harassment.” writes Patrick Cloutier at (3/23/2018):

Jayda Fransen, the Britain First leader whose videos about Muslim atrocities were retweeted by President Trump in November of last year, is in jail in the UK for “religiously aggravated harassment,” i.e., free speech, and protesting Muslim rapists. I learned that she can receive mail and letters in prison. Her address in prison:

Prison NO: A7921EDFRANSEN, HMP Bronzefield, Woodthorpe RD, Ashford, Middlesex, TW15 3JZ, United Kingdom

The UK is no longer a free county for those who criticize and tell the truth about Islam and Muslims, including terrorists, murderers, and gang-rapists of English girls, and oppose Muslim immigration. The country that invented freedom of speech and other basic rights and liberties now arrests, prosecutes, and imprisons men and women for exercising what should be their right to freedom of speech.

In contrast, Muslims are free to hate, vilify, and demonize “infidels,” i.e. native UK citizens, to provoke violence against “infidels, to defend acts of terrorism, an epidemic of assaults with knives in London resulting in murders and serious injuries, sexual outrages against English girls, and “religiously harass” generally. I doubt if a single Muslim has been convicted of much less sentenced to prison for “religiously aggravated harassment.” Or even arrested and prosecuted?

But, surprisingly, those imprisoned for criticizing and telling the truth about Islam and Muslims have the right to receive and read mail and letters from not only friends and family but also strangers in the UK and US and many other countries. But Abigail Simon, Kathryn Ronk, and other inmates have no such right in Michigan.

So from west-central Wisconsin, I could have mailed a letter that would have been flown all the way to New York, Boston, or wherever, and then flown across the Atlantic Ocean to London, I assume, and then by road to a prison in Ashford, Middlesex, and Jayda Fransen would have received and read it as she has with who knows how many other letters of support and sympathy from people in the UK and who knows how many other countries. And so, too, with Tommy Robinson, I assume. But Abigail Simon and Kathryn Ronk were prohibited from receiving and reading articles and letters I sent them from a neighboring state.

Finally, to contrast the evil and insanity of the U.S. with that of the United KIngdom: if a few of these monsters and savages are convicted of “grooming” -i.e., abducting, enslaving, drugging, raping, gang-raping, beating, torturing, brutalizing, and terrorizing poor and working-class English girls- I’m almost certain that none of them -not even the worst of the worst and the ring-leaders- will serve as many years in prison as Abigail Simon and Mary Kay Letourneau, or even Kathryn Ronk, to say nothing of the Georgia teacher who was sentenced to 40-years in prison for having sex with a student or the Nevada woman who was sentenced to life in prison for allegedly “forcing” a teenage male to touch her breast.


In a Sane and Just and Rational Country


, , , , , , ,

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 weeks older….


, , , , ,

The generic age of consent is 16 in Michigan. If Abigail’s “victim” had been 16 rather than 15, just a few months and 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 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. Summarizes the 22nd Most “Notorious Crime” of the “Past Hundred Years”


, , ,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


, , , , , , , , , ,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


Will I Die Before Abigail is Released From Prison?


I’m 69 and “not long for this world,” as some put it, and there are no other worlds. The end is near -how near I have no idea at this moment- and there is no afterlife. If I was religious, e.g., a devout Christian, and believed in God and an afterlife, an eternity in heaven or hell for my “immortal” and immaterial “soul,” I’d be terrified of dying even if I was 95% certain I was going to heaven rather than hell since I believed that Jesus was the son of God who was born of a virgin and resurrected after his death by crucifixion. If Christianity is true, then I will “burn in hell for eternity.” But since Jesus, assuming he existed, was and is not the son of a God that doesn’t exist, and the idea of hell is a sick and evil fantasy, I’m not worried, and have never worried, not even for a moment.

For an atheist who rejects the tenet of mind/body dualism, the fantasy of a soul and afterlife, what’s to fear in and of death? Death is oblivion, nothingness, the cessation of consciousness, the end of pain and suffering, liberation and surcease from the “hell that is other people,” the annihilation of a lifetime of memories in which (for me and for most people) the bad and worse far exceed the good and better. Death is like falling asleep, with no dreams, and not waking. Thus I face the end with stoicism and equanimity.

And some of the worst memories and thoughts that will die when I die are those of Abigail crying not only after but also before hearing the guilty verdicts; Abigail at her sentencing, so debilitated and mortified by fear and angst and despair and lack of sleep that she could barely walk or even stand and almost collapsed twice; depressing images of her crying with damp and matted hair and no make-up and wearing the same denim unisex jump-suit that is worn by violent and/or recidivist male criminals, shackled for over 2-hours in handcuffs attached to a waist-chain and leg-irons when there was no exigent and practical reason she had to be shackled in this manner or in any manner to protect anyone and/or to prevent her from escaping; thoughts of her life in jail and then prison and her life after prison, a life-sentence of electronic parole-monitoring with an ankle-tether/”bracelet” she can never remove and public sex-offender registration, etc.

Given the SC decision, she’ll be enslaved for almost 5 more years, at least, and perhaps longer. I’ll be 73 or older when she’s finally released. So it’s possible, if not likely, that I’ll die when she’s still in prison.

The Michigan Supreme Court Refuses to “Hear an Appeal from Abigail Simon”: 8-Years of Enslavement, at Least, for a First-Offender Convicted of a Nonviolent and Victimless and Malum Prohibitum “Crime.”


, , , ,

From the Grand Rapids News, “State’s highest court refuses appeal from Catholic school tutor who had sex with teen,” Oct. 4, 2017:

The State’s highest court will not hear an appeal from Abigail Simon…James Benson, senior attorney in the Kent County prosecutor’s office appeals division, said Simon’s options now are limited with a low chance of success. These include asking the U.S. Supreme Court to look at her case, trying to file a writ of habeas corpus in federal court, or filing a motion for relief from judgement.

Such “chances of success” are so “low” that one can say that she has no “chance of success.” So she’ll be enslaved for almost 6-more years at Huron Valley Correctional Facility, at least, followed by a lifetime of electronic parole-monitoring with an ankle-tether/”bracelet” she can never remove and public sex-offender registration. It would be fascinating if the U.S. Supreme Court were to rule on the constitutionality of lifetime electronic monitoring and public sex offender registration for a woman who is no “threat to society” or to anyone nor even a “danger” to re-offend by having sex with another biological man under statutory age. But I’m sure that will never happen.

Given the misery and monotony, hour after hour day after day week after week month after month year after year, for well over three years, all the nights with little or no sleep lying in bed and staring into darkness, days and nights that feel like they will never end, and then more and more such days and nights, it probably feels as if she’s been enslaved for 5-years or even longer -and now, given the SC decision, her last hope, she’ll be enslaved for almost 6-more years, 8-years in total, at least, which will feel more like 15-20 years. Then imagine her anxiety, the excruciating psychic torture, as she enters her 8th year of enslavement, anxiety and fear that will intensify, unbearably, as her “day of reckoning” grows increasingly near, with no certainty that she’ll be paroled -and, if not,  I assume she’ll be enslaved for at least another 2 years and possibly 4 or even 6 years.

I’m sure she’s had thoughts of suicide since the day or night she was arrested at her home or perhaps at school, handcuffed, roughly escorted to and stuffed into the back seat of a police cruiser, and then driven to the jail where she was stripped-searched, her vagina and rectum violated with hands in rubber gloves in the search for “contraband,” dressed in a unisex denim Jumpsuit, a cheap bra, cheap panties (or men’s underwear?), socks that have been washed hundreds of times, and Walmart-like canvas slip-ons, and thrown in a cell with one or two other women because of overcrowding, or perhaps a dormitory with who knows how many women sleeping in bunk beds, where she sat or lay, crying most or some of the time, terrified, crestfallen, mortified, perhaps hyperventilating, claustrophobic, beset with panic attacks, until she was released on bail the next day or whenever. And also while awaiting trial, and after her conviction while in jail for 7-weeks before sentencing, and while in prison.

But her thoughts of suicide and moments of despair in prison were allayed by hope that she would be released after two or three years. Now all hope is gone and I’m sure her thoughts of suicide have intensified. But you can’t commit suicide if you have no privacy. Perhaps she’ll go insane and end up in the mental ward.

8-years, at least, with no privacy or freedom: the freedom to do what one wants to do, legally, when one wants to do it, after work and on the weekends; the freedom to eat what you want and when and where; to sleep as late as you want on the weekends, to go to bed when you want to or take a nap if tired on the weekends; to use a computer and listen to music and read articles and watch videos and so forth on the internet; to date and have sex and perhaps marry and have children; to shop at a mall or downtown; to attend concerts, plays, sporting events; to see a movie, go to the beach, take a walk at night or in the morning or afternoon, sit in a park, alone or with friends, family, a date or lover; to go to a bar or club or party and have a few cocktails, glasses of wine, or beers while talking to friends and patrons and/or listening to music; to drive a car or take a bus or plane; to travel within the state or country or to Europe or wherever.

Even the most trivial and innocuous actualities of prison life exacerbate the overall misery and monotony, especially for a woman like Abigail who doesn’t belong in prison. Imagine living for 8-years, at least, without enjoying a delicious meal.; 8-years, at least, without the freedom to buy the food you want to eat and to enjoy meals in the privacy of your house or apartment, or to dine with family and friends at homes or in restaurants; 8-years, at least, without the freedom to visit a restaurant, fast or slow, and order and savor a good and tasty meal in a usually clean and pleasant milieu.

Prison is Sartre’s “the hell that is other people” in extremis. Generally, female inmates of all races are not nearly as awful as men. But I’m sure most of them are bad enough, among the worst women in all of Michigan, especially the blacks. I assume that roughly half or close to half of the 2000-plus inmates are low-IQ, white-hating, mostly violent blacks, 85-90% of them from inner-city Detroit. I’m sure that most of them are recidivists convicted of violent felonies. And I’m sure that most of them would love to assault and murder a woman like Abigail, who is not only white but also, unlike me and nearly all of the other white prisoners, an avatar of “white privilege.” Talk about hell.

And thanks to the mass-media, she’s the most infamous, and probably the most hated, of all 2000-plus inmates. Hopefully the guards will protect her. But thanks to the media, I’m sure most of them also hate or dislike her, and that few if any are sympathetic.

All of this is so insane and absurd that it would be risible if not for the suffering, hellish and harrowing and heartrending, as pointless as it’s profound, not only Abigail’s, by far most hellishly, but also that of her “loved ones,” family and friends, whose grief and anguish is profound and excruciating, even more so now, knowing that she won’t be “freed” after “only” 3 or 4 years in prison, and will be enslaved for at least 8-years and perhaps longer, and then subjected to a lifetime of draconian/Orwellian persecution, humiliating and punitive restrictions on her freedoms and intrusions into her private life for 30 or 40 or 50 years or longer that aren’t necessary to protect anyone from anything. Not a single person in Michigan will be any safer and not one serious crime will be prevented or deterred.

I’m infuriated and depressed whenever I think of her in prison and I don’t even know her, can’t even write to her and ask her questions and, hopefully, receive answers and correspond, given prison regulations, and possibly wouldn’t like her even if I did know her. Then imagine the feelings and thoughts and emotions of her family and friends. Imagine having a highly intelligent, educated, sensitive, gentle, vulnerable, perhaps (at least mildly) neurotic daughter, sister, friend, a woman they love, a daughter and sister and friend who has never committed a violent or other malum in se crime in her life and never will but is enslaved in a zoo like an animal for a nonviolent and victimless and malum prohibitum “crime.” Imagine their depression, their fears for her safety, and hopefully their rage, when they think of her life in prison. Imagine how depressing it must be to visit her in prison for an hour or so, perhaps only once a month and surely no more than once a week. and under what conditions? Are they allowed to speak and cry in private and hug and kiss as they say good-by.

* Unlike Abigail and nearly all of the other white prisoners, the inner-city black inmates are actually better off in prison in some ways. Most importantly, they’re much, much safer in that they can’t be assaulted, raped, murdered, brutalized, and terrorized by black male criminals. They’re simply transferred from one hell-hole to another in which they’ll make life hellish for Abigail and the other white inmates and possibly assault them or worse.

Mary Letourneau’s Love Affair with Vili Fualaau the 22nd most “Notorious” Crime of the Century!



On May, 2, 2009, I published an article at entitled “Mary Letourneau: Over a Decade of Lies, Hatred, Nonsense, Hysteria, and lunacy” which begins by noting that lists the “Crimes of the Century, the top 25: On the 75th anniversary of the Lindbergh kidnapping, TIME looks back at the notorious crimes of the past hundred years.”

Mary’s love affair with Vili Fualaau ranks as number 22, not quite as “notorious” as the Lindbergh kidnapping, the abduction and murder of an infant by a monster who was summarily executed, and monsters even worse, crimes even worse, even far worse, legions of them: the Black Dahlia, Richard Speck, Tate Murders, Son of Sam, John Wayne Gacy, Ted Bundy, Jeffrey Dahmer, O.J. Simpson, the Unabomber, JonBenet Ramsey, Versace Killings, and a few others, but more “notorious” than Columbine and “The Scream” and myriads of other heinous crimes involving murder, mass murder, serial murder, terrorism, abductions, enslavement, violent rape, gang-rape, aggravated assault, maiming, torture, mutilation, and cannibalism not included in the “top 25.” A love affair between a teacher and her student that resulted in the births of two daughters and a marriage after her release from prison that has lasted over 10-years is equated with the most hideous, execrable, nauseating, and shocking barbarism, cruelty, sadism, brutality, depravity, and terrorism. Yes, according to, Mary love affair with Vili is more “notorious” than the 9/11 terrorist attack in which over 3,000 people were murdered.

And this in a country in which, during the last 50 years to say nothing of the last century, almost a million people have been murdered, millions and millions of women and girls have been raped and gang-raped (and who knows how many men have been raped and gang-raped in prisons and jails?), and tens of millions of people of all races and both sexes have been the victims of not only rape and murder but aggravated assaults, shootings, muggings, armed robberies, car-jackings, abductions, home invasions, etc. Approximately 90-95% of such crimes have been committed by stereotypical criminals, overwhelmingly young males in their 20s and teens. And Mary is far more infamous and despised than all of these nameless and faceless criminals put together!!