I was once watching an interview between a news reporter and a self-proclaimed feminist named Naomi Wolf. Because this interview had been televised more than a decade ago, I don’t remember the name of the news reporter. However, I do remember many of the details of what Ms. Wolf said to him. She spoke about how her parents were very permissive about allowing her to take boys up to her bedroom to have sexual intercourse with them back when she was 15 years old. She even bragged about how casual her parents were about telling her to come downstairs to have dinner after she was finished getting it on with her boyfriend. At first, Ms. Wolf seemed like an interesting person who had a progressive way of thinking. However, my opinion of her began to plummet rapidly after she started throwing around her so-called point about how older men sexually encroached upon adolescent girls while, at the same time, she implied that a teenage boy could do no wrong to an adolescent girl in middle school or high school so long as he was a minor himself. Whenever I finish watching a video on YouTube about a 16-, 15-, 14-, 13-, or even a 12-year-old girl whose same-age boyfriend has gotten her pregnant, has bailed on her, has slut-shamed her and has even encouraged his friends to bully her, I have the strong urge to confront Ms. Wolf and tell her how wrong she is and that she has no right to blame all the problems of teenage minor girls on older men when it is teenage boys that are looking to use these girls for their own self-centered gratification.
I recently came across an article on the Internet titled “Normal Adult Men Don’t Date Teenage Girls” in which its author, Eve Vawter, made it no secret that she adheres to this same misguided school of thought that Naomi Wolf does. What is so interesting is that this same article was written back in December 5, 2013 when Ms. Vawter’s daughter was only 9 years old. Now, therein Ms. Vawter did describe her own experience as a teenage girl in high school who had an older boyfriend, and she mentioned about how uncomfortable it made her feel in the beginning that older men noticed her after she hit puberty. Therein she never really brought up any actual instances in which her older boyfriend treated her with contempt or disdain. She merely insisted that normal men in their adulthood didn’t date teenage girls. Then she warned that she would never allow any older man to touch her daughter before she was of age. What is so seriously flawed about Ms. Vawter’s logic is that she goes by this school of thought that if she allows her daughter to have “beautiful amazing life affirming healthy fun sex” whenever she wants after she hits puberty, nothing can go wrong so long as the young girl’s sex partner is the same age as her. However, HEAVEN FORBID, she will never ever allow for any man beyond high-school age even to call her teenage daughter up on the telephone to talk about the weather.
Now, I completely get it. Ms. Vawter was indoctrinated to believe that no adult man was supposed to go grazing in her pasture back when she was an adolescent regardless of how much proof there was out there to show that adult/adolescent relationships have flourished into successful marriages and have led to happy families in the past. Many of us live in this dogmatic culture called the United States of America where men older than 21 years of age simply are not supposed to have any sort of non-Platonic feelings for adolescent girls (12 to 17 years of age), for a lack of a better and more accurate description, but teenage boys as young as middle-school age but not old enough to vote have the full run of the sexual mill with these young girls regardless of how much harm they cause them. Well, Ms. Vawter’s daughter would now be 15 years old. Therefore, I wonder how highly she thinks of these hypersexual teenage boys who are supposed to fill her daughter’s life with such pleasure and happiness, especially whenever she comes across an article or a YouTube video on the Internet of a 13- or 14-year-old girl describing how her same-age boyfriend got her pregnant and then turned into an absolute piece of human feces on her. It makes me think of a story that I came across on the Internet regarding a 16-year-old girl whose 30-year-old significant other was trying to protect her from an abusive 16-year-old ex-boyfriend, and the girl’s grandparents were unjustly siding with the abusive teenage boy against the protective 30-year-old significant other. People’s stupidity and ignorance can actually do much more harm than good to youngsters in our society.
To make matters more offensively worse than before, Ms. Vawter actually presented her article as a story about “child abuse” of all things. Even though I do not like to criticize other writers’ prose, I cannot help but to denounce her article as nothing more than an opinion piece that presents no research that is backed up by any facts. Her article at best is propaganda rather than good, honest reporting. If she wants to go on believing that normal adult men don’t date teenage girls, she is perfectly entitled to her opinion. However, here is something that I would really like for her to chew on. Teenage boys who get adolescent girls (12 to 17 years old) pregnant, bail on them, slut-shame them and encourage their friends to bully them are not engaging in anything that remotely resembles NORMAL ADOLESCENT BEHAVIOR despite what Ms. Vawter and other sheep like her may have been indoctrinated to believe. I’m not putting goody two shoes on every man over 21 years old who has ever had a relationship with an adolescent girl less than 18 years of age, but I can confidently say that there are more teenage male minors harming pubescent and adolescent girls in today’s society than there are adult men doing so.
Ms. Vawter thinks that it’s perfectly okay for her now-15-year-old daughter to engage in sexual contact with boys her own age, but she believes that any man over 21 years of age who shows even the slightest attraction to an adolescent girl is creepy and unsettling. Are you stupid, Ms. Vawter, or do you only choose to believe what you wish to believe rather than accept the full truth? Ms. Vawter, you actually believe that if your teenage daughter gives her virginity to a boy the same age as her, somehow her life is going to become a bed of roses or perhaps an ongoing story in a Harlequin romance novel. Really? Especially after that teenage boy gets your daughter pregnant, bails on her, slut-shames her, get his friends to bully her at school and eventually happens to show up at the maternity ward to see his newborn kid, so to speak, with his trashy, new girlfriend?
Regardless of how good of a mother that Ms. Vawter praises herself to be, women like her are living in a white-picket-fence fantasy world that is doing more damage than good to our nation. Eve Vawter and Naomi Wolf both don’t seem to realize that our nation is now the deadbeat teen dad capital of the world, and it’s not mainly older men who are ruining pubescent and adolescent girls’ lives. Ms. Vawter? If you’re reading this article here of mine and if your 15-year-old daughter has sex with a boy her own age and gets pregnant from it, this is the kind of mother of that prospective deadbeat teenage father whom you’re likely going to have to deal with.
A Mother Makes Ludicrous Excuses For The Misconduct Of Her Jerk Of A Son Who Is A Deadbeat Teenage Father-To-Be
Ms. Vawter? If your teenage daughter should become lucky enough not to get pregnant after having sexual intercourse with a boy her own age, she will still become her teenage boyfriend’s topic of discussion in a filthy boys’ locker room setting and word will spread throughout her school that she is easy even though you know for a fact that she really is a nice girl. Give it up, Ms. Vawter. You don’t know how a teenage boy’s mind works, and you definitely don’t know how an adult man’s mind works either; and you cannot generalize about boys and men with a one-size-fits-all formula for all of them. Moreover, Ms. Vawter, you don’t get to determine how men should differentiate right from wrong, because you’ve never walked in their shoes and you could never understand their difficulties and struggles in life because of agendas that femi-Nazi extremists are constantly trying to shove down their throats.
Believe it or not, there are older men who share affection with adolescent girls and do the honorable thing by eventually marrying these girls and starting families with them. However, societal fundamentalists continue to peddle the mendacious propaganda that the older “dude” who has non-Platonic feelings for a middle-school or high-school girl does so inasmuch as he cannot get a woman his own age. These societal fundamentalists overdo their stupidity by promoting the belief or rather the actual misconception that adolescent girls younger than 18 years of age who respond to these men’s affections must have daddy issues. No, no, no. That bogus scenario is not how it usually is. The man over 21 years old who hooks up with the teenage girl who does not yet vote in elections could very well be someone who has never had a girlfriend in his entire life, and, therefore, he may not be able to relate that easily to experienced women his own age and probably is not aggressively looking for a woman his own age because of it; and he is looking for that genuine first-love experience that he missed out on or was wrongfully deprived of during his adolescent years. The teenage girl who is too young to vote in elections and who hooks up with that older man most likely does so in order to steer clear of the many adolescent boys who contribute to the epidemic of deadbeat teenage fathers in our nation.
Societal fundamentalists will run their mouths about power imbalances in adult/adolescent relationships, but somehow they find the behavior of deadbeat teenage fathers to be completely excusable; when, in fact, it is never normal adolescent behavior for a teenage boy to get an underage girl pregnant and then manipulate her situation to make life easier on himself and more difficult on that girl from that point on in light of the situation. According to these societal fundamentalists, an adult man over 21 years old who falls in love with an adolescent girl younger than 18 years of age has to have something seriously wrong with him, but a 15-year-old boy, on the other hand, who goes around getting every underage girl pregnant whom he can get his hands on can do no wrong and should even receive a trophy for his reprehensible behavior. This is the kind of stupidity to which societal fundamentalists have reduced our nation.
The power-imbalance argument, which usually starts out as the difference-in-experience argument pertaining to adult/adolescent relationships, doesn’t hold as much water with many of us more knowledgeable individuals today as it did in previous years, because there are more incels and perma-virgins turning up in the 21-plus-year-old population than in past years. In case you don’t know what an incel is, it is an involuntary celibate. A perma-virgin is a man who remains a virgin involuntarily later in life than most of his male peers do. Now, if someone wants to say that adult incels and perma-virgins are mentally challenged and that adolescent girls should be kept away from them, then we are delving into the debate over whether the mentally challenged have the right to their happiness; and we are saying that teenage girls should stay away from all mentally ill people of any age, which is a very wrong school of thought to encourage. If other people wish to argue that these adult incels and perma-virgins are losers and society, therefore, has the right to segregate them from adolescent girls, then I must interject that all the prom kings and male prima donnas of society don’t have the right to turn our nation into an absolute alpha-male caste system.
If we go back to the previous decade of the twenty-first century, some of us may remember the major news story about a 22-year-old man named Matthew Koso who married his pregnant 14-year-old girlfriend, Crystal Guyer Koso. Before they had gotten involved with each other, Matthew Koso had never had a steady girlfriend in his life and Crystal Guyer Koso had already been in a sexual relationship. Therefore, Mr. Koso had less experience than the young girl he married. Yet society viewed him as being no different from some sex fiend who chases after every pubescent and adolescent girl in sight in a shopping mall or at a skating rink, when truth has it that he is nothing like that despite how some self-righteous do-gooders may perceive him.
Now, some of you are going to argue with me that there are teenage fathers out there who step up to the plate. I will not deny that there are a few here and there. I even knew one personally whom I grew up with and whose wedding I attended shortly after he turned eighteen. However, reality has it that teenage boys generally do not make as good fathers as adult men do. In fact, teenage fathers who appear to step up to the plate have been known to harm and even murder their own children. For example, in Iowa, a 17-year-old boy murdered his own baby daughter a year ago. During that same year, another teenage boy murdered his baby daughter in Pennsylvania during a fit of rage related to a video game. Nowadays, in the press and in the media, you also hear and read about teenage boys who murder teenage mothers’ babies that are not even their own flesh and blood.
A 17-Year-Old New York Boy Got Sentenced For Killing His Girlfriend’s Toddler Back When He Was 16 Years Old
Getting back to the weak argument about power imbalances that these societal fundamentalists are always spewing at the public, I don’t believe that teenage girls are as easy to dominate as these individuals believe them to be. Sure, the class hunk in their school can easily have their way with them inasmuch as there are peer pressures coming at these young girls from all directions. However, these same girls are always going to be on their guard with older men. Moreover, during my adolescent days, I noticed that most girls had gotten their rejection skills down to a fine art by the time they were in the eighth grade. It could explain why the shy, quiet boy in the back of the classroom in a middle-school or high-school setting often runs the risk of someday falling into the vicious vortex of adult inceldom or perma-virginity.
A short while back, I read this one article by a writer named Anna North, who publishes her articles on a website named Jezebel, about an adult man who admitted that he was attracted to pubescent and adolescent girls; and as I was reading the comments section of the article, I felt as though I were listening to a room full of Harper Valley hypocrites getting up on their moral high horses about adult men showing non-Platonic attention to adolescent girls. The title of the article is so vulgar that I’ve decided not to quote it herein. Most of these femi-Nazi hags in that article’s comments section kept ranting on about how adolescent girls found middle-aged men who flirted with them to be so repulsive. Well, they could have fooled me, because there were so many television talk shows that aired in both the 1990s and the early part of the 21st century that featured teenage girls coupled up with men who may have even been older than their fathers. Anyhow, if these know-it-alls see it that way, then it supports my point in my other Hive-Blog articles on how marriages between adolescent girls and middle-aged men are so rare in our nation that there really is no point to legislators outlawing marriages between adolescent girls and middle-aged men and that the hysteria over such marriages is completely unfounded. Moreover, Ms. North did not reveal the age of the man that she described in her article. The only thing that Ms. North said about that man’s age was that he was an adult and nothing more. Therefore, these femi-Nazi hags in the comments section of that same article had no real grounds to bring up the subject of adolescent girls hooking up with middle-aged men.
A couple of these same femi-Nazi hags complained about how much grosser they felt as teenage girls whenever any men over 30 years old flirted with them as opposed to boys their own age flirting with them. They insisted that American society should merely learn to accept their observations as a universal standard of some kind. However, every culture, every subculture and even every socioeconomic structure adheres to its own set of principles and standards in this regard. Compare the 2005 American film titled Hard Candy with the 2003 Italian film titled Ginger and Cinnamon, and it will become quite obvious to you that the average 14-year-old girl in Southern Europe likely doesn’t share the same viewpoint as the average 14-year-old girl in a suburb of the United States of America on what is and is not an age-appropriate partner for a girl her age. In the movie Hard Candy, the 14-year-old girl (Hayley Stark) vented her hatred against the 32-year-old man she met in an online chat room and verbally emphasized to him that she viewed him to be no different from some serial child rapist who grabbed toddlers from playgrounds and committed unspeakable crimes against them; whereas, in the movie Ginger and Cinnamon, the 14-year-old female protagonist (Meggy) was found having a lovey-dovey conversation with a man in his thirties and she even welcomed a comment from him in which he stated that he never felt uncomfortable about talking about sex with her despite that he knew her true age.
When I was 11 years old, my sister had this one friend named Terry, who was 14 years old at the time. My mother had these drinking glasses that had pictures of male models on them, and Terry became grossed out after my sister handed her a drinking glass that had a male model on it who looked to be in his forties. She insisted that my sister gave her a drinking glass with a male model on it that was only in his early twenties. Often Terry would talk about rock musicians with stars in her eyes, and she would comment on how she would just love to have their baby. After I would find out from reading some magazine that these same rock musicians were older than her father, I would find myself laughing really hard. As you can see, age has very much to do with how people perceive it rather than what it really is on a purely numerical level.
Nevertheless, if of any of these women who posted in the comments section of Ms. North’s article were actually speaking the truth about middle-aged men, it greatly bewilders me how it is that so many 13-, 14- and 15-year-old girls choose the skuzziest-looking teenage boy they can find in their school to date insofar as even their mothers constantly find themselves asking them the million-dollar question, “What do you see in this social degenerate?” A woman’s quest for an age-appropriate Utopia for their adolescent daughters, so to speak, can only go so far to the point that even that same woman will eventually have to sense the absurdity of her own beliefs in that regard. If these same femi-Nazi hags had to spend their adolescence in the 1960s back when middle-aged bike gang members were kidnapping 12-year-old girls and forcibly turning them into baby machines, they would cave in way too easily and they would stop judging adult men in our time era to be “creeps” for failing to meet their criteria of age-appropriate perfection. These women are like pampered trust-fund kids demanding their next monthly allowance.
I find way too many Americans making comments on the Internet about how they think it is so disgusting and appalling for any adult male over 21 years of age (sometimes even 18 years of age) to have non-Platonic feelings for an adolescent girl but that it is perfectly okay for an adolescent boy younger than 18 years old to “pump and dump” and even impregnate girls in middle school and high school. According to them, teenage boys get to play around with “jailbait” and destroy these girls’ lives any way they please so long as they’re on the same side of the legal age line as these girls, because, after all, according to their school of thought, boys will be boys and adult men are supposed to walk the white line of age-appropriate perfection. Well, I once saw this one movie titled Pitch Black, which was released in 2000. It was set in the distant future, and it was about a spaceship crew that was marooned on a planet that had more than one sun. After it became apparent that there were dangerous flesh-eating creatures that flew around on the planet during periods of darkness caused by solar eclipses, one of the characters in the movie named Riddick, who was a convict, kept telling this one female spaceship pilot, “It ain’t me you have to worry about.” Well, whenever one of these femi-Nazi extremists start running their mouths about how every mother needs to protect her 12- or 13-year-old daughter from “creepy, older men,” I can almost envision Riddick saying the same thing to these women, because, let’s face it; most heinous sex crimes against pubescent and adolescent girls are committed by boys the same age as them rather than by significantly older men. If you ever get a chance to see the 2001 movie titled Things Behind The Sun starring Kim Dickens, Gabriel Mann and Eric Stolz, you will find out exactly what I mean. Also, keep in mind that Things Behind The Sun is based upon a true story.
At the end of the day, teenage minor boys in middle school and high school have the most access to teenage girls (12 to 17 years old) and the most opportunities to victimize them sexually. I once even read a crime report from the Federal government that reported that most sexual predators of adolescent girls are within close age difference to these girls rather than being significantly older men. Therefore, the “dirty old man” scare is highly unwarranted for the most part. However, most women continue on to believe that teenage boys can do no wrong to girls this young and that adult men always have dishonorable intentions for them. Hmm. In a figurative sense, I guess they would prefer that their 14-year-old daughter date someone like Philip Chism or perhaps teenage boys like Nathan Walker, Avion Lawson and Jakaris Taylor. These women are putting so much emphasis on the age factor regarding whom their middle-school or high-school daughter dates or falls in love with that they have become completely blind to the sexual atrocities that adolescent boys younger than 18 years old commit against underage girls every day in this nation.
The comments section of the above-aforementioned article from Anna North was inundated with intellectually bankrupt posts from self-proclaimed child advocates and self-appointed pedo-experts. Each and every one of them always insisted that everything that they stated was the gospel truth and that anyone who disagreed with them was either a pedophile or a pedophile apologist. One ongoing argument from these circus clowns that I found so laughable was the point they made about how the prefrontal cortex of the frontal lobe of an adolescent’s brain was not fully developed and, therefore, lawmakers, in their opinion, should raise the statutory age of consent as high as they could in each state jurisdiction of our nation inasmuch as adolescents could not make wise decisions in relationships with adults. In other words, these circus clowns want to justify an oppressive school of thought and an archaic criminal justice system based upon a contention that is not fully conclusive. Anyhow, what I found so interesting was a post in that same comments section from one individual who challenged this same argument that these people constantly bring up about the adolescent brain. Therein this person stated:
Eh... We have hard data that teenage brains look structurally different from adult brains, yes. We may even know that those specific differences are in areas that are implicated in decision making, but we actually know very, very little about how brain structure maps to brain function - in anyone. Cognitive neuroscience papers are usually distorted by the media and made out to present far more impressive evidence than they actually do. The studies that look at how brain development influences impulsiveness and decision making usually involve picking out which bits light up when someone presses one of two buttons on a g— Stroop test. That tells us virtually nothing about real-life, complex decision making.
1. American Legislators Are Now Prohibiting 16- And 17-Year-Old Minors From Wedding Anyone More Than Two To Seven Years Their Senior
What takes me to a place way beyond anger is the fact that because of the intrusive activities of Unchained At Last and The Tahirih Justice Center, state legislatures across our nation have been actually placing age-differential limits on 16- and 17-year-old minors who wish to get married. For example, in Louisiana, under a new marriage law that mandates that no minor younger than 16 years of age can get married under any circumstances in that state, a 16- or 17-year-old minor is prohibited from marrying an adult more than three years their senior under any circumstances. In Florida, under their new marriage law, a 17-year-old minor cannot legally wed anyone more than two years their senior under any circumstances. In Colorado, under their new marriage law, a 16- or 17-year-old minor cannot marry an adult more than three years their senior under any circumstances. In Georgia, under their new marriage law, a 16- or 17-year-old minor cannot marry anyone more than four years their senior under any circumstances. In Missouri, under their new marriage law, a 16- and 17-year-old minor is not allowed to marry anyone older than 20 years of age under any circumstances. In Nevada, under their new marriage law, a 17-year-old minor cannot marry anyone more than three years their senior under any circumstances. In Ohio, under their new marriage law, a 17-year-old minor cannot marry anyone more than four years their senior under any circumstances. Former Ohio Governor John Kasich signed off on this new marriage law in Ohio. Keep in mind that he ran for president in 2016, and I will be doing an article about Ohio’s new marriage law and elaborating on Governor Kasich in a future Hive-Blog article.
In Tennessee, under their new marriage law, a 17-year-old minor cannot marry anyone more than four years their senior under any circumstances. In Arizona, under their new marriage law, a 16- or 17-year-old minor cannot marry anyone more than three years their senior under any circumstances. In Utah, under their new marriage law, a 16- or 17-year-old minor cannot marry anyone more than seven years their senior under any circumstances. Most of us realize that if two people just so happen to be on the opposite sides of the legal age line and they are further apart in age difference than their state jurisdiction will legally allow them to be if they wish to wed, such a couple is likely going to travel to a different state jurisdiction to make their marriage possible. Even if every state jurisdiction in our nation were someday to outlaw marriage before the age of eighteen altogether, these couples could still travel to foreign jurisdictions to get married legally; and criminalizing such marriages is likely going to bring up constitutional concerns at a Federal level, because, after all, we are not Australia.
Fraidy Reiss of Unchained At Last is as infuriated by these same provisions in these new marriage laws across the nation as I am. However, her reasons for being so are diametrically different from mine, and our simultaneous opposition to these same provisions in no way constitutes any kind of consensus between us. Why? Here is my answer. She doesn’t believe that these provisions should exist at all inasmuch as she believes that nobody should be able to get married before 18 years of age under any circumstances. She refers to these same provisions as “loopholes” as per usual. I say that these provisions in these new marriage laws are as ludicrously unreasonable as these new marriage laws themselves, and well enough should have been left alone. Moreover, our state lawmakers throughout our nation have never engaged in this kind of outrageous legislative conduct before recently. Before 2016, no state jurisdiction here in the Union imposed any kind of age-differential limit on anyone getting married here in our country. It would appear that there would be constitutional concerns with these new marriage laws forbidding minors from marrying someone so many years older than them.
If you surf around the Internet and read some of the propaganda that self-proclaimed child advocates are spewing on this issue, it becomes clear to you that these people actually believe that underage adolescent marriage, which they wrongfully label as “child marriage,” is a masquerade for child sexual abuse. Now, I have to stress that as there are religious fanatics out there who obsess over Satan and Hell, there are many self-proclaimed child advocates who are just as destructive in their way of thinking as these religious fanatics are in that they insist that no adult man who ever has non-Platonic feelings for any adolescent girl could ever have honorable intentions for her at the same time. Trying to convince these self-proclaimed child advocates that non-exploitative adult/adolescent relationships do exist is as about as easy as trying to convince a Christian fundamentalist that all suicides do not get cast into the Lake of Fire for all eternity. You simply won’t get anywhere with these people if you try to talk reason into them, because they refuse to listen or reason with anyone who doesn’t completely agree with them. I’m going to warn each and every one of you that these self-proclaimed child advocates can be even more dangerous than some of these religious fanatics that we periodically read about or hear about in the press and in the media.
What gets me laughing about so many of these extremists who proclaim themselves to be child advocates is that many of them will go as far as to say that 14- and 15-year-old girls should stay away from young men who are only four years their senior, because these young men are considered to be legal adults; whereas, at the same time, many of these same child advocates consider the actor, Corey Feldman, to be some kind of ambassador for the war against “Hollywood pedophilia,” as they call it. That is, they view adolescents above 13 years of age to be just as prospective targets of pedophilia as toddlers despite that their perspectives on such matters don’t agree with the definition of pedophilia that appears in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (“DSM-5”). Well, I guess I have to be the one to rain on these people’s parade and inform them that Corey Feldman dated a 14-year-old girl when he was 18 years old. That girl was Drew Barrymore. Moreover, Corey Feldman was no late-blooming goody two-shoes back then either, because he married an adult woman shortly after he broke up with Drew Barrymore. It should also be noted that Corey Feldman had also dated Drew Barrymore back when he was 14 years old and she was only 10 years old. If he wasn’t having sexual intercourse with her back then, it was only because she was wise enough to reject his sexual advances. However, he would have been someone likely to put pressure on her to have sexual intercourse with him, because he was not someone who remained on the straight and narrow during his younger years. Therefore, I have to say, “So much for Corey Feldman’s clean-cut-boy image that all these self-proclaimed child advocates so delude themselves into believing.”
These extremists proclaiming themselves to be child advocates are both ignorant and mentally unhinged. Exactly as the YouTube video below shows, there are some of these self-proclaimed child advocates who go as far as believing that pedophiles and child molesters are traveling here from other planets and from other dimensions in the form of shape-shifting reptilians who take on the appearance of human beings. What is particularly disturbing about the YouTube video below is that there are people out there who would actually take the man in this same video seriously.
The Self-Proclaimed Child Advocate Presenting This YouTube Video Is Clearly Not In Touch With All Of His Mental Faculties
We cannot and should not take these fanatical child advocates seriously inasmuch as they will continue to do harm to our society despite how noble they may appear in their intentions. What makes them even more dangerous than they could ever be is that they are aggressively seeking like-minded individuals to help them further their detrimental agenda to pass laws that will outlaw any adolescents from getting married before 18 years of age under any circumstances. Some of these idiots actually believe that a 16-year-old girl will be so much better off with an 18-year-old welfare king than she will be with a 23-year-old stockbroker as evidenced by all these new marriage laws throughout our country, placing age-differential limits on whom 16- and 17-year-old minors can marry.
2. The Fundamentalist Crusade To End Underage Adolescent Marriage Is Luckily Being Met With Some Resistance
I recently came across an article on the Internet titled “End child marriage in the U.S.? You might be surprised at who’s opposed” by Dartunorro Clark. Therein Mr. Clark provided a list of organizations that are wisely opposing the efforts of Fraidy Reiss and her legion of femi-Nazi extremists to outlaw underage adolescent marriage. Those organizations are The American Civil Liberties Union, Planned Parenthood, The National Center for Youth Law, and The Louisiana Family Forum. I commend this article for being very informative about the fact that there are people who have wised up to this fundamentalist crusade that femi-Nazi extremists like Fraidy Reiss of Unchained At Last and Jeanne Smoot of The Tahirih Justice Center have been waging on our nation behind the backs of many people who are still unaware of these legislative events. However, I did find it somewhat offensive that Mr. Clark gave Cassandra Levesque a platform. Ms. Levesque is not only a joke, but she is also a dangerous troublemaker; and I will be publishing an article about her here on Hive Blog in the near future to expose her for the kind of cutthroat that she is.
Therein female legislators are described as whining about “dirty old men” exploiting young girls through the institution of marriage either under the status quo marriage laws or the previous marriage laws in their respective states; but as I have stressed previously herein, there are far more teenage boys harming teenage girls than there are older men doing so. Societal fundamentalists who are hyping up this same hysteria are constantly bickering about how the minimum marriageable age in each state should at least mirror the statutory age of consent. However, let’s not forget that American statutory-age-of-consent laws are becoming more and more unpopular and untrustworthy because of flaws in their logic. Down below is a video from a YouTuber named Black Pill Presentations who elaborates on this same topic regarding statutory-age-of-consent laws.
The Statutory-Age-Of-Consent Laws Here In Our Nation Leave So Very Much To Be Desired
Both the television entertainment industry and the film industry have continuously demonized any kind of non-Platonic interaction between adult men and adolescent girls for decades. If we go as far back in time as the early 1970s back when groupie Lori Mattix was having a sexual affair with rock singer David Bowie, which she later reported to be gratifying and rewarding to her, the movie Billy Jack showed a scene in which the protagonist of that movie, Billy Jack, searches for his girlfriend’s rapist only to find him naked in bed with a 13-year-old girl, who was also naked, while country music is blasting loud from a radio. After he does so and he realizes that his girlfriend’s rapist and the 13-year-old girl are in the middle of having sexual intercourse, he tells the young girl in that scene to get dressed and get out of there inasmuch as he had a score to settle with his girlfriend’s rapist, who is also a political boss’s son. After the young girl leaves the bedroom, this political boss’s son pulls out a gun. However, Billy Jack kills this political boss’s son before this same political boss’s son can inflict deadly harm upon him, although he does sustain a gunshot wound.
Toward the mid-to-late 1970s, a soap opera on ABC named General Hospital worked a storyline into its plot in which a 15-year-old girl named Laura Webber became sexually involved with a significantly older man named David Hamilton; and after the relationship encountered problems, she eventually caused his death by accident. Her mother, Dr. Lesley Webber, took the blame for the murder and was arrested, because she didn’t want to see her teenage daughter suffer the legal consequences of her actions. Eventually, justice prevailed, so to speak, and Laura Webber had to serve out a sentence in the form of a modest amount of probation.
In 1981, a movie titled Fallen Angel was released that starred Dana Hill and Richard Masur. The movie was about a baseball coach named Howie Nichols who pulls rank with a 12- to 13-year-old girl named Jennifer Phillips to entice her into posing nude in pictures for him. The movie producer’s original intention was to deliver a film about a pedophile who sexually molests children. However, if he wanted to do so, he should have made the “victim” in the film younger than puberty to deliver an honest depiction of a child falling prey to sexual exploitation rather than another Lolita-fantasy-gone-wrong type of story. The movie completely whitewashes the existence of any teenage sex or teenage promiscuity that was going on among high-school students and even middle-school students at the time that it was made and completely denies that there were adolescents as young as 12 or 13 years old back then who aggressively sought out sexual relationships with older partners. You hear the prosecuting attorney utter the word “pedophile” toward the end of the movie, but she never explains what it means exactly or how it would even apply to the situation at hand, which really doesn’t matter inasmuch as the young girl, Jennifer Phillips, is not a prepubescent child but rather an adolescent of middle-school age. Keep in mind that most people back then didn’t know what a pedophile or pedophilia were, and they had not even heard of those two terms. I will not comment on the quality or lack thereof of the movie’s contents. However, I will denounce the movie as sensationalizing an issue that could have been depicted more sincerely and more accurately than it was, although, at the same time, I will not ignore the fact that there are very threatening situations that pubescent and adolescent youngsters do fall into with people in authority over them who only care about themselves. I must admit that one very interesting scenario that was incorporated into the plot at the beginning of the movie was a situation in which Howie Nichols had gotten a girl pregnant who was supposed to be no older than, say, 12 or 13 years of age, and he was planning on getting her an abortion. Believe it or not, the actress who played the role of this girl was none other than Elizabeth Cheshire, who used to play the role of Jill Hayden in the television series Sunshine in the mid-1970s back when she was a little girl. She was actually 13 years old in real life when she appeared in the movie Fallen Angel.
Nevertheless, as you can see, Hard Candy was not the first and only American movie ever to demonize adult men who take a non-Platonic interest in adolescent girls. Hollywood and other areas of both television and movie production have been engaging in this biased practice for a very long time. Therefore, it is no mystery why Americans are so ready to stigmatize any non-Platonic feelings that an adult man may have for an adolescent girl, even when that girl is better off with that man than she would be with an abusive boyfriend who is the same age as her. This same neuroticism that self-proclaimed child advocates are greatly to blame for encouraging with the help of both the television entertainment industry and the film industry has now bled over into the controversy over whether underage adolescent marriage should continue to remain legal in this nation.
Reality has it that there simply is no one-size-fits-all standard regarding whether adolescent girls (12 to 17 years of age) should or should not have any sort of non-Platonic interaction with significantly older men. As I described in my Hive-Blog article titled “Should Hebephilia Be Reclassified As A Psychiatric Disorder?,” it became known to me during my senior year of high school that my American Studies II teacher, Mr. Greer, was married to a 19-year-old girl even though he was in his early forties. I also had found out that he had been sneaking around with her when she was 15 years old and he was 38 years old. However, Mr. Greer never acted in any way inappropriate with me or any of my classmates. At the end of the day, I found that his personal life was his business, and I was not going to pass judgment on him inasmuch as he had always treated me with the utmost respect in my capacity as a student. In my humble opinion, I believe that a schoolteacher should avoid becoming romantically involved with any of his or her students, in every way possible.
Back when I was a sophomore in high school, I had this one Physical Education teacher temporarily whose name was Mr. Milillo. He taught wrestling, and there were both boys and girls in my class. Whenever he had a problem with any of the male students doing anything erroneous while wrestling, he would scream at us and even do things to humiliate us such as pulling on our pants to move us around. On the other hand, whenever a girl needed help in performing a wrestling move correctly, he was always ready to place his hands on her breasts and her buttocks and he’d make a big smile while speaking. Other teenage boys and I used to have a good laugh about him at our lunch table, because we all experienced the same situation with him and we all had witnessed him fondling female students. I didn’t know how old Mr. Milillo was at the time, but I was certain that he was at least in his thirties. Some of you are probably going to ask me why I didn’t report him or why didn’t anyone else report him. My answer to that question is plain and simple. I was a student; and if I had reported him to anyone in authority at my school, I sensed that his word would have been taken over mine and it would have only intensified his hostile behavior toward me. I imagine that other boys my age were trapped in that same mindset back then.
Instead of publishing an article regarding underage adolescent marriage that depicts gloom and doom like the articles that Nicholas Kristof has been publishing in The New York Times over the past couple of years, The Washington Post decided to publish an article about a married couple from Pennsylvania consisting of a 25-year-old husband and a 16-year-old wife. Although I do not agree with everything that was stated in the article, I admire that it gave this couple a chance to voice their stance on the issue of underage adolescent marriage. The article described the difficulties that this couple had to go through because of social pressures against their relationship and their marriage. It explained how this couple lived in a state whose legislature and governor were considering banning underage adolescent marriage altogether. What was very clear was that this couple wanted to remain together and that they did not want outside institutions such as the police or a social services agency dictating what their future held for them. The article also spelled out how much difficulty it would have caused this couple if the husband had to serve time in prison and was placed on the sex-offender registry.
This same article made it more than obvious that the laws that Unchained At Last and The Tahirih Justice Center are pushing throughout our nation to eliminate underage adolescent marriage altogether are going to affect couples like the one in the above-described article in an extremely adverse manner. This same adult/adolescent couple do not have a child together. However, in situations where other similar couples do have a child together or one along the way, having no recourse in the legal system to remove the prospect of a statutory-rape trial from the equation beforehand runs the danger of complicating matters even more for both the adolescent girl and the baby. Conservative state legislators who oppose changing the marriage laws in the way that Unchained At Last and The Tahirih Justice Center want them to do so mention frequently about how eliminating underage adolescent marriage could cause a dramatic increase in abortions. I am opposed to abortion, but I fully understand that there are pro-choice individuals who sharply disagree with me on such an issue. In any event, it is bad enough that deadbeat teenage fathers are causing kids to be needlessly raised in single-mother homes. If our state jurisdictions here in our nation legally eliminate underage adolescent marriage altogether and begin prosecuting female adolescent minors’ adult baby daddies aggressively, we will be bringing ourselves in for much harder times than any of these societal fundamentalists like Fraidy Reiss and Jeanne Smoot care to admit inasmuch as those same baby daddies will likely be incarcerated and, therefore, will be removed involuntarily from their offspring’s lives.
I do not completely agree with everything that YouTuber The33Secrets said in his video titled “SCARY FACTS About Kids RAISED By SINGLE MOM's! (Red Pill),” especially when he mentioned teenage marriage in a seemingly negative light. However, I must commend him for doing his homework at least to some extent in that he provided a great amount of Earth-shattering facts about the consequences that single mothering has on society when it is extremely widespread throughout a nation. Watch his video below and decide for yourself what the outcome of everything I described above is going to be in the long run.
YouTuber The33Secrets Provides Government Data Relating To The Impact On Children Of Single Parenting By Women
Fraidy Reiss and Jeanne Smoot as well as their legion of femi-Nazi extremists will not give any of you the devastating facts on how banning underage adolescent marriage will adversely affect our nation. They want everyone to believe that a girl who gets married at 14 or 15 years old is definitely going to face a lifetime of mental disorders and physical ailments as well as a tragic future of both poverty and suffering at the hands of some psychopath, especially if her husband is older than her. They base their beliefs on questionable research. They are always talking about how awful divorce is, and they stress their belief that underage adolescent brides are much more likely to get divorced than adult brides. I’m not saying that divorce doesn’t have its fair share of frustrations, financial difficulties and unpleasant moments. It does. However, as a child of divorce myself, I can also say that divorce is not the end of the world for everyone involved and I have even witnessed individuals improve their quality of life after getting divorced. Sammi Smith is a strong example of a woman who got married at the age of fifteen to a significantly older man and ultimately made a success of her life as a musician. Perhaps her first marriage wasn’t completely perfect, but she has made a financial success out of her life in the music entertainment industry and has achieved more in life than most women who got married in their twenties to someone the same age as them and remained married indefinitely. Fraidy Reiss, Jeanne Smoot and their legion of femi-Nazi extremists can do nothing to change those facts no matter how hard they try to distort reality.
J. G. Higginson conducted a qualitative study so many years ago in which she interviewed 14 teenage mothers who were at one time involved with someone over 18 years of age while they were still minors. She found that *“mothers who were still in these relationships viewed them as normal — their boyfriends just happened to be older. They argued that their boyfriends loved them and made them happy, therefore, the relationship could not be wrong, and no one was getting hurt.” (*Note – I quoted this information from page 307 of Denise A. Hines and David Finkelhor’s 2006 abstract titled “Statutory sex crime relationships between juveniles and adults: A review of social scientific research” in reference to pages 22 and pages 25 to 46 of J. G. Higginson’s 1999 publication titled Symbolic Interaction). This same qualitative study, in essence, contradicts and even debunks the junk science that Ms. Reiss and Ms. Smoot employ to mislead the public to believe that all adolescent girls who enter into relationships with older adult men do so unwillingly and that any marriages that ensue from them can only lead to tragedy. These two women simply don’t care about the facts, and it greatly bewilders me why enough people have not questioned their activities and intentions.
It is ironic that, like me, Ms. Reiss disapproves of these new laws throughout the United States of America that restrict 16- and 17-year-old minors from marrying anyone beyond a certain age. However, she opposes these new laws, because she doesn’t believe that anyone should be able to get married before 18 years of age at all. I oppose them, because I don’t believe that lawmakers have the right to put age-differential limits on legalizing love.
For those of you who are still convinced that these new marriage laws either banning or limiting underage adolescent marriage are not going to do more harm than good to our nation, here is some food for thought. A father can handle a 23-year-old man asking his 14-year-old daughter’s hand in marriage much better than he can handle his 14-year-old daughter telling him that some 15-year-old punk got her pregnant. If a 23-year-old man asks a father for his 14-year-old daughter’s hand in marriage, the father can always say no. However, if a father finds out that a 15-year-old punk has gotten his 14-year-old daughter pregnant, then it is not as though he can punch that young boy out without suffering the consequences of being charged with Battery Of A Child or some other ludicrous criminal charge. Even if the young girl doesn’t get pregnant in that event, a 15-year-old punk could make her a topic of filthy boys’ locker room conversation. Societal fundamentalists will always make the mistake of sugar-coating same-age relationships between adolescents and mislead people to believe that nothing could go wrong if two consenting adolescents engage in so-called sexual exploration, whereas these same societal fundamentalists will ignore any facts that anyone may send their way to show and prove that non-exploitative adult/adolescent relationships can and do exist. In the above-aforementioned article titled “End child marriage in the U.S.? You might be surprised at who’s opposed,” Fraidy Reiss complained about the comments from certain state legislators in which they stated, “Well, Joseph married Mary when she was 8. If it is good enough for God, why shouldn’t it be good enough for us?” Well, Ms. Reiss, if you’re reading my article here on Hive Blog, why don’t you chew on this?!!!!! Whenever a child who is abandoned by his juvenile deadbeat teenage father grows up someday to commit patricide, many of those who are allied with you, Ms. Reiss, will drag out the Fifth Commandment of The Holy Bible that one is to “Honor Thy Father”; when that child’s same biological father has no right to call himself a father in the first place. Besides, those same supporters of you, Ms. Reiss, who adhere to this school of thought have probably never set one foot in a church in their entire life. Therefore, they are only being hypocrites.
3. My Conclusion To This Topic
Get with it, my fellow Americans. Fraidy Reiss along with her organization Unchained At Last as well as their followers and supporters are not looking out for the best interest of our nation. They are pushing an agenda that is going to continue to unleash a great number of unwanted problems upon our land, and they are using faulty and suspicious research to brainwash the public at large into believing that they have well-meaning intentions. We all need to put a stop to these individuals. Part K of my Hive-Blog article titled “The Great American Controversy Over Underage Marriage” tells you exactly what you need to do to go against these people and to protect the public interest. We all need to work together to stand up against individuals like Fraidy Reiss, Jeanne Smoot, Cassandra Levesque and the rest of their legion of societal fundamentalists and femi-Nazi extremists. Our legislators across the nation cannot stand up against these people alone. It is my concern that some of these state legislators have actually caved in to the pressures of these individuals, and both the mainstream press and the mainstream media are not doing a very good job of allowing for the voices of those opposed to these individuals’ agenda to be heard. Some of you brilliant legal minds out there may know of a way to challenge these new marriage laws in the general court system or perhaps even in the Supreme Court of the United States. If so, now is the time for you to act.
This Article Is Copyright-Protected.