A Goose Winds Up With Gander Sauce...

[Lord Jim]

Perhaps we shouldn’t update call you Dorthy dour to your love of strawmen

CP, you really need to stop using an online translator to translate your posts into Farsi and then back into English before posting...

[BoSoxGal]

While many of your posts ARE largely incomprehensible due to the lack of care you take in typing them, I had no trouble whatsoever discerning the meaning of many of the posts in this thread about how this young man isn’t a victim, was a willing participant and engaged in a shakedown by coming forward as a victim.

Trying to deflect from those statements now is just gutless.

[datsunaholic]

It's a point of view.

What happened in the 10 years between them acting together and then sleeping together? Did she spend those 10 years "grooming" him for sex, or was it more a case of they ran into each other again 10 years later and she was "oh my, look how you've grown".

The picture makes it look like he was a willing participant. Did he "jump her"? Probably not. Her actions show she knew it was wrong. Lying that it never happened, then deflecting the blame. It was statutory rape.

Even if he was a willing participant, and I think he was, then later changed his mind and decided he didn't like what happened, it was still wrong. But what was the motivation behind taking a payoff? If he was really just trying to show the world that she was a predator just like Weinstein, why take hush money?

[BoSoxGal]

The inability for most of you to comprehend that maybe he DIDN'T actually want it to happen really disturbs me. There is a whole lot of sexism and willful lack of comprehension of sexual abuse dynamics wrapped up in this conversation, it’s a bit mind boggling.

[datsunaholic]

Maybe he didn't. MAYBE.

I think it's more a case of "buyers remorse" but that's my opinion. How many people end up sleeping with someone they later realize was a bad idea? The 20 year age gap here makes it easy to label her as the predator rather than it being a mutual mistake. The fact that it was illegal gives him the legal higher ground - but the fact that he "dealt with it privately" but then decided to go public anyway... that to me looks like he didn't get the money he wanted to stay silent.

That she lied and changed her story tells me that she knew it was wrong but it doesn't prove to me that it wasn't a mutual decision at the time.

If she made his getting a movie role conditional on having sex, then that's another story. That's the huge "open secret" in Hollywood, it's coercion, it's what the slimeball producers do and are being called out on it now.

[Big RR]

OK Datsun, let's say you're right; let's saying he was willing (even eager) participant and that it was a mutual decision; does that make it fine? We do know that kids can get screwed up by this sort of relationship, and I don't think it too much to hold the adult up to a higher degree of scrutiny.

Now in this case I don't know the details of their prior relationship (I imagine they are available), but let's make it easier--let's say she was his mother, or perhaps an aunt who cared for him or a teacher. this abuse of a trust can and does screw some kids up, and when the hormones clear, realizing you slept with a closer relative or caregiver can lead to a variety of consequences. So even though I maintain that he may well have been old enough to make his own decisions and that this should not be illegal, I am not about to say it is OK. If she had this sort of relationship with him, she clearly should have known better, as should any parent, teacher, coach, etc., and she can and should be held liable for the damage she caused. People can make stupid decisions and they have to live with the consequences, and if she were a 40 year old stranger the consent could well be the end of it. But where a couple had some sort of authority/subordinate relationship in the recent past, I think we have to look further to see what happened and not just stop at the consent. Indeed, even if the sex was purely at his unsolicited initiation, I would expect her to say no, just as I would expect ahis mother or a teacher to do the same.

As for why he entered into a financial settlement, many times that is all our system can offer.

[datsunaholic]

I never said it was fine.

My question is, what was he trying to get out of it? He said he chose to deal with it privately, which was where the $380,000 sum was reached. He reportedly wanted 3.5 million.

He said he didn't want to come out publicly about the issue, so what was Ms Argento supposed to do at that point? The deal had been made. He didn't want it public? The money aside, she couldn't well say anything if HE didn't want it made public because then it would be. So again, what should she have done? Aside from not having sex with him in the first place, obviously. But the deed was done. So what, she should have turned herself in the next morning? So why make it public NOW? Who leaked it? I was assuming it was him, but now that i think about it, maybe it wasn't. But SOMEONE set out to discredit Ms Argento. Having actual evidence does make that rather easy.

Another group of people I know (who are far deeper into Hollywood than anyone here) are spinning this as a conspiracy to bring down the #MeToo movement by persons WAY up in the Hollywood hierarchy. WAY up. Persons who have done far, far worse things to children much younger. They're making the news about Argento and others like Corey Feldman rise to the top to direct the heat away from them, discredit the accusers, and keep their own names out of the media. I have a friend who has sent me pages of evidence against a LOT of actors, most of whom have claimed or are rumored to have been molested as children themselves, but have become the same evil in adulthood. As well as evidence against those Hollywood high-ups. All of it I've found internet sources of, but the evidence is not verifiable be someone like me. I can't tell if it's true, fiction, paranoia, or simply revenge. What I can ascertain is there's a lot of fucked up people in Hollywood.

[Gob]

I'd do her.

[Big RR]

So would I gob, and when I was 17 I would have done a knot in a tree.

Datsun--you raise a good point; obviously, she could have avoided all of this by being the adult, but when he offered to remain silent for a payment, I can't blame her for taking that out--especially since there were criminal charges which could be brought against her. But her later behavior, from blaming Bordain to saying it never happened, etc., is something she could/should have refrained from--it just makes her look worse IMHO. Is this something trumped up by the Hollywood establishment? Perhaps, but it certainly appears to have more than a a kernel of truth to it.

As for your point of people molested as children becoming the predators when adults, sadly that does seem to occur, just as violently abused children often do the same to their children, but I don't see that as any excuse for their behavior, nor do I see it as somehow casting significant doubt on any abuse they suffered.

[Burning Petard]

What is the statute of limitations on #me too retribution? Tonite I turned on the car radio to the National NPR station out of Philly and got the first 'break' at the end of the first half hour, on the radio show that has evolved from 'Prairie Home Companion" Once that was the biggest hit in the NPR schedule. Then the star of the show, Garrison Keillor, was ejected into outer darkness for sexual misconduct in the past. He had already retired from the show. But with this new scandal, all connections to Prairie Home Companion had to severed. The name of the program was changed, and the music that had been played at the end of the first half hour (the Powdermilk Biscuit Jingle) has now been replaced by something called 'the Fast Fiddle Tune'.

This morning I heard powerful speeches honoring Senator McCain. There were literary allusions and quotations. His daughter included a quotation from 'The Sun Also Rises' which she said was his favorite book. Is the sexual behavior of Hemingway now to be overlooked? Is the PC requirement that sexual misconduct by today's standards must be strictly punished, no matter when the deed(s) may have occurred, but if the miscreant has escaped by death, then we can ignore it?

snailgate

[RayThom]

For me, two names quickly come to mind. Oscar Wilde was a prolific, gay pedophile, and Paul Gauguin was a syphilitic, hetero pedophile. Both have creative works that are quoted and admired still, and often.

A person's publicly known immorality and/or amorality -- especially those who are among the rich and famous -- obviously come with a time limit. The Hollywood 'elite' were almost always immune until #MeToo and TimesUp. Ultimately, it appears to be the public who decides if and when it's appropriate.

And according to today's NYT, serial masturbator, comedian Louis C.K. is slowing crawling his way out of the dung heap that the #MeToo movement tossed him into. I like Louis C.K.'s comedic stylings, however, if given a chance I'd probably say, "#TooSoon."

[Big RR]

and let's not forget the "King of Pop", Michael Jackson, whose ultimate send off eclipsed the death of Mother Teresa.

[ex-khobar Andy]

I have never heard that Wilde was a serial pedophile. I don't have a biography of him to hand, but his Wikipedia entry mentions only his first homosexual lover who was 17 at the time. That of course in today's understanding may make him technically a pedophile but it appears that the 17 year old did all the running there. Wilde's most famous love was Lord Alfred Douglas who was 22 at the time they met. So I think that describing Wilde as a serial pedophile is at stretch at best. He liked young men, no question. But pedophile?

[Burning Petard]

Pedophile? YES ! I was asking about applying today's standards to past behavior. Snailgate

[BoSoxGal]

Here’s an interesting story:

CRIME Ex-GOP senator who voted for anti-trans ‘bathroom bill’ gets 15 years for child sex trafficking Sky Palma
BySky PalmaPosted on September 17, 2018
COMMENTS

In March of 2017, former Oklahoma state senator Ralph Shortey was arrested and charged with child prostitution after being caught in a hotel room with an underage boy. This Monday, he was sentenced to 15 years in prison on a child sex trafficking charge.

Shortey, who is now 36, faced sentences between 10 years to life. Once he is released from prison, he’ll serve 10 additional years of supervised probation. The judge said that Shortey will also have to pay a fine at a later date that could be up to $250,000.

In November, Shortey pleaded guilty in a deal that allowed prosecutors to drop three child pornography charges against him, a deal he said at the time was in the best interest of him and his family.

According to the Moore Police Department, Shortey was arrested in March of 2017 after police went to “check on a juvenile at the Super 8 Motel” in Moore, Oklahoma. When they found Shortey and the juvenile, who was then 17, there was allegedly a “strong smell of marijuana” and an open box condoms in the juvenile’s bag. Shortey claimed he had simply gone to the hotel to “hang out with a friend.”

Police also said they found sexually explicit exchanges on the teen’s tablet in which Shortey referred to the teen as “baby boy” and offered him cash in exchange for “sexual stuff.”

According to ABC News, Shortey resigned shortly after the arrest and his wife divorced him earlier this year.

In the wake of Shortey’s arrest, LGBT advocacy groups pointed out his support for anti-transgender legislation such as a proposed “bathroom bill” from 2016.

From The Norman Transcript:

These stigmatizing bills create fear, bias, and discrimination against the LGBTQ community even when they fail. We find it highly ironic that Senator Shortey voted to advance this legislation out of committee, and less than a year later, he was caught in what appears to be actual predatory behavior toward a vulnerable youth. …

There has never been a legitimate recorded incident in Oklahoma of a transgender person harming anyone in a restroom, yet there are numerous accounts of predatory behavior by anti-LGBTQ legislators who have taken bigoted votes akin to the vote Senator Shortey cast last year.
Shortey had also previously used fake names to acquire child pornography and to seek out minors on the internet.

He’s 35, his ‘victim’ 17; surely this was a miscarriage of justice, then?

[Big RR]

Or is this a predictable overreaction because homosexuality was involved? In Oklahoma, I'd bet the latter.

[datsunaholic]

Oddly the age of consent in Oklahoma IS 17. Something doesn't add up. The CP charges were dropped, and those seemed to be the only thing that had legal teeth. Maybe the whole paying for sex part, but again... 17. So sex was legal, just not pictures. Pictures, illegal. That's 18, nationwide.

I'll agree the guy is a predator, and a hypocrite, but the issue is with the CP. Which were dropped... nonsensically. Since there seemed to be evidence this wasn't an isolated incident.

[BoSoxGal]

What the Laws Spell Out: A Web of Requirements

The basic law is that even though 16- and 17-year-olds are considered children (under 18), at 16 years old an Arkansas teen can consent to have sex. A 15-year-old can also consent to have sex with someone who is no more than 3 years older or younger than him or her. The same goes for younger teens, though with more variations. Easy enough right?

But then the law varies even more when you start dealing with younger adolescents, adults in authority, caregivers, sexting or soliciting sex, sending graphic images, and indecent exposure. Once you start adding in the variations, the law can become a web of what is or isn't allowed -- and that isn't always clear.

"It definitely creates confusion, the real problem I'm trying to address is that it creates a hole in the law," said State Representative Clarke Tucker, in regard to variations and gaps in the law.

Tucker has filed a bill to close one loophole in the sexual crime and age laws that have created problems for prosecutors. Those laws made it illegal for, say, a 19-year-old to solicit a teen for sex, while making it legal for them to actually have sex, given a certain age span.

"[Prosecutors] have had to tell parents of a young lady that if only the guy who she had a sexual relationship with had solicited the relationship -- we would be able to prosecute," Tucker said. "It created a hole in the law that likely wasn't intended, because these laws were passed at different times."

Prosecutors are apparently not the only ones who deal with the struggle of determining what the law allows, especially when you review the Suskie investigation file, which required law enforcement, principals and mental health providers to try and determine if the relationship was actually illegal. Ultimately, because of her position as a substitute, she was charged with sexual assault.

We know of numerous cases where adults are charged with sexually assaulting teens, even 16- and 17-year-olds, but it's only reportable when they reach that age if the alleged offender is a caregiver (under the Child Maltreatment protocol), in a position of trust or authority (the Criminal Statutes), or uses force or coercion (which is always against the law, regardless of age range of the victim).

Source: https://www.fox16.com/news/local-news/f ... /650460068

Apparently, soliciting a teen under 18 for sex is illegal.

Obviously you guys don't have a problem with this 'romance', either.

[Big RR]

Well, it does appear to be solicitation of sex for money, which is quite different from a "romance", so I'm not sure I understand your point.

[ex-khobar Andy]

Apparently, soliciting a teen under 18 for sex is illegal.

Obviously you guys don't have a problem with this 'romance', either.

Who are 'you guys' and what makes you conclude that they (or we - not sure) are OK with this behavior?