Female Sex Offenders And Their Defense

Three recent female sex offender incidents shows America’s feminist culture uses an array of excuses to defend these women's actions.

In the first incident, an Ohio high school track coach, Mrs. Martina Stanley, 35, admitted to a sexual relationship with a 17-year-old boy. Although  he was a student at her high school, she was neither his teacher nor coach. In June, a Marion County court issued her a 15 day jail sentence and 60 hours of community service. She also lost her teaching license.

The defense used by her attorney, and promoted by several media outlets, was the sexual relationship caused the boy no harm. Some media reports implied Mrs. Stanley should not even be sentenced. The 'no harm' defense is often used for female sex offenders. It is routed in feminist ideology and white knight culture.

Feminism emphasizes men are often responsible for a women's misdeeds therefore women are not true criminals. Only men are criminals. This philosophy was the basis for a document titled "Sentencing Women Offenders: A Training Curriculum for Judges" written by the "The National Association of Women Judges" The document's focus was the promotion of a two tiered sentencing system based on gender. Women should be given lighter sentences than men for most crimes. The document has beenn promoted for nearly a decade.   

Similarly, male white knight culture is based on the belief all women are pure and good. They see women as being 'up on a pedestal'. These men view the conviction of women for criminal actions as wrong.

The idea adult women cannot harm adolescent boys is false.

Consider the fact psychologists, feminist and white knights categorically emphasize adolescent girls are more mature than adolescent boys. They also violently oppose any sexual relationship between adult males and adolescent girls. They claim such a relationship causes girls to have higher levels of depression, lower levels of self-esteem and causes her physiological damage.

Yet, maturity is the determining factor in how well an individual handles a sexual relationship. The claim mature girls are harmed by sex while immature boys remain unaffected is illogical and contradictory. Also, when Mrs. Stanely began a sexual relationship with the boy, she taught him its ok for adults to date minors. When he's in his 30's, he could have sex with adolescent girls based on his experience with Mrs. Stanely. Has harm been done? Suppose he gets married in the future. By having sex with the boy, Mrs. Stanely taught him its ok to lie to your spouse's face and stab them in the back. He could cheat on his future wife with an adolescent girl based on his experience as an adolescent. Has harm been done?

Lastly, actual harm is never the only issue in other crimes. For example, if a women is attacked and raped by an assailant, that assailant is viewed as a criminal. Suppose the woman was able to escape thereby avoiding all the harm associated with rape. Is the assailant no longer a criminal?  The legal issue is adults dating adolescents.

Martina Stanley's 15 day sentence might seem reasonable if the youth was close to his 18th birthday. However, there is a small problem.

On March 1, 2013 a Marion County Court sentenced a male sex offender to 14 years in prison. Richard Hale, 53, was guilty of taking nude pictures of an underage girl  and having a sexual relationship with her.  The girl was either 16 or 17 - for reasons unknown the court did not determine her exact age. The adolescent girl made no statements against Mr. Hale. Their relationship was only discovered when the girl asked her high school for help with her home life. Her mother was selling drugs and she was using drugs. The Court had no evidence Hale ever gave her drugs. Hale also had many nude pictures of previous girlfriends. Several officials viewed the photos. Only 1 person thought a few of the girls were probably under 18. However, the judgmental accuracy and objectivity of this person is unknown. Defendants cannot be convicted of additional crimes based on  a vague opinion of one individual. No other victims have come forward. There is also no evidence Hale ever distributed any of his pictures to the public.

The factual evidence against Richard Hale and Martin Stanely is not too different yet the difference between their sentences is huge. It appears Marion County is using "Sentencing Women Offenders: A Training Curriculum for Judges" as its legal guidance. Mr. Hale would seemingly have grounds for a gender discrimination lawsuit.

In a second female sex offender case, Utah teacher, Mrs. Brianne Land Altice, 34, admitted to having a sexual relationship with a 16 year old boy. The boy was a student at her school. Allegedly, the relationship lasted from March to June in 2013. Mrs. Altice's defense is the relationship was not her fault. Her attorney claims the 16 year old boy is at fault. He pursued her. On June 3, a Utah judge denied a motion to dismiss charges against her.

Claiming an adult woman is not responsible for her actions is classic feminism. Like Martina Stanely's case, it is rooted in the feminist belief that men are responsible for a women's misdeeds. Whether or not the boy pursued her is irrelevant. She is the adult. ALL adults are responsible for their actions. She made the decision to date a 16 year old, lie to her husbands face and stab him in the back. She bares sole responsibility for that decision. Her husband has filed for divorce and custody of their child.

In the final sex offender case, a New York high school gym teacher, Mrs. Joy Morsi, 38, was arrested on June 3 and charged with 20 counts each of third-degree rape and third-degree criminal sexual act. She allegedly had a sexual relationship with a 16 year old boy whom was a student at her school. Prosecutors claim the relationship ended when Mrs. Morsi “flipped out” over the boy's decision to take a female classmate to the prom. Additionally, a second student has since come forward to say he also had sex with the teacher. Apparently, Mrs. Morsi began dating him as an act of revenge against her original teenage boyfriend. Her husband accompanied her to her arraignment but reporters claim he did not leave with her afterwards.

Defending her, Fox News commenter Tucker Carlson stated "”You’re this boy, and all of a sudden you’re a rape victim? You pursue an older woman, and have a relationship with her, and you’re a rape victim??”. He called the case "ludicrous". He also admitted it would be a different if the victim was female and the teacher was male. Carlson is another white knight male who views women as being 'up on a pedestal' He thinks 16 year old girls never think about sex. Instead, they sit in their basement and play with their Barbie dolls. Its irrelevant the teenage boy pursued Mrs Morsi. He's a minor. SHE'S THE ADULT.

In America, feminist double standards, often supported by white knight men, are used to defend female sex offenders.

July 7, 2014

The National Campaign Against Male College Students

Feminist have launched a national campaign of harassment and intimidation toward male college students. 

At Columbia University, feminists wrote the names of four male students at various locations across the campus claiming they were rapists. However, none of the students had been found guilty of anything. The only known fact about any of their cases is that a complaint was filed against one of the men 5 months after the incident. 

New York's feminist Senator, Kirsten Gillibrand, wants more legislation against colleges' alleged rape culture. She stated "The price [for women] of a college education should not include a 1 in 5 chance of being sexually assaulted." She claimed schools have "become havens for rape and sexual assault". "These are not cases of dates gone badly, of a misunderstanding about whether she said yes or no, these are actually brutal crimes committed by recidivists and predators". Falsely claiming thousands of women are being raped means thousands of men are rapists. Gillibrand is hoping to create new legislation making it easier for schools to expel large numbers of accused men. 

Sandra Fluke, a feminist California State Senate candidate, repeated Gillibrand's fraudulent clam of 1 in 5 female undergraduates being sexually assaulted. She stated "One in five women will survive a rape or attempted rape by the time she graduates college. That means of the approximately 966,000 women at the bachelor's degree level who will graduate this year, 193,200 will be survivors of rape or attempted rape while in college". Fluke demanded female undergraduates be given "rape shield statutes to protect assault survivors from character assassination". Her proposal means that in any campus incidents women will remain anonymous while men will be named. This includes
incidents of false rape. 

In a TIME Magazine article, Nancy Chi Cantalupo, feminist professor at Georgetown Law, argued that accused students rights can be ignored because "schools face exponentially more expensive liability for violating student victims’ rights under Title IX than they do for violating accused assailants’ due process rights". She stated the largest award given to a falsely accused male undergraduate was only $26,500 compared with $2.8 million awarded a women. 

Feminist Amanda Childress, Sexual Assault Awareness Program coordinator at Dartmouth College stated “"Why could we not expel a student based on an allegation?” "It seems to me that we value fair and equitable processes more than we value the safety of our students." Thus, the Dartmouth Coordinator wants men expelled on mere accusations. This same school has also created a Bystander Initiative program which demands pupils, faculty and staff intervene against men at the first signs of dating trouble. Dartmouth is creating a type of feminist police state. 

Lastly, TIME magazine's recent large article titled 'The Sexual Assault Crisis on American Campuses' emphasized campus sexual assault rules are applied only against men. Women cannot be rapists. In fairness, the author also implored only about 6% of male undergraduates are rapists. She said most men are good. Nonetheless, emphasizing rape laws be applied only against men gives feminist opportunities to manipulate sexual assault rules without impacting female students. Manipulating rules will allow for the expulsion of increasing numbers of men from college. Thus, 6% can easily be changed to 20% or even 40% of male undergraduates are rapists. An example of this double standard occurred in the Ohio State University false rape incident. A video was posted of two drunk undergraduates having sex. Feminists publicly demanded the man be expelled because, under current campus guidelines, a drunk women cannot give sexual consent. However, the man was was also drunk. Yet the woman was not deemed a rapist. Sexual assault guidelines were applied only toward the man.

Across America, feminist are advocating a hostile campus environment for male university students. These women are creating rules allowing for the easy expulsion of men on bogus charges. Feminist are attempting to limit the number of men earning degrees. 

The impetus for this limitation is a 2010 study by the research firm Reach Advisors. The study discovered single women aged 22-30 outearn their male counterparts in most American cities. Reach Advisors cited college education as the main reason for the gender pay gap. Significantly more women than men earn degrees. By altering campus rules, feminist hope thousands of male undergraduates can be prevented from obtaining degrees. Less men with degrees means more high paying skilled jobs go to educated women. 

Curtailing mens' economic opportunities while simultaneously advancing women is the campaign's major goal. If feminists wanted equality, they would have advocated fairness for all students. Instead, these women are intentionally creating a hostile learning environment for men.

May 31, 2014

America's Feminist Media and Jill Abramson

The New York Times recently fired executive editor Jill Abramson. She was replaced by Dean Baquet. America's female chauvinist media was outraged.

Every time a white female corporate manager is fired, there is mass media hysteria. The same hysteria happened with the firing of Carly Fiorina, Carol Bartz, Cynthia Carroll and a host of other female corporate managers. The American media projects a feminist mindset that white female managers should not be fired nor questioned. They should simply be obeyed.

The Los Angeles Times, Washington Post, Huffington Post, CNN, NPR in fact nearly all media outlets claimed she was fired because she was a woman. They even made up a phrase calling her firing a 'glass cliff' for women.

However, Dylan Byers (from POLITICO) stated that Abramson had many problems with subordinates. She was viewed as stubborn and condescending. Many subordinates believed they were being treated poorly. The usually feminist NewYorker backed up his claim. Could this be the reason for her firing? Why would an organization want dissension within its ranks?

A Charlie Rose panel (Rebecca Traistter, Ann Marie Lipinski and Dylan Byers;) grudgingly admitted that the previous executive editor, Bill Keller, had the same problem. Ultimately, it led to his demotion. Could it be the New York Times owner did not want to go thru the same scenario all over again?

The same panelists also stated Abramson hired many females - most of whom were white. Could it be that male journalists were growing resentful at being passed over for promotion or not being hired at all? Because most major media organizations operate secretively, its not known whether she actually practiced sex discrimination in her hiring and promotion practices. However, it is known that she intended to hire Janine Gibson - a white female and place her in a prominent position. Ms. Gibson would serve alongside Dean Baquet as a co-managing editor. Baquet was never told of such an arrangement and was angered when he inadvertently found out. Was Abramson discretely creating a white female controlled environment circumventing other employees? Additionally, could her underhandedness concerning Mr. Baquet be a reason for her firing?

Another fact is Abramson demanded the New York Times pay her more money.  After 3 years as executive editor, her salary was $503,000. She demanded the same salary as previous executive editor Bill Keller. His salary, after 8 years in the position was $559,000. Abramson hired a lawyer to assert her salary demands.

Making salary demands by hiring a lawyer is not an intelligent decision. An employer will likely become angered. Could that be a reason for her firing? Additionally, American feminist media outlets such as the LA Times, Huffington Post, Slate, The NewYorker, CNN and others claimed her salary demands were about pay equity. However, none of the feminist outlets justified why a women needs only work 3 years in a position before she can make the same as a man who worked 8 years in the same position. 

Lastly, these same news organizations contended Abramson created an atmosphere for high quality reporting and investigative journalism.If so then why has the New York Times continued producing biased and chauvinistic articles? For example. a few weeks before her firing the organization wrote an article titled "Technology’s Man Problem". The article claimed male programmers make death threats and rape threats against women. It stated the "computer-engineering culture" causes hostility toward women and pushes them out of the industry. It quoted a man named Lauren Weinstein. He said the reason more women aren’t in this industry is because "these guys are just jerks, and women know it". The foundation for these hostile claims was the fictional app Titstare. According to its comedy presentation, the app allows someone to take photos of themselves staring at tits. The New York Times claimed the app was disgusting and sexist. It was an example of why more women are needed in computing. However, this same news organization produced a November 2013 article discussing the app Lulu. This app allows women to write reviews of men but expressly forbids men from reviewing women. Pictures of men can also be uploaded and their names listed. Negative comments can be posted anonymously. Lulu's developer hopes the app will change men. The New York Times article openly supported Lulu. Thus, according to this news organization, under Abramson's management, a fictional app about staring at anonymous women's tits promotes sexism. A real app rating named men like a restaurant service - and forbidding the rating of women - does NOT promote sexism. THIS IS CLASSIC FEMINIST DOUBLE STANDARD.

Admittedly, the New York Times produced biased and double standard articles long before her hiring. However, she did little to promote objectivity during her tenure.

Media hysteria every time a woman corporate manager is fired shows the American news industry has an entrenched female chauvinist culture. It is a culture based on the philosophy that women should not be held accountable for their actions and men are second class citizens. This philosophy is formally known as feminism.

May 22, 2014