Misc. Ramblings 2012
Since the original Misc. Ramblings was getting so long I decided to give it a chapter break.
Update 1/10/12
Talk about over the top. An English seven-year-old girl who got a 6000 pound gift certificate for a breast enlargement on her birthday last year got a 7000 pound gift certificate in her Christmas stocking for liposuction. The fifty-one year-old mother has spent 500,000 pounds on her own body over the years. She spent another 6,000 pounds on the girls birthday party which included manicures, pedicures and make-overs for her daughter and seven of her daughter's friends. FYI - a British pound is roughly equal to $1.55 U.S.
This is rich. The Greek government explanded their list of the disabled to include pedophiles, exhibitionists, and kleptomaniacs, and pay them a disability allowance. Some Greeks have a problem with that. I wonder, do they get special parking slots too?
*****
Update 1/17/12
Slut shaming, I never heard the expression until I saw the video on You Tube. The practice has been around for a long time, it just never had a name. It was wrong when I was young and it is wrong today. We still live in the dark ages when it come to being labeled by our actions. A guy that has multiple sex partners is a stud while a girl who has multiple partners is a slut. We all know guys seduce while girls "put out." Someday equality may come, but don't hold your breath. This is a must see video made by a thirteen-year-old, braces and all. She speaks the truth, see for yourself. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXH2K7OC37s
*****
Update 2/07/12
A six-year-old boy was charged with sexual assault by the school principal when the boy accidentally brushed up against the groin of another boy in a game of tag. The boy was suspended from school and the sexual battery charge entered on his permanent school record. The parents had to hire a lawyer who pointed out there is no such law against a six-year-old in California. The sex charge was purged from his school record and he was reinstated at another school. Isn't it sad that people this dumb are put in charge of our youth?
Off topic. A fifteen-year-old autistic boy was shot to death by police in Chicago, Il after he threatened them with a butter knife. After an internal investigation by the police the shooting was ruled justified. Fifteen? Autistic? Butter knife? Justified? Aww, come-on now. Somewhat the same thing happened in my town when a man threatened the police with a knife and was shot to death. That verdict was even more laughable, it was ruled "suicide-by-cop." How's that for a made up justification?
The super bowl was this past weekend which brings to mind: Prime time TV. Serial killings, murder, mayhem, slaughter, buckets of blood, gore, evisceration, disembowel, decapitation, disfigurement, skinning alive and dead, all good clean American fun. And people wonder why our culture is so violent prone. Show one nipple and that's a fining offense by the U.S. Government. I guess they are afraid if thirteen year old boys see that they will immediately pull out their willie and pound the pud right in front of their parents and the local vicar, or perhaps run out and rape the first girl they see. One can only wonder how many children who saw Ms. Jackson's nipple will require psychiatric treatment when they are adults. There is a very good article explaining why we are where we are with the exposure of the breast in public at:
http://sexhysteria.wordpress.com/2011/09/01/breast-shame-tradition-deception-and-the-money-trail/For those of you who want a representation of naked youth without the hassle of Homeland Security kicking down your door I suggest you look into Llardo's fantasy series of fairy figurines. The model they used had to be twelve with the prettiest budding breasts you ever seen. I was pleasantly surprised to see them at Macy's.
*****
Update 3/06/12
Here is another site that caved into outside pressure concerning content of minors in possibly suggestive situations. I worry that some day ASSTR will also ban stories concerning minors in sexual situations.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.reddit.com/r/blog/comments/pmj7f/a_necessary_change_in_policy/
At reddit we care deeply about not imposing ours or anyone elses' opinions on how people use the reddit platform. We are adamant about not limiting the ability to use the reddit platform even when we do not ourselves agree with or condone a specific use. We have very few rules here on reddit; no spamming, no cheating, no personal info, nothing illegal, and no interfering the site's functions. Today we are adding another rule: No suggestive or sexual content featuring minors.
In the past, we have always dealt with content that might be child pornography along strict legal lines. We follow legal guidelines and reporting procedures outlined by NCMEC. We have taken all reports of illegal content seriously, and when warranted we made reports directly to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, who works directly with the FBI. When a situation is reported to us where a child might be abused or in danger, we make that report. Beyond these clear cut cases, there is a huge area of legally grey content, and our previous policy to deal with it on a case by case basis has become unsustainable. We have changed our policy because interpreting the vague and debated legal guidelines on a case by case basis has become a massive distraction and risks reddit being pulled in to legal quagmire.
As of today, we have banned all subreddits that focus on sexualization of children. Our goal is to be fair and consistent, so if you find a subreddit we may have missed, please message the admins. If you find specific content that meets this definition please message the moderators ofthe subreddit, and the admins.
We understand that this might make some of you worried about the slippery slope from banning one specific type of content to banning other types of content. We're concerned about that too, and do not make this policy change lightly or without careful deliberation. We will tirelessly defend the right to freely share information on reddit in any way we can, even if it is offensive or discusses something that may be illegal. However, child pornography is a toxic and unique case for Internet communities, and we're protecting reddit's ability to operate by removing this threat. We remain committed to protecting reddit as an open platform.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The referenced article is absolutely scary. The FBI has arrested a man for possession of child pornography without any photos of naked or sexually explicit children. His offence was posting suggestive comments on Facebook. It reminds me of the quote by Martin Neimoller, "First they came for the...." First it was photos of children with emphasis on their genitals or sexually explicit poses. Then it was any photo of a naked child. Then it could be taking pictures of children at a playground. Now you don't even need a photo. Tis a slippery slope we are sliding down. When will "Lolita" by Nabokov be banned for being too suggestive?
http://www.freep.com/article/20120229/NEWS03/120229035/southfield-child-pornography-FBI-FacebookThere has been a lot of talk about birth control in the news lately. There are some who believe any birth control is against gods will and are doing everything in their power to make it difficult to get. First, from what I have read, the U.S. birth control mainly uses The Pill. Why? I don't know, probably because there is a lot of money to be made. It is not the most effective method on the market. The best is the latest IUD prescribed extensively in Europe. Here is a chilling statistic. Teen pregnancy (Children 15 to 19 y.o.) for the U.S. is over 50 per thousand. For children in Italy, that mecca of Catholicism the rate is 5 per thousand. Either those kids sure know how to say no or they use birth control even if it is against their religion. I wonder which is correct.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1079321*****
Update 4/10/2012
This article has haunted me since I read it. A sixteen-year-old Moroccan girl committed suicide rather then continue being married to the man that raped her when she was fifteen. How, in heavens, could a court condemn the teenage victim to live life with the man that raped her? What kind of screwed up law is that? Here is their reasoning, according to their thinking a woman who loses her virginity before marriage brings dishonor to her family. The answer is... make the girl marry the man that took her virginity...in this case the rapist. I guess there was no law against rape if he marries the woman because the man got off scot-free. And what kind of family would go along with that? I would be inclined to cut the man's genitals off and make him eat it. The article gets me so upset that it is impossible for me to give you the whole sordid details.
Read it all at: http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2012/03/15/amina-filalis-choice-stay-silent-or-marry-your-rapist/
******
I appreciate all comments about this site or its stories. Plaese take a minute to tell me what you think.
You can use the ASSTR email system by clicking here:
Or:
Send me email directly at:
If you email me direct and do not want me to reply please add "Do Not Reply" to your email