Oh, you mean the men too, asshole? Funny...in your parents' day and age, it was never the boys they sent away.

If hes anti birth control and anti-sex ed, he's a hypocritical asshole (he's a distasteful asshole anyway).

And while I don't believe in shaming, ostracizing, "sending away" or terrifying pregnant teens or teens who experience unexpected consequences from sex (STIs, pregnancy, whatever)....

Oh the hell with it. Penalties (like restricting access to BC and keeping mum about real concerns regarding sex, be it readiness to be a parent, abusive relationships, whatever) aren't working.

But I resent being guilt-tripped into the notion that it's neutral for a someone who may lack the maturity and may be unable to provide 70% of what their kid needs financially/emotionally to be knocked up, especially in a country where you can still go to the drugstore and buy condoms (that goes for boys too....fuck, ESPECIALLY for boys. Wish we could make men experience what its like to pregnant).

Either way....fuck officials like him. I'm always surprised the license people like this are granted....no matter how often they damn themselves with their own words, on record.

Wow. I just finished reading the book "The Girls Who Went Away" about those so-called "sluts" who were sent away to pregnant teen homes to give away their children. The amount of shame that these young women went through was unbelievable. Not only were they shamed at the time, but they continued to feel shamed for most of their lives. And they were forced to give up their babies.

I would like to see this guy try and call them sluts to their faces!

Oh my freakin' god, this is ridiculous. I am so going to call because, seriuosly, how many great messages can one come up with to leave regarding his comments. They are endless...

By the way, his answering machine reminds us to "speak slowly and clearly." Oh, I will...

Yikes. As if we needed another reason to pull out our hair, I just saw this video on CNN about two girls getting suspended for wearing shirts demanding they teach something other than abstinence-only "sex-ed".

Ah yes, one of the reasons I miss flying every week- to see the ridiculous crap in local papers that one never hears about otherwise. I have to make light of this because really thinking about men like this in decision making roles makes me too scared and sad to get out of bed.
So instead, I think he is just upset because he was shamed into thinking sex was BAD BAD BAD and therefore hasn't been laid since 1965.

1) A girl who has the same boyfriend for years, who's entirely faithful to him and they're a real "they'll get married some day" couple is still a "slut" just for having sex with that one guy? Seems like he's using the word to refer to any teenager who has sex at all.

2) If they are sluts, it's not the government's damn job to stop that.

I really can't think of much more to say than "what the fuck?"..so disgusting.

Oh, what an ass. I don't think anyone thinks that a teenager who has not finished high school becoming pregnant or having a baby is a really sound, well thought out thing.

But how is shaming a pregnant teenager a good idea? What is that going to accomplish? It makes that girl feel awful, and certainly doesn't help her to make a decision, or figure out a way to take care of herself and her baby, if she chooses to keep her baby. There is no reason why she should feel ashamed and carry that shame with her for the rest of her life! And it's not good for the child either, if the girl has the baby. That child will have the stigma of being a "bastard baby" following them.

Whatever assholes like him think personally of premarital sex, shaming kids who have sex is not the answer. Comprehensive sex education and contraceptive education is.

"I think he is just upset because he was shamed into thinking sex was BAD BAD BAD and therefore hasn't been laid since 1965."

That was my thought exactly. the only people who get all flustered and call people "sluts" are the people who aren't getting any. lol

I sent him an email. What an ignorant jerk.

"Send them away" and...what, exactly, Rep. Liston? Give their babies to a more deserving anti-slut (good luck finding her!)? Banish them to Slut Island, where sluts and their kids do whatever it is they do for perpetuity?

This isn't how lawmaking works. You have to actually come up with solutions that help your constituents, not just bitch about how they don't make the choices you want them to.

Playa hata just resents not getting any in high school.

so disgusting.

He needs to wipe that silly ass smile off his face in his picture for starters.

I just sent somebody a sweet, understanding, gentle, explicatory voicemail.

Here's my letter to Senor Douchebag: (strike that--he probably thinks using a douche is slutty too...)

Dear Representative Liston:

I am greatly offended and appalled by your comments regarding pregnant teenagers. You said, "In my parents' day and age, (unmarried teen parents) were sent away, they were shunned, they were called what they are. There's no sense of shame today. Society condones it ... I think it's wrong. They're sluts."

Do you know of any boys who were sent away, Mr. Liston? Do you know of any boys who were shunned? I think you'd be hard-pressed to find them. Though you may say you mean the boys too, we all know who "bears" the brunt of the shame doled out by people like you.

And if you want shame, Mr. Liston, why don't you go back to the days of the Puritans and force them all to wear a great, big letter "A" too. That might be just as effective as name-calling in the battle against a few million years of evolution.

It is precisely shame--shame about sex--that contributes to teen pregnancy in the first place. Some adults are so ashamed of sex that they refuse to arm teen boys and girls with life-saving, pregnancy-preventitive information. Yet again, it is YOUR PARTY that wants to outlaw abortion, your party that won't budge for universal access to healthcare and contraception, and your party that wants abstience-only education in our schools when, eveident by your own frustration here, it clearly isn't working.

So what's a pregnant girl to do? She didn't have the information about or have access to contraception in the first place, so now she must decide between being shamed and shunned or having an abortion.

If Republicans are so intent on a "Culture of Life," you might want to think about what happens to that life AFTER a baby is born, instead of hoping that slut-shaming will make teen pregnancy just disappear.

It's getting more and more embarrassing to be a Coloradan.

someone needs to send Liston away.

Nerve. Absolute nerve.

I'm not a fan of all of these out-of-control out-of-wedlock births but shaming young ppl for being irresponsible is counterproductive.

Parents have to be more comfortable with talking to their kids about sex. Education doesn't equate to encouragement. If you know your kid's having sex, please give them a contraceptive.

Young girls need to be taught self-worth so as not to give into the "If you love me, we don't have to use a condom" nonsense that guys use.

Young boys need to be taught to be just as responsible as girls are being taught. Many ppl still adhere to the age-old, irresponsibility encouraging belief of "That's her parents' problem" when a young girl gets pregnant.

http://anonymissblog.blogspot.com

Why "sluts" and not "statutory rape victims"?

I'm tired of this guff about "it's not statutory rape if the boy is under 18" because -- are you any less a robbery victim if the thief is under 18? No.

Not sluts, RAPE VICTIMS.

And the boys should be sent away, for sure...TO JAIL, GODDAMMIT.

and here's my letter to Liston:

Mr. Liston,

It is getting more and more embarrassing to be a Coloradan, with ignorant assholes like yourself representing me. And I feel completely justified in calling you an asshole, since you feel it necessary to call young women who choose to have a baby "sluts". My mother gave birth to me when she was 16, she is now 46 and has only ever been with my father. So, because she was a pregnant teen, that makes her a slut? Come on. I guess in your opinion it would have been better if she had aborted me.

Thank you, and go fuck yourself.

Wow. I just called. I thought it would be an aid or something, but that was Rep. Liston. I gave him a piece of my mind, but I was a bit shaken.

I'm tired of this guff about "it's not statutory rape if the boy is under 18" because -- are you any less a robbery victim if the thief is under 18?

Are you serious with this? Sixteen-year-olds shouldn't be allowed to have sex with each other? That's just as puritanical as Liston.

The reason statutory rape is rape is because of the vast power differential between an adult and a minor. There is no inherent power differential between two sixteen-year-olds--no more than there is between two thirty-year-olds.

Wow. I just called. I thought it would be an aid or something, but that was Rep. Liston. I gave him a piece of my mind, but I was a bit shaken.

Please, e-mailers and telephoniers: Inform him that the correct term for male slut is "himbo."

What Mr. Liston is really trying to say is that kids need to get married when they're still in high school! If 15 year olds want to have sex, they should just get married. Marriage is, after all, the magical quick-fix pill for all of our social ills that have to do with sex. Nothing is more sacred than entering into a lifetime commitment with another person because you're horny!

*rolling eyes* Now my head hurts from trying to get any sort of logic out of this crap.

Wax: You could have abandoned the LogicQuest much earlier once you saw the (R) by his name or the fact that the offending statement was made at a GOP conference.

His buddy raped a 13-year-old girl, and then he denied working with the guy.

What Mr. Liston is really trying to say is that kids need to get married when they're still in high school! If 15 year olds want to have sex, they should just get married. Marriage is, after all, the magical quick-fix pill for all of our social ills that have to do with sex. Nothing is more sacred than entering into a lifetime commitment with another person because you're horny!

*rolling eyes* Now my head hurts from trying to get any sort of logic out of this crap.

I am tired of hearing about people, particularly politicians, trying to force their beliefs on others. He "complained that society condones premarital sex". I've read 95% of people have sex before marriage. Does he think he's more moral than 95% of the population?
And I think these conservatives need to get out into the world more. Has this guy actually had a conversation with a pregnant teenager, a homosexual, or whoever else? Not everyone has the privilege he has. And he actually thinks society condones teen pregnancy? Just because teens aren't teens aren't sent away, doesn't mean there is no shame.

I'm tired of this guff about "it's not statutory rape if the boy is under 18" because -- are you any less a robbery victim if the thief is under 18?

Are you serious with this? Sixteen-year-olds shouldn't be allowed to have sex with each other? That's just as puritanical as Liston.

The reason statutory rape is rape is because of the vast power differential between an adult and a minor. There is no inherent power differential between two sixteen-year-olds--no more than there is between two thirty-year-olds.

Wrong. The reason statutory rape is RAPE is not because the man is older, but because the victim is UNDER THE AGE OF CONSENT.

Coercion is presumed not because he's old enough to know better, but because she's NOT old enough to know better.

If he's the same age or younger than the girl, certainly a judge can take into account the utter stupidity of youth -- the same way he might take it into account if a rapist or murderer was mentally retarded or under the influence of drugs or alcohol when he committed the crime.

And keep in mind that they execute convicted murderers here in Texas even if they are mentally retarded, and especially if they were under the influence of drugs or alcohol when they committed the crime.

What's the difference between a 16-year-old rapist with the mentality of a 16-year-old, and a 30-year-old mentally retarded rapist who happens to have the mental age of a 16-year-old?

Should a 30-year-old who rapes a 16-year-old girl get the same sentence as a 16-year-old rapist, if the 30-year-old can prove that he's mentally retarded?

Interesting questions, but your logic is simply for lowering the age of consent, since you contend that 16-year-olds are, in fact "old enough to know better." Aside from the FACT that they're simply NOT, what would YOU propose as the new AngryYoungWoman Age of Consent?

15? 13? 12? 8?

And do get back to me with your revised figures when you have a daughter or niece that age, will you?

Okay, wagadog, I'll bite. I have a daughter who will soon be thirteen. She's dating a 14 year old. If they had sex, and my daughter consented of her own free will and desire, I would in no way consider her boyfriend a rapist. I'm not pushing her into having sex, but I am educating her on contraception and safety and the right and wrong reasons to say yes (right: because you really wanna do the deed; wrong: he pulls the 'if you loved me you wouuuuld' card). See, even at my daughter's tender age, I can write about her having sex without even a blush. I'm over here, not blushing. And certainly not attaching the 'rapist' label to a perfectly sweet, perfectly acceptable boy.

For the record, I don't think she's anywhere near ready to have sex, and I don't think it's fully even on her radar. And also for the record, it's exactly none of my business what she chooses to do with her body, providing she's safe (I consider it absolutely my duty to ensure she IS safe, the same way I wouldn't let her walk somewhere alone after dark).

So...I've gotten back to you. With an actual kid that age. In an actual situation where it might come up. I don't require the fainting couch, why do you?

Also, wagadog, I have a deep respect for my daughter's agency. That's really what it comes down to, isn't it? The belief that a young woman can have agency over her own body, the belief that she can and should make choices based on that agency. When you say 'all boys are rapists', you're really saying 'all girls are too stupid to consent to sex of their own free will'.

“Wrong. The reason statutory rape is RAPE is not because the man is older, but because the victim is UNDER THE AGE OF CONSENT.
Coercion is presumed not because he's old enough to know better, but because she's NOT old enough to know better.�
Uh, what? But if they are the same age, which one is the rapist? I mean what makes the 16 year old boy automatically the rapist and not the girl? Or do you want to put both of them in jail?

AAAGHHHHHHHH!

Ok, now that's out of my system I'll proceed to the contact info.

So, from your hostile rant, wagadog, I'm going to conclude that your answer is yes, you do think that sex between sixteen-year-olds should be illegal.

What the fuck would make consensual sex between two fifteen-year-olds rape? Which one would the aggressor be? Who's being harmed? Why should it be illegal? Why would you presume coercion? Is it because you don't think that people under 18 can form loving bonds and explore their sexuality? Why do you think 16 is so much closer to 8 than it is to 18? In your fantasy world, what happens? All young people abstain from all sexual contact until they turn 18, at which they magically and without any exploration or practice or learning have the ability to fully consent to sex with clear knowledge of the risks and benefits, whereas a year earlier any consensual sexual contact with a peer would have damaged them? How does that work, exactly? And how is it different from fundies arguing that sex is dirtying and sullying and awful until the day you're married, when it magically becomes a beautiful gift that you should value and love?

The reason statutory rape is RAPE is not because the man is older, but because the victim is UNDER THE AGE OF CONSENT.

That's simply not true, legally, and in my opinion it's not true morally. The rape occurs because one partner can consent and the other can't.

If two eight-year-old girls are playing doctor and they decide to explore each other's genitals, that's not rape, either. They should both probably be told that in general, that's not how we socialize, and perhaps they should be screened to make sure that neither is being sexually abused, but they're not raping each other, because they are relating as peers. Fifteen-year-olds who fall in love, or who feel romantic towards each other are also relating as peers. I really don't see why you have such a hard time differentiating between a thirty-year-old man who wields an inordinate amount of power over a young girl, and a boy of her age who has a loving, equal relationship with her?

And keep in mind that they execute convicted murderers here in Texas even if they are mentally retarded

Since I find that disgusting beyond belief, it's not exactly a convincing argument.

What's the difference between a 16-year-old rapist with the mentality of a 16-year-old, and a 30-year-old mentally retarded rapist who happens to have the mental age of a 16-year-old?

You haven't actually given me any reason to think that a 16-year-old who has consensual sex with another 16-year-old is a rapist. As sojourner asks, what would make him the rapist and not her?

By your logic, somebody who is developmentally disabled so that they never gain what we would consider full adult mental faculties should never, ever get to have sex, even with somebody of a similar status.

I hate to be shallow, but this guy just looks like a douche bag.

Creepy smile, bad combover(as if there is such a thing as a good combover!).

What a pig.

No, no, he means the mother was sent away, not the father. She was kicked out of high school and made to be a living Prometheus, all for her horrible crime of accidental pregnancy. Society can either evolve or degenerate and that seems to be what the right is all about enforcing.
We can deny sex education so our female teens are completetly ignorant about their own bodies, and when they get 'knocked up' we can blame the girl-you dirty slut! They deny abortion so we can make all those forced pregnant teens walk the gauntlett. The guy never had too. They accept the myth of Mary and Joseph which was about an unplanned pregnancy (initiated by God, which counts as child rape) torwards an adolescent girl, but not our teens.

Of course, the guy she had sex with is a stud!

I hope you guys called the Congressman's office. It's just a recording, so leave a message!

I wrote him an email:

It wouldn't be such a bad idea if you went to a doctor of human sexuality and had her explain to you what happens to adolescents during their sexual development. If nature wanted us to be sexually active when we were in our late 20's we wouldn't get our secondary sex characteristics until then. Young men and women get them at 11 or 12. Deal with it.

Instead of calling them sluts, try hard to figure out that they are fully biologically ready to have children and indeed in history you can quite clearly read about how young women were having their first children at 14-15 years old.

So I would suggest you do a little bit more research and a little less speaking until you understand human sexuality.

There you have it.

Would I be stooping if I pointed out that he kind of looks like a penis with a face?

So, I first had sex when I was 15 years old, as was my boyfriend. The age of consent where I live is 16. My boyfriend is 5 months younger than me. I guess all the time we were having sex before he turned 16, I was raping him!! :( Or wait, is that not possible because I'm a woman and I could have not POSSIBLY known better, hm?

I bet you were both scarred for life, huh, baphomet?

I would like for that pervy-looking douche to produce some statistics showing that "a sense of shame" resulted in fewer out-of-wedlock pregancies back then. Don't we have fewer teen pregnancies now that sex is on the table for discussion in schools and in families?

This comes from dictionary.com:

Slut
-noun
1. a dirty, slovenly woman.
2. an immoral or dissolute woman; prostitute.

I'm pretty sure that most pregnant teenagers are not prostitutes, nor are they dirty, slovenly, immoral, or dissolute. They're just teenagers who had sex and their birth control failed (or didn't use any because jackasses like him are in power and don't want teenagers knowing about or using birth control). It could happen to any person, at any point in their child bearing years.

Here's the email I sent him, in case anyone wants a template:

Mr. Liston,
I hope that you feel "at least a sense of shame." Your comment that unmarried women who become pregnant are "sluts" is reprehensible. Such a comment is beyond tasteless; it is hypocritical. It is your party that continues to pour taxpayers' money into abstinence-only programs. There is no evidence that these programs work; on the contrary, the major effect of such programs is to reduce the likelihood that teens will use contraception. This is due, in part, to the fact that abstinence-only programs often misrepresent the efficacy of condoms.
Is the only way you can promote your opinions by lying to young people and then calling them derogatory names? Shame on you.

my email to the asshole. a disclaimer: i do not think all teen girls who have sex are raped and don't have a choice, and don't think at all that those who chose to have sex are sluts. I was just making a point to mr simple black or white asshole.:

Dear Mr. Liston,

I am outraged by your recent derogatory statement against pregnant teens. You stated:

"In my parents' day and age, (unmarried teen parents) were sent away, they were shunned, they were called what they are. There was at least a sense of shame. There's no sense of shame today. Society condones it ... I think it's wrong. They're sluts. And I don't mean just the women. I mean the men, too."

Your statement is not only hateful, but disgustingly misogynistic. Even though you tried argue otherwise, the term “slut� has historically referred to the female gender only. “Slut� is an openly derogatory and sexist term, just like the n-word is an openly derogatory and racist term, and I am appalled by your disgusting pride in using such a word, a word that has been used for so many years to insult and degrade women.

In your parents’ day and age, it was ONLY the girls who would be sent away and shamed. Boys had to face none of the horrific, life-altering consequences forced onto these poor teenage girls. What you are suggesting is a return to open hatred towards young women!

I am also disgusted by your insensitivity to pregnant teens. Teen girls are widely subject to rape by abusive partners and even family members. Many girls do not have the resources or agency to say no to sex or protect themselves from pregnancy. Are they sluts also? Teen girls may get pregnant for a wide range of reasons, sometimes reasons that completely out of their control. Who are you to call them derogatory sexist names? These girls need sensitivity, understanding, access to resources and emotional support, not degradation!

You need to issue a public apology for your disgusting display of misogyny and open hatred to teen girls. You should be the one we shame!

Ailei, you rock. I wish I had a mom like you growing up.

Here's my email to the penis-face:

I know you don't think teenagers should be having sex. But here's the thing. They ARE. They always have, and they always will, no matter what you tell them about being sluts or going to hell. That is a fact that you and your party and every pewmember in every church in America needs to understand. You don't get to say DON'T HAVE SEX and then wash your hands of the problem of teen pregnancy in this country. You don't. You are as much to blame for those "sluts" ending up pregnant as anyone. Why? Because you block attempts to give teenagers the tools to make responsible choices. Because you stand there on your self-righteous soapbox and preach but don't do anything to help. You look at a REALITY--a 14-year-old mother who needs to now make a living for herself and her child and who may end up having to drop out of school--and say "I told you so! Now fuck off." Is that the action of a person of compassion? And since you're likely basing your comments on your "faith," is that Christian? Would Christ have had that attitude? Would Christ have even used the word whore? Actually, if my Sunday School class memories serve, he ministered to the "slut" and said that whoever was without sin could cast the first stone against her. And being without sin himself, he declined to throw one. I don't even go to church, and I think that's a pretty amazing example--one that too many people who support your party FAIL TO FOLLOW.

Language like "In my parents' day and age, (unmarried teen parents) were sent away, they were shunned, they were called what they are" only accomplishes one thing. It gives teenagers the idea that if they do get pregnant, they don't have anywhere to go. And this is an important point, because what's absent from your comments is any concern for the children of teenage mothers. You may not like how these kids come into the world, but they're in the world, and your comments show that you (and the rest of your party) don't give a damn about what happens to them. You're more concerned with how things LOOK.

Let me ask you this. Which of the following would you want for YOUR DAUGHTER?

1. To see her publicly humiliated and called a slut and told that she should hide herself away?

Or,

2. For her to have the knowledge she needs to protect herself if she does have sex and feel that she has options other than to be treated like a boil on the face of humanity if she gets pregnant?

And what exactly is the value of having these kids "shunned" anyway? The way I see it, the more kids hear about the responsibilities that being sexually active comes with, the more responsible they will be. How can there be any other point of view on the subject?

Shaming pregnant teenagers and calling them sluts is one of the reasons that a lot of teenage girls hide their pregnancies and throw their babies in dumpsters. I can't believe this asshole thinks that shaming pregnant teenagers is a good idea. Also, hiding pregnant teenagers until they give birth is bullshit. My own mother gave away my older half brother out of shame of giving birth to an illegitimate child back in the "good old days." She regrets it to this day. Fortunately, she was reunited with him a few years back, and they have a great relationship. Unfortunately, she learned that his adoptive parents mistreated him. I know a lot of adopted children end up in good homes, but this was not the case for my half-brother. Shaming these girls into hiding their pregnancies and telling them it's better to put their babies up for adoption is not the best choice in every situation.

Seriously, Virago. My cousin and I are both adopted, and we were both 'forced' or 'coerced' adoptions done in the 'good old days'. Those good old days when apparently they'd give a kid to anybody, because our mothers were seriously insane. We keep telling each other 'we didn't ask to be adopted by these psychos'. It doesn't help much.

Ailei, sorry to hear about you and your cousin. My half-brother would've been better off raised by my mother than his adopted parents. Anyway, he doesn't have anything to do with his adopted parents anymore, and he did an adult adoption to have my mother "readopt" him. Of course, his adopted parents try that "look at what we did for you crap." He moved back to our state to get away from them. Anyway, my mother is glad that she has another chance to be his mother.

"Also, wagadog, I have a deep respect for my daughter's agency. That's really what it comes down to, isn't it? The belief that a young woman can have agency over her own body, the belief that she can and should make choices based on that agency."

Sure, she has agency. That also means the agency to say "No" and make it stick.

But it never does. Guys will always push it too far, unless you have a credible and immediate threat -- such as swift and sure kick in the ass or an automatic conviction on a rape charge -- if he can't keep it in his pants.

It's not a matter of making "sex between teenagers illegal" -- it's a matter of giving young girls the real power to enforce their own agency -- which they currently can't, unless they only date guys they can physically overpower and/or know how to do some serious physical damage to.

Marie Cirile, the first NYPD detective, describes in her memoir how she once talked herself out of a rape situation -- the guy had her pinned to the ground up in the Bronx -- and she started asking him about how he would feel if somebody did this to his mother. According to her, he left the scene in tears.

But what 16-year-old has those social skills of self-defense? What 16-year-old knows physical self-defense? How can you claim she has "agency" if she can't defend herself in the course of acting on that agency?

She might know what she wants to do, but she can't do them safely if she can't defend herself.

All a boy has to do is bat his little puppy eyelashes at the lady judge and claim they were "in love" to get away with raping your daughter.

And with this "sex positive" ostensibly feminist culture -- who will believe she said no and didn't want it?

"Also, wagadog, I have a deep respect for my daughter's agency. That's really what it comes down to, isn't it? The belief that a young woman can have agency over her own body, the belief that she can and should make choices based on that agency."

Sure, she has agency. That also means the agency to say "No" and make it stick.

But it never does. Guys will always push it too far, unless you have a credible and immediate threat -- such as swift and sure kick in the ass or an automatic conviction on a rape charge -- if he can't keep it in his pants.

It's not a matter of making "sex between teenagers illegal" -- it's a matter of giving young girls the real power to enforce their own agency -- which they currently can't, unless they only date guys they can physically overpower and/or know how to do some serious physical damage to.

Marie Cirile, the first NYPD detective, describes in her memoir how she once talked herself out of a rape situation -- the guy had her pinned to the ground up in the Bronx -- and she started asking him about how he would feel if somebody did this to his mother. According to her, he left the scene in tears.

But what 16-year-old has those social skills of self-defense? What 16-year-old knows physical self-defense? How can you claim she has "agency" if she can't defend herself in the course of acting on that agency?

She might know what she wants to do, but she can't do them safely if she can't defend herself.

All a boy has to do is bat his little puppy eyelashes at the lady judge and claim they were "in love" to get away with raping your daughter.

And with this "sex positive" ostensibly feminist culture -- who will believe she said no and didn't want it?

"But it never does. Guys will always push it too far, unless you have a credible and immediate threat"

Huh? What a generalization. Unless you mean some guys will push it too far? While others are NOT how culture and media seem to portray them, that is always wanting sex despite what the woman wants.

"How can you claim she has "agency" if she can't defend herself in the course of acting on that agency?"

You are justifiably angry on a number of issues recently. I am not claiming you are doing so, but I would not blame victims and potential victims for not defending themselves, lacking the ability to do so, or not striking the fear of God into their attackers; something which increased awareness of the problem of violence against women, an increasing number of laws, the existence of self-defense training, and the right to bear arms have not yet changed.

It does not take much for rape to happen (*sometimes* not even a conscious choice by a rapist to subjugate a woman, given our culture), and it can happen unexpectedly, as in an ambush; or quite unnoticed until too late, as in the course of a relationship. And woe be to the victim if there is some sort of family tie, friendship, acquaintance, or actual love for the attacker (as may be true in 80-90% of completed sexual assaults and rapes), because she may not want to harm them at all given the opportunity to defend herself; she may not even be willing to press charges against her attacker later.

This is just one more ugly truth about sexual assault and rape. It is just evil.

Yes, you hit the nail on the head, A Male.

I am absolutely furious -- Halliburton/KBR can get away with multiple rapes and sexual assaults overseas -- and nobody even HEARS about the half of it, Blackwater can murder a score of civilians in the street including a doctor and her child and only protesters re-enacting the scene in protest get arrested, young girls can be cajoled into sex before they've had a chance to figure out multiple ways of defending themselves and be called "sluts" for bearing the brunt of the consequences rather than having a charge of statutory rape leveled against the guy, and now a Judge in Texas' idea of producing justice for yet another victim of Halliburton/KBR is to send it to binding arbitration and tsk tsk tsk "Sadly," wrote Judge Miller, "sexual harassment, up to and including sexual assault, is a reality in today's workplace."

WHAT???????? "Sadly...Just a REALITY" ????? Yes, HE SAID THAT! No, he didn't just SAY it, he WROTE IT IN HIS DECISION. To send it to arbitration.

It is like the hugest setback for working young single women EVER. Not to mention the rest of us.

What the hell kind of message does this Judge's words and decision send to women's bosses' and co-workers?

We're FAIR GAME now.

And Feministing did not cover it.

Huntin' season is on, now, girls, wear your high heels, and remember they make TERRIFIC weapons when the shoe is held in the hand, heel out towards your attacker's face, and sharply hammered into his bleeding eyeballs.

Unfortunately, if your attacker is also your boss, this will not help you keep your job. If you've got kids to support, tough shit.

THAT'S what's going on.

Look, I don't CARE if Jamie Leigh is a nicer person with better connections and more media savvy than Tracy Barker.

The Judge on the Barker Case said

"Sadly, sexual harassment, up to and including sexual assault, is a reality in today's workplace."

Along with a decision that would make sure it would not only continue apace, but get worse.

And Jessica STILL conflates this case with Jamie Leigh's. AAAARGH!

I dropped him a note:

In response to your comments on teen pregnancy, I would like to propose a policy question:

It is shown that teen pregnancy is directly linked to child poverty, due to teen parents' lack of access to vital resources such as day care and health care for their children. How would your call for teen parents to be "sent away,... shunned, ... called what they are" alleviate this problem?

Liston's comment was derogatory, disgusting, and ouright insulting.

However, I'm more offended by wagadog's equally insulting and outright absurd comments on this thread. I've come to expect sexist drivel that demeans young women from conservative politicians, but to see it from a so-called feminist is just disgusting. Do you really think that young women have absolutely no agency and no libido? Would you really accuse two teens that have sex of rape? Would you call me a rapist to my face for the six months of my life in which I was 18 and my boyfriend 17?

You say it's an issue of female minors not being able to protect themselves? I'm not any more capable of protecting myself now than I was a year ago. I don't see how a woman under 18 is magically incapable of saying no and defending herself while a woman over 18 is capable of doing so.

Your claim that boys and men will "will always push it too far, unless you have a credible and immediate threat" is also insulting. Sure, there are some men who don't know how to take no for an answer. But saying ALL men are like that is a sexist generalization. While the world is still an incredibly misogynist place, there ARE decent human beings in it, many of whom are male.

You are a goddess Sayna. Thank you for saying what I just now wanted to.

Victims of rape are not to blame for the rape.

I should post this in the appropriate place. This is my response from penis head, followed by my response TO penis head:
"Thank you for your e-mail and for sharing your comments.

As you may or may not know, I have apologized for the use of the derogatory term that prompted your e-mail. My comment was ill-chosen and inappropriate and I fully realize that. My true message about personal responsibility, and educating young people in regard to the responsibility of parenthood, has been overshadowed by a poor choice of one word.

As a father, I want my child to get a good education, first and foremost, before undertaking the responsibility of parenthood. Adolescents may be capable of having babies, but most are ill prepared for the difficult duties ahead that come with being successful, competent parents. Unknowingly, they may relegate themselves and their children to a lifetime of poverty and hardship. This applies to young men as well. I understand that we all can make mistakes. My objection is with encouraging and perpetuating those mistakes.

Though I realize you may disagree not only with my choice of wording, but also with that message, I respect your views. If anything positive has come of this incident, it is that more people have joined this debate over teen pregnancy, personal responsibility, and parental involvement.

Respectfully,

State Representative Larry Liston "

My response:
"Dear Mr. Liston,

I appreciate your response and your apology. I agree to the fullest extent that our children need to be educated, mature, and ready before they undertake the responsibility of parenthood. Unplanned pregnancy does lead to a lifetime of poverty and hardship, an enormous burden for them personally and for us as a society.

However, I do not think the responsibility falls solely on teenagers to prevent unintended pregnancy. We as a society need to take responsibility. This means we as a society need to increase access to life-saving comprehensive sex-ed, medical care, and contraception. We as a society need to address sexist media that sexualizes young girls and objectifies all women, leading to a culture of rape and violence against women. Not all unintended pregnancies are the result of a bad choice. Many girls are raped by partners and family members. That is why it is essential to arm these young girls with ways to protect themselves to the best of their ability. And we as a society need to recognize that the MAJORITY of teenagers will not remain abstinate until marriage regardless of how much we keep them from vital comprehensive information about sex.

We need to stop blaming teenagers for our failures as a society."

This is not to say that I think teenage girls don't have the agency and drive to want sex, but I am just putting it in these simplistic terms for the simplistic penis head who's so quick to call teenagers sluts.

"Oh, you mean the men too, asshole? Funny...in your parents' day and age, it was never the boys they sent away."

Now I'm wondering how much of only sending the girl away was sexism (treating boys better than girls) and how much was an age thing (for example, kids being easier to send away than older men who get them pregnant)? For example, I bet it's easier to kick one's unmarried 15-year-old daughter out of one's own house than to kick one's 37-year-old neighbor out of the house he bought himself...

"But I resent being guilt-tripped into the notion that it's neutral for a someone who may lack the maturity and may be unable to provide 70% of what their kid needs financially/emotionally to be knocked up,"

Yeah, I agree. Can't we support people in difficult situations *without* encouraging other people to put themselves in difficult situations?

"1) A girl who has the same boyfriend for years, who's entirely faithful to him and they're a real 'they'll get married some day' couple is still a 'slut' just for having sex with that one guy?"

Some people out there would even call her a slut for spending more than 10 minutes talking to him before agreeing to have sex with him in the first place. o_O

"But how is shaming a pregnant teenager a good idea? What is that going to accomplish?"

Maybe he wants unmarried teen pregnancy rates to go down *and* ignorance rates to stay up, and thinks this can be accomplished by having unmarried teen girls avoid pregnancy via fear of being called sluts rather than via knowing about contraceptives?

"If nature wanted us to be sexually active when we were in our late 20's we wouldn't get our secondary sex characteristics until then."

That's assuming nature *wants* anything at all, instead of our genetic traits being what was left over after random mutations happening and some of those traits being killed off before they got passed on.

Meanwhile, what about when a girl who has breasts and pubic hair at age 12 doesn't want to have sex yet? Would you tell her "if nature didn't want you to be sexually active you wouldn't already look so sexy"?

"I know you don't think teenagers should be having sex. But here's the thing. They ARE."

Nitpick: *some of them* ARE. Some others aren't.* If you don't hint at being ignorant of their existence, you sound even more intelligent and your argument becomes even more solid and even harder to dismiss. :)

"I know a lot of adopted children end up in good homes, but this was not the case for my half-brother."

...and don't forget the ones who age out of foster care instead of ever getting adopted in the first place! I wonder how many of the women and girls who have unwanted pregnancies and get told "just give it up for adoption!!!" aged out of foster care or are still waiting for adoption themselves...

"Guys will always push it too far, unless you have a credible and immediate threat -- such as swift and sure kick in the ass or an automatic conviction on a rape charge -- if he can't keep it in his pants."

There are roughly 3 billion guys on the planet. Surely they're not *all* like that!

* For example, I didn't have sex as a teen. My only options were (and still are) not having sex or somehow having sex with someone against his will, and I don't rape.