By now, the massive media uproar over Donald Trump’s admitting on a recorded statement that he wanted to sexually assault a married woman is blowing more wind than Hurricane Matthew on Florida and the east coast of North America.
A friend of mine just made this long and profound statement on Facebook. I think it needs to be preserved for as many people to see as possible. I left her name out of it, but her identity does not matter. NO ONE should have to endure this!
Here are some rules for men who do not want to be accused of raping a woman:
1. ALWAYS ask the women directly during a date in a private setting, “Do you want to have sex with me?” If her response is anything other than, “Yes,” drop the issue and do not bring it up again until she does.
2. Never talk about the experience of having sex with anyone other than a licensed therapist, your parents or other guardians (if you are underaged), or a clergyperson in a counseling session. PRIVATE MATTERS MUST REMAIN PRIVATE. Other men do not need to know how you “banged that hot chick last night”.
3. The claim that women claim to be raped because they regret having sex with a man long after the fact is simply self-serving bullshit. Do not repeat that claim, ever.
4. Even if you use protection or any form of birth control, PROMISE the woman that if she gets pregnant, you will either support the child or pay for an abortion, whichever she decides.
5. Do not merely be a woman’s sex partner…..be her LOVER. Be willing to share in anything she does or is involved in or ask her to share in things you enjoy. If you do not want a complete relationship with a woman, you can always masturbate by yourself.
6. Unless your partner is a porn star, you do not need to take or possess nude pics of her. And NEVER post them online!
That is all for now. If I think of more, or if you have your own suggestions for rules, this list will be added to.
Read this article:
Arizona statutory rape victim forced to pay child support
Nick Olivas became a father at 14, a fact he wouldn’t learn for eight years.
While in high school, Olivas had sex with a 20-year-old woman. As he sees it now, she took advantage of a lonely kid going through a rough patch at home.
State law says a child younger than 15 cannot consent with an adult under any circumstance, making Olivas a rape victim. But Olivas didn’t press charges and says he didn’t realize at the time that it was even something to consider.
The two went their separate ways. Olivas graduated from high school, went to college and became a medical assistant.
Then two years ago, the state served him with papers demanding child support. That’s how he found out he had a then-6-year-old daughter.
“It was a shock,” he said. “I was living my life and enjoying being young. To find out you have a 6-year-old? It’s unexplainable. It freaked me out.”
He said he panicked, ignored the legal documents and never got the required paternity test. The state eventually tracked him down.
Olivas, a 24-year-old Phoenix resident, said he now owes about $15,000 in back child support and medical bills going back to the child’s birth, plus 10 percent interest. The state seized money from his bank account and is now garnisheeing his wages at $380 a month.
He has become one of the state’s 153,000 active child-support cases, according to the Arizona Department of Economic Security division of Child Support Services.
In May alone, payments were not made in 49 percent of those cases, according to the agency.
Olivas’ fear has turned to frustration.
He wants to be in his daughter’s life and is willing to pay child support going forward. But he doesn’t think it’s right for the state to charge him for fees incurred when he was still a child himself or for the years he didn’t know the girl existed.
“Anything I do as an adult, I should be responsible for,” he said. “But as a teenager? I don’t think so.”
I have already made my opposition to the concept of statutory rape clear. The state of Arizona, and every other state that has such a concept, must make a choice: Either discard the concept, or never charge the underage fathers that result from such acts as being financially responsible for the babies that are later born. Actually, I think they should do both.
On the one hand, I do not think there was a “rape”, since Olivas clearly consented to having sex with the older woman. But because what they did was illegal, OF COURSE she kept the relationship and the paternity of the baby secret…..until the boy had grown up and had started a lucrative career that she could take advantage of! Indeed,I have to wonder…..why hasn’t the woman been arrested and charged with rape? If a 20 year old man had gotten a 14 year old girl pregnant, wouldn’t the expected actions of the state against the man be obvious?
In the case of a boy so young he could not even hold down a full time job at the time the baby was born, the issue is obvious; he should be released from paying any child support, no matter how many years have passed and the state should NOT charge him for back child support! If an older woman is stupid enough to have a child by an underaged boy, she alone should care physically and financially for that child, period. Or if she cannot due to lack of child support payments, she should not have custody of the baby. Even if Nick Olivas was not a rape victim of the mother of his child, he currently IS a victim of a state that has trapped itself in a contradiction resulting from “pro-family” values not based on practical reality, which should forever be the ONLY basis for laws and procedures of any government!
I would occasionally see the term “rape apologist” thrown around by feminists and I assumed for a long time that this was merely hyperbole. What man, in his right mind, would publicly defend the act of forcing a woman to have sex with him? Instead, I figured the only proper definition of a rape apology would be a rapist saying to his victim months or years later, “I’m sorry that I violated your dignity as a fellow human being and I promise I will never do that again to anyone.”
Boy was I mistaken! Continue reading
Read this article:
By ALYSSA NEWCOMB
The cupcake empire Chloe Stirling built out of her home kitchen has come crumbling down after Illinois health officials said the sixth-grader wasn’t in compliance with local laws.
Chloe, 11, said she was told by health officials in Madison County, Ill., that if she wants to continue selling cupcakes she will need to buy a bakery or build a separate kitchen.
“It bummed me out because I wanted to keep baking,” Chloe told ABCNews.com. “I had a bunch of orders and they said I had to cancel them all.”
Stirling, who is in sixth grade, has operated “Hey Cupcake” out of her family’s kitchen in Troy, Ill., for the past two years. And it appears her success may have invited the scrutiny of regulators.
The cupcake mogul said she’s raked in some serious dough for a kid her age, charging $10 for a dozen cupcakes and $2 each for the more elaborate treats, such as cakes that look like high heel shoes.
“It felt good because with all my money I could buy stuff I wanted and didn’t have to wait until my birthday or Christmas,” Chloe said, adding that she was also saving money for a car.
Her mother, Heather Stirling, told ABCNews.com she’s meeting with officials from the health department and the state attorney next week in hopes of finding a way to help Chloe re-open Hey Cupcake.
“This is her niche. You have kids who are good at baseball and soccer and this is what they pursue,” Stirling said. “Chloe is one of a kind. No one else does this at her age. There are a lot of hoops we’re going to have to jump through.”
Toni Corona, a spokeswoman for the Madison County Department of Health, told ABCNews.com in a statement that the laws are “applied uniformly and without discrimination.”
She said the department “applauds the entrepreneurial spirit” of Chloe and “joins with her many fans in hoping she will find a location for her cupcake enterprise that complies with state laws.”
Do you see something missing in this article? How about any evidence that anyone was sickened by any of the products produced by this girl’s baking business?
Shutting down her business for failing to comply with state health regulations even with no complaint from customers about her products serves one purpose: Eliminating competition with the corporations that dominate our economy and both force people to work for them instead of working for themselves and force them to buy their products instead of creating their own. This is bullying of the worst sort and it goes against our legal standard of “innocent until proven guilty”. The State of Illinois and the officials of Madison County should be ashamed of themselves!