Nasty? Yes. Poor taste? Yes. Deserving of An Ass Whipping? Yes. Criminal? No.1) All 14 year old girls are not just alike. 2) 14 year old girls have been having sex with 28 year old men for thousands of years. None of us would be here had that not been the case.
My grandmother was married and had my uncle at 14.
Statutory law is one thing, human nature is another. In this case they clash. State legislatures could pass stricter statutory rape laws, make the punishment for breaking them death, and place police officers in every bedroom in America - and some girls are still going to have sex with some men.
15 year old Mylie Cyrus in Vanity Fair - > Is a society that tolerates the objectification of children just as guilty as the R. Kelly's that have sex with 14 year olds who conduct themselves like porn stars?
I don't blame R. Kelly and the girl / young lady nearly as much as I blame her parents and our society. We tolerate a mass culture that has reduced children to sex objects. From schools to music videos to clothing merchandisers to television to music our culture engineers hyper-sexed preteens who now screw like rabbits.
We pass out condoms in school and discuss anal sex in class rooms as if it were a right of passage. We celebrate Brittany Spears for her striptease act and make Paris Hilton the national de facto Princess of America after her "Celebrity Sex Tape" is revealed. The underlying message of Radical Secularism is: "Sex is inevitable. Sex makes you happy. Sex is Power. Do it. Oh ... Be Safe."Why are we so tolerant of every abominable, vile, aberrant sexual deviation imaginable between members of the same sex, but suddenly become pious and indignant regarding heterosexual sex between sexually active people of different ages?
Not saying it's "right". Simply pointing out the hypocrisy of asking the government to play sex police in this case, but not in others.
After all, if we are going to lock people up for nastiness, should R. Kelly really be the first?
"child abuse occurred by that sick bastard"
Byrdeye said...
Um, many Britney Spearses today toss their V-cards out by 14, 15, 16 on their own anyways. Because feminism has turned this into a Girls Gone Wild Raunch culture. It's a whole different ballgame now and many 14-yo girls are far from innocent Pollyannas. A lot of these girls rack up a dozen partners and a few abortions or babies by 20.Britney's own 16-yo sister is already pregnant. And unmarried. Whether you like that or not, that's simply the new reality.
So, to apply social standards from 50-years ago to radically-different girls today - is just out-of-touch - whether you agree with it or not.
And I think continually absolving "blame" from girls for this only keeps them doing it more. Because then, what have THEY got to lose? Nothing. But shouldn't feminism be advocating equality here?
If a 14-yo girl willingly breaks the same law - shouldn't she suffer the same punishment as well? I think if that happened, they might stop having sex until they're of age? But as long as they are immune to any reprecussions, why should they?
12 comments:
Ok so I guess you can just send your daughter over to Kells for a sleep over in what 3-4 years from now?
If my daughter is a 14 year old Vanessa Del Rio - would it matter?
Uh, that girl is 14 going on 25...
How come these teen sluts get let completely off the hook and all the blame gets put on the guy? Cuz you can tell this teen gone wild is more porn star than nun. R Kelly didn't "spoil" her...she already did that to herself.
Laws need to catch up the reality out there 2008.
Byrdman the issue has never been who is the cause of her being a "teen slut." What does her being a slut and a glutton for punishment have to do with the fact that child abuse occurred by that sick bastard.
You sound like some lame dude that would say it's cool to rape a female, that's a known slut, ho. Ho's need guidance...u ain't know?
"child abuse occurred by that sick bastard"
Um, many Britney Spearses today toss their V-cards out by 14, 15, 16 on their own anyways. Because feminism has turned this into a Girls Gone Wild Raunch culture. It's a whole different ballgame now and many 14-yo girls are far from innocent Pollyannas. A lot of these girls rack up a dozen partners and a few abortions or babies by 20.
Britney's own 16-yo sister is already pregnant. And unmarried.
Whether you like that or not, that's simply the new reality.
So, to apply social standards from 50-years ago to radically-different girls today - is just out-of-touch - whether you agree with it or not.
And I think continually absolving "blame" from girls for this only keeps them doing it more. Because then, what have THEY got to lose? Nothing. But shouldn't feminism be advocating equality here?
If a 14-yo girl willingly breaks the same law - shouldn't she suffer the same punishment as well?
I think if that happened, they might stop having sex until they're of age?
But as long as they are immune to any reprecussions, why should they?
I mean, just look at those photos.
Does that girl, regardless of age, look like some innocent nun to you?
Same thing happened with Monica Lewinsky. She got portrayed as some virginal victim who got seduced by power.
When reality is, she was prolly a high school BJ queen.
The "young" 20ish hotties I meet today are generally moderate to raunchy. Many love to get crunked and have experimented with drugs. And I don't think I've met a virgin over 20 yet. Or even 18. Most seemed to have lost their V-cards by 16 or 18 (being late).
This antiquated view of chaste young woman just doesn't really jive with the real scene out there today. Remember, this is the same demographic that watch Sex in the City religiously and subscribe to COSMO.
Byrdman...there is a HUGE difference between a 20ish "hottie" WOMAN and a 13 year old GIRL. FYI...DV is playin' you with those photos....that chick is legal.
What do you mean Paul?
Playin' who? How?
What makes that chick in the photo 'legal'?
What's the HUGE difference between a sexually active 20 year old "hottie" and a sexually active 13 year old "hottie" other than 84 months?
If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck.
A rose is a rose ...
The cliches go on.
What makes a child a child is INNOCENCE not age.
We cannot rob children of innocence and expect them to remain children.
We cannot allow them to become something other than children and expect the world to continue to relate to them as children.
The answer is not putting men in prison, but to protect their innocence to begin with.
Don't wait until a girl is doing the butterfly over a dude's Johnson to get all pious.
I don't have the time and energy to prove you wrong DV, but since you asked, she's a dancer who sued bitch ass molester for invasion of privacy. Her tape was included on the bootlegged sex tape which also included the little girl he pissed on (reference.
The difference? Legal vs illegal. Woman vs girl. Ok vs lame.
Ho's need guidance. Even young ones. Just because they like to get abused and treated like sluts doesn't make it right. Wifey might need to keep an eye on you when your son's get that age when they're bringing home one of their tenderonies...ha ha
BTW. What Black man gets their rocks off by pissin' on someone?? Lemonade? That's some nasty white man freaky deaky stuff (no offense to the white dudes reading the blog, but you'll know you'll can be a lil' out there when it comes to fetishes).
What P?
Pissin is too nasty?
That's for white boys?
I thought you liked shit 'nasty'?
I thought sistas needed to step up their 'nasty' game.
Which one is it homey?
Robyn....come on now....pissin' is in an entirely different league....SOME Black women still trippin' on head.
Post a Comment