Don’t think bigotry exists in America? Well, actually bigotry against boys is literally endemic to our entire society, not only universally in “revered” institutions like our public schools, but also in sports programs, the YMCA, the Boy Scouts, our churches, and in almost all other entities dealing with boys, including those policing agencies charged with protecting them. In America you can do anything you want to boys, and no one will ever say anything. It’s far more important to protect everyone else – including schools, women, girls, coaches, prosecutors, counselors, journalists, police, clergy, bureaucrats, community leaders, judges, welfare organizations, women social scientists, activity groups, even mothers – while our voiceless boys are simply expendable road kill.
Just read the following AP story, and note that the one factor that never comes up for consideration – for a half century – is the welfare of the boy victims of all this perverted conspiracy. (One of the things that I’ve never been able to figure out is why predators who prey sexually on boys are always “abusers”, very rarely “rapists” and certainly never “homosexuals”.) Also note how the “respected establishment” conspires first and foremost to protect itself, damned the boys involved – until one Portland male attorney with enough spine finally stood up.
All this bigotry is now routine in America despite federal child civil rights and protection laws passed as their final acts by the Greatest Generation in the early 1970s – which other groups and their many powerful lobbies immediately commandeered solely for “me”. This, too, is another legacy of the self-involved baby Boomer generation and their children.
Never trust anyone speaking or writing only in terms of “kids”, “children”, “students”, etc.. Because interest groups never pass up an opportunity to promote themselves, such terms just hide their bigotry behind gender-neutral terms that give the false impression that boys and girls are treated equally in America. Women’s groups and the super-majority women’s voting bloc, especially, suck the life out of literally every other social ill in our society, to the great detriment of the other half while they are still children. Assisting that despicable process are our legions of really stupid and cowardly “men”. It’s a lot easier blaming the products of your bigotry than it is seeing responsibility in the mirror.
Boys are America’s Last Minority.
“Perversion files” show locals helped cover up
Associated Press, Thursday, October 18, 2012, By NIGEL DUARA
PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — Again and again, decade after decade, an array of authorities — police chiefs, prosecutors, pastors and local Boy Scout leaders among them — quietly shielded scoutmasters and others accused of molesting children, a newly opened trove of confidential papers shows. At the time, those authorities justified their actions as necessary to protect the good name and good works of Scouting, a pillar of 20th century America. But as detailed in 14,500 pages of secret “perversion files” released Thursday by order of the Oregon Supreme Court, their maneuvers allowed sexual predators to go free while victims suffered in silence.
The files are a window on a much larger collection of documents the Boy Scouts of America began collecting soon after their founding in 1910. The files, kept at Boy Scout headquarters in Texas, consist of memos from local and national Scout executives, handwritten letters from victims and their parents and newspaper clippings about legal cases. The files contain details about proven molesters, but also unsubstantiated allegations. The allegations stretch across the country and to military bases overseas, from a small town in the Adirondacks to downtown Los Angeles.
At the news conference Thursday, Portland attorney Kelly Clark blasted the Boy Scouts for their continuing legal battles to try to keep the full trove of files secret. “You do not keep secrets hidden about dangers to children,” said Clark, who in 2010 won a landmark lawsuit against the Boy Scouts on behalf of a plaintiff who was molested by an assistant scoutmaster in the 1980s.
Clark’s colleague, attorney Paul Mones, said the files “show how pedophiles operate, how child molesters infiltrate youth organizations.” “These guys (abusers) basically were in a candy store, the way they thought about it,” Mones said.
The Associated Press obtained copies of the files weeks in advance of Thursday’s release and conducted an extensive review of them. (Clark also was releasing the documents on his website: kellyclarkattorney.com .) The files were shown to a jury in the 2010 Oregon civil suit, and the Oregon Supreme Court ruled the files should be made public. After months of objections and redactions, the Scouts and Clark released them.
In many instances — more than a third, according to the Scouts’ own count — police weren’t told about the reports of abuse. And even when they were, sometimes local law enforcement still did nothing, seeking to protect the name of Scouting over their victims.
Victims like three brothers, growing up in northeast Louisiana. On the afternoon of Aug. 10, 1965, their distraught mother walked into the third floor of the Ouachita Parish Sheriff’s Office. A 31-year-old scoutmaster, she told the chief criminal deputy, had raped one of her sons and molested two others.
Six days later, the scoutmaster, an unemployed airplane mechanic, sat down in front of a microphone in the same station, said he understood his rights and confessed: He had sexually abused the woman’s sons more than once. “I don’t know how to tell it,” the man told a sheriff’s deputy. “They just occurred — I don’t know an explanation, why we done it or I done it or wanted to do it or anything else it just — an impulse I guess or something. As far as an explanation I just couldn’t dig one up.”
He wouldn’t have to. Seven days later, the decision was made not to pursue charges against the scoutmaster. The last sliver of hope for justice for the abuse of two teenagers and an 11-year-old boy slipped away in a confidential letter from a Louisiana Scouts executive to the organization’s national personnel division in New Jersey. “This subject and Scouts were not prosecuted,” the executive wrote, “to save the name of Scouting.”
An Associated Press review of the files found that the story of these brothers and their scoutmaster, however horrendous, was not unique.
The files released Thursday were collected between 1959 and 1985, with a handful of others from later years. Some have been released previously, but others — those from prior to 1971, including the story of the three scouts in Ouachita Parish — have been made public for the first time.
The documents reveal that on many occasions the files succeeded in keeping pedophiles out of Scouting leadership positions — the reason why they were collected in the first place. But the files are also littered with horrific accounts of alleged pedophiles who were able to continue in Scouting because of pressure from community leaders and local Scouts officials.
The files also document other troubling patterns. There is little mention in the files of concern for the welfare of Scouts who were abused by their leaders, or what was done for the victims. But there are numerous documents showing compassion for alleged abusers, who were often times sent to psychiatrists or pastors to get help. In 1972, a local Scouting executive beseeched national headquarters to drop the case against a suspected abuser because he was undergoing professional treatment and was personally taking steps to solve his problem. “If it don’t stink, don’t stir it,” the local executive wrote.
Scouting’s efforts to keep abusers out were often disorganized. There’s at least one memo from a local Scouting executive pleading for better guidance on how to handle abuse allegations. Sometimes the pleading went the other way, with national headquarters begging local leaders for information on suspected abusers, and the locals dragging their feet.
In numerous instances, alleged abusers are kicked out of Scouting but show up in jobs where they are once again in authority positions dealing with youths.
The files also show Scouting volunteers serving in the military overseas, molesting American children living abroad and sometimes continuing to molest after returning to the states.
But one of the most startling revelations to come from the files is the frequency with which attempts to protect Scouts from molesters collapsed at the local level, at times in collusion with community leaders. It happened when a local district attorney declined to prosecute two confessed offenders; when a three-judge panel included two men on the local Scouting executive board; when law enforcement sought to protect the name of Scouting and let an admitted child molester go free.
Their actions represent a stark betrayal, says Clark, who won the case that opened the files to public view. “It’s kind of a deal. The deal is, our society will give you incredible status and respect, Norman Rockwell will paint pictures of you, and in exchange for that, you take care of our kids,” Clark said. “That’s the deal, incredible respect and privilege. But there was a worm in the apple.”
The Louisiana case certainly contained all the essentials for a police investigation and, perhaps, a conviction: The scoutmaster admitted to raping a 17-year-old boy on a camping trip and otherwise sexually molesting two other boys; the victims corroborated his confession. But evidently, no charges were ever filed. The man was let off with a warning that should he be found with young men in the future, he was subject to immediate incarceration at the state prison. The man “was asked to leave the parish, and if he was caught around or near any boy or youth organization, he would be sent to state prison immediately,” a Scouting executive wrote to national headquarters. “We are indeed sorry that Scouting was involved.”
With the deadline to disclose the files looming, the Scouts in late September made public an internal review of the files and said they would look into past cases to see whether there were times when men they suspected of sex abuse should have been reported to police.
The files showed a “very low” incidence of abuse among Scout leaders, said psychiatrist Dr. Jennifer Warren, who conducted the review with a team of graduate students and served as an expert witness for the Scouts in the 2010 case that made the files public. Her review of the files didn’t take into account the number of files destroyed on abusers who turned 75 years old or died, something she said would not have significantly affected the rate of abuse or her conclusions. ((And, after all, the victims were “just boys”?))
The rate of abuse among Scouts is the not the focus of their critics — it is, rather, their response to allegations of abuse. In the case of the files released in Portland, most salient is the complicity of local officials in concealing the abuse by Scouts leaders. Warren told the AP such complicity “was simply quite a natural desire to want to be somewhat protective over (the BSA).”
Certain cases, well-detailed by the Scouts, illustrate how it happened.
In Newton, Kan., in 1961, the county attorney had what he needed for a prosecution: Two men were arrested and admitted that they had molested Scouts in their care. One of the men said he held an all-night party at his house, during which he brought 10 boys, one by one, into a room where he committed, in his words, “immoral acts.” The same man said he had molested Scouts on an outing two weeks prior to the interrogation. But neither man was prosecuted. Once again, a powerful local official sought to preserve the name of Scouting.
The entire investigation, the county attorney wrote, was brought about with the cooperation of a local district Scouts executive, who was kept apprised of the investigation’s progress into the men, who had affiliations with both the Scouts and the local YMCA. “I came to the decision that to openly prosecute would cause great harm to the reputations of two organizations which we have involved here — the Boy Scouts of America and the local YMCA,” he wrote in a letter to a Kansas Scouting executive. He went on to say that the community would have to pay too great a price for the punishment of the two men. “The damage thusly done to these organizations would be serious and lasting,” he wrote.
When cases against Scouts volunteers or executives went forward, locals often tried and sometimes managed to keep the organization’s name out of court documents and the media, protecting a valuable brand.
In Johnstown, Pa., in August 1962, a married 25-year-old steel mill worker with a high school education pleaded guilty to “serious morals” violations involving Scouts. The Scouting executive who served as both mayor and police chief made sure of one thing: The Scouting name was never brought up. It went beyond the mayor to the members of a three-judge panel, who also deemed it important to keep the Scouts’ names out of the press. “No mention of Scouting was involved in the case in as much as two of the three judges who pronounced sentence are members of our Executive Board,” the Scouts executive wrote to the national personnel division.
In Rutland, Vt., in 1964, William J. Moreau pleaded guilty to “having lewd relations” with an 11-year-old Scout, according to a contemporary newspaper account. According to the files, the 11-year-old was one of a dozen Scouts who stayed overnight at Vermont’s Camp Sunrise. The Scouts, as is demonstrated repeatedly in the files, talked to the parents about their concern for “the name of the Scouting movement” if charges were brought, but were rebuffed — the parents were insistent on filing charges.
Moreau, a 27-year-old insurance adjuster and assistant Scoutmaster, resigned his position, but a local prosecutor and the police department made sure the Scouting name was never publicly associated with the crime, despite the fact that the abuse was conducted by a Scoutmaster on Scouts at a Scout camp. “The States Attorney with whom I talked late last night and the local police assure me they will do everything in their power to keep Scouting’s name and Camp Sunrise out of this,” a local Scouts executive wrote in a letter to the national council headquarters. In newspaper clippings attached to the files detailing Moreau’s charges and his plea, no mention of the Scouts is ever made.
Over the years, the mandatory reporting of suspicions of child abuse by certain professionals would take hold nationally. Each state had its own law, and the federal Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act passed in 1974. ((See Footnote #1.)) The Scouts, however, wouldn’t institute mandatory reporting for suspected child abuse until 2010. They did incorporate other measures, such as a “two-deep” requirement that children be accompanied by at least two adults at all times, and made strides in their efforts to combat pedophilia within their ranks.
According to an analysis of the Scouts’ confidential files by Patrick Boyle, a journalist who was the first to expose about efforts by the BSA to hide the extent of sex abuse among Boy Scout leaders, the Scouts documented internally less than 50 cases per year of Scout abuse by adults until 1983, when the reports began to climb, peaking at nearly 200 in 1989.
Attitudes on child sex abuse began to change after the 1974 law, said University of Houston professor Monit Cheung, a former social worker who has authored a book on child sex abuse. “Before 1974, you could talk to a social worker who could (then) talk to a molester and that could maybe stop abuse,” Cheung said, noting that most abuse happens within families. But mandatory reporting made the failure to report suspected abuse a crime. “That’s the change, that you’re no longer hiding the facts of abuse,” Cheung said. ((1974 was 38 years ago.))
The case of Timothy Bagshaw in State College, Pa., is illustrative of the changing national attitude to mandatory reporting. Bagshaw, a Scouts leader, was convicted of two counts of corruption of minors in 1985. ((See Footnotes #2 and #3.)) But he wasn’t the only one to face charges. The Scouts learned of the abuse months before it was reported, and forced Bagshaw to resign at a meeting, but he wasn’t reported to police. That failure was costly for Juanita Valley Council director Roger W. Rauch, who was charged with failure to notify authorities of suspected child abuse.
“I didn’t know I was supposed to contact anyone. I felt it was the parents’ responsibility,” Rauch told the Centre Daily Times in 1984. “We acted very responsibly. I’m concerned that this not get blown out of proportion.” ((It’s all about “me”; damned the boys.))
Associated Press writers Matt Sedensky in West Palm Beach, Fla.; Rebecca Boone in Boise, Idaho; and Shannon Dininny in Yakima, Wash., contributed to this report.
Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
(End AP article.)
Kelly Clark, Portland, Oregon USA web site: http://www.kellyclarkattorney.com/
Note that the files which the court forced the Boy Scouts to release are those still existing from a 26 year period between 1959 and 1985, and that many of them involve well respected members of the community, often with connections to police, court and school officials. Only a very tiny fraction involve cases over the past 27 years – which, as isolated press reports have indicated, have seen a virtual explosion of such twisted behavior.
This whole sick tragedy involves just one area in which we exercise our bigotry against boys. As some of the other articles posted here demonstrate, there are many other ways, including even through our public schools. Obviously everyone knows full well that boys constitute the one minority group in America with no special interest lobby to champion its best interests. In America you can do anything you want to boys, and no one will ever say anything. And then later everyone can smugly vilify the adult creeps they become and with whom we fill our prisons, an incarcerated percentage of our population far greater than in any other society in history, while never once granting our own complicity in creating all those creeps, jerks and losers, and, of course, the mentally disturbed, identity conflicted, socially dysfunctional, perverts and, yes, suicides, too. It’s far better for our sense of self-satisfaction to imagine that all those deformed men simply “created themselves”, that a whole host of grossly irresponsible adults, both directly and indirectly, did not go into making what they became, or didn’t become – while they were still children. And, since they “create themselves”, they also assume full responsibility for whatever the create. Over the past half century there has been such overwhelming emphasis on the female half of our society’s population that we have arrived at the point of mindlessly destroying huge portions of the other half, which, of course, will only make the future for the female side an endless hell.
Note that the AP story above is based on records of one organization for a period that ended in 1985. Aside from this one case, it is extremely difficult to find accurate statistics anywhere in the US on sexual offenses, including rape, committed against boys. For a variety of pathetic reasons, including willfully blind or stupid “men” and bigoted women,
such crimes are deliberately suppressed by adults – from parents to schools to law enforcement and justice officials – responsible for the equitable application of the law to all citizens. But anecdotal evidence clearly indicates that over the most recent quarter of a century their numbers have steadily risen and now rival the numbers of such offenses committed against girls. Right along with the increase in rapes of boys has gone the rise of “non-traditional” families. Today half the children born in the United States are born to single women, and half the remaining children are being raised by divorced women – all exercising their rights of choice. Only one in four American boys can count on a father through age eighteen. It’s obvious that women fall short in their responsibility for raising boys, but it’s also obvious that the number of American men who are qualified for that same responsibility has also steadily declined as a result of the choices women make.
The number of under-age American boys who run afoul of the law, and thus “earn” a life-crippling police record before they even get started, continues to climb through the roof. A really huge majority of those boys are the off-spring of “single mothers” exercising their rights. Our society actually PAYS such women to have and “raise” such boys – no strings attached. Those boys enter a world of women social workers and women judges. Both the police and the press, with the brains of gnats, delight in releasing and publishing the names and identities of those boys – as if they simply created themselves right there on the street corner in all their grotesque splendor. Just when do we start hauling their mothers into court with them? When do we start releasing and publishing their names and identities right beside those of the boys’? When do those sexist women social workers and judges start holding other women accountable for the consequences of their endless rights? When it comes to boys and the “justice system” in America, with all its double standards, it’s worse than anything that ever existed under Charles Dickens’ Victorian England.
“There can be no keener revelation of a society’s soul than the way in which it treats its children.” – Nelson Mandela
In December 2012 a woman judge in Riverside, California, heard and decided a case, without a jury, involving a 10-year old boy who had shot his white-supremacist father to death. The Prosecutor, speaking for the state on behalf of the dead man, argued that the boy had carried out the killing in a cold and premeditated manner. The Defense, speaking for the boy charged, argued that the boy should not be held accountable for his actions because a lifetime of abuse and his father’s neo-Nazi activities had conditioned him to violence. The judge determined that the 10-year old boy had understood what he was doing was wrong and “chose his own way and made his own rules” and therefore will be sentenced to prison at least until he is 23. (After which his “future” will be limitless?) I’d bet a bundle this same woman judge, hearing a case of an adult woman husband-killer, would have no problem at all accepting her claim of “domestic abuse”. It’s impossible to imagine in our society the same outcome had the only difference been the gender of the child.
If a 10-year old boy had understood what he was doing was wrong and “chose his own way and made his own rules,” then how is it possible to prosecute “child predators”, or any male having sex with a “minor under age 18”, guilty for rape solely on the basis of the victim’s age being “prima face evidence” of not being able to consent to the act? In other words, it is not possible to hold a minor culpable in an act involving someone who is not a minor in one instance, but it is possible in another instance. Why is it not possible for a male “child predator” to claim that the minor victim “chose his own way and made his own rules” and thus was a full and willing participant in what transpired? If this woman judge’s twisted “reasoning” is correct, then creeps like Sandusky at Penn State DO have a “defense” that all those boys willingly participated in his perverse acts, and he is therefore innocent. The same could be said of all the creeps associated with the Boy Scouts in the above article. It is reasonable to ask if this woman judge would have applied the same reasoning to a minor girl having sexual relations with a non-minor male who is then charged with rape – and tarred forever as a “sexual offender”. Just how far would the “she chose her own way and made her own rules” argument go in this case? Adult women routinely claim successfully a wide range of rationales to excuse their killing of “abusers”. Then, of course, logic is no longer necessary in a society based on emotional mush, according to self-serving “me”. This bigoted woman judge would never accept that stupid “rationale” even if the defendant was a drunk “adult” women twelve years older in college.
It’s bad enough when this sexist crap permeates our whole society, but when it starts to infect our judicial system, too, you know our nation is in Big Trouble. For American women, even those in our judicial system, self-serving emotion easily trumps logic and equity. In short, boys “create themselves”, including teaching themselves all their own rules; adults, especially women, “play no role” in that creation. So boys are thus solely responsible for themselves. (Unless there’s Big Bucks to be extorted for adults somewhere in the mix, of course.) But girls need a “vast village” tiled, of course, in their favor from birth onward.
Of course, it’s an entirely different story when a boy manages to overcome all that bigoted crap and somehow succeed at something worthwhile. THEN every women who ever got near that kid will come out of the woodwork to claim credit. “Credit for success is mine; blame for failure is for “someone else”.” Got it. (Note that half the children born in America are born to single women exercising their rights of choice, and over half of the remaining children are “raised” by women exercising their rights in divorce. This means that only one in four American boys can count on their own father through age 18; the other 75% are solely the products of women busily shaping children in their own image. American women have rights; they do NOT have responsibilities. They are dedicated to marrying Big Daddy Government; boys, and the crippled “men” they become, are just road kill along the road to whatever women want, for “very special me”.)
This sort of twisted self-serving double-standard “reasoning” occurs every day in an America that only theoretically holds everyone “equal under the law” despite a Constitution that mandates exactly that. Why would any man accept “justice” from a woman judge who decides on one set of law for “me” and another set of law for “anyone else”? It’s not difficult to determine how such twisted “thinking” ever gained a foothold in this country. It’s taught by self-involved women with a million rights and no responsibilities – from mothers to teachers to “journalists” to “academics” – all solely to serve “me” and “my” group, on the basis of emotion, with zero logic (and a whole lot of really dumb men then parroting the nonsense). It’s very easy to engage in such bigotry when boys are the only minority group in American society who are not championed by an interest group lobby ever ready to jump up and scream at any perceived slight to members of their group. It’s just another case of arrogant and very powerful bullies piling on the weak, to serve themselves. And isn’t it nifty when you can so easily absolve yourself of responsibility, of accountability? For American women, it’s ALL about “me”.
In this country the only reason why people like Sandusky, priests, coaches, scout leaders, etc. (all of whom, of course, also “created themselves”), are ever publicly “outed” for preying on boys and then prosecuted in court is that someone saw a way to extort huge amounts of money from them or from their employers, for themselves. The boys are just everyone’s road kill.
It all makes me ashamed of the society I’ve been defending for my entire adult life.
(See also “Why Are American Men So Dumb?, and “A Society With Only One Gender“, posted separately.)
Footnote #1. The federal Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (1974 Public Law 93-247) provides federal funding to States and their mostly women bureaucrats in support of prevention, assessment, investigation, prosecution, and treatment activities and also provides grants to public agencies and nonprofit organizations for demonstration programs and projects. Additionally, CAPTA identifies the Federal role in supporting research, evaluation, technical assistance, and data collection activities; establishes the Office on Child Abuse and Neglect; and mandates the National Clearinghouse on Child Abuse and Neglect Information. CAPTA also sets forth a minimum definition of child abuse and neglect. This Act was amended several times and was most recently amended and reauthorized on 25 June 2003 by the “Keeping Children and Families Safe Act” of 2003 (P.L. 108-36). (We now have to insert that term “families” in there to address our tens of millions of single mother “families” under these ridiculously absurd emotional law titles; by broadening the scope of the law, you inevitably water it down, so that those originally intended to be protected aren’t. It’s mainly used now to extract child support and alimony from fathers while providing very secure employment and benefits to many thousands of bureaucrats, mostly women. The last victims you will ever see considered are those boys neglected by mothers who place their trophy infants on comfortable shelves until they can be diagnosed with social autism or similar “learning disabilities”.)
Footnote #2. “Corruption of minors” is itself one of those purposefully nebulous terms designed to hide the truth; it could refer to anything from giving a boy a glass of beer to repeatedly raping him. The very last consideration is the boy victim. The charge is almost never used with girl victims.
This sick misandry is even more prevalent today than ever. Recently (2012) the brainless police in Kalispell, Montana, released the mug shot of a twelve-year-old boy to the media for publication, and the ever stupid media obediently published it for the whole world to see, even on the internet, along with the boy’s complete identification. (The story was bought to my attention by a friend who spotted it – in Finland.) In short, both the police and the media conducted a public lynching of a 12-year old boy without even a trial, and no one else was held culpable for the boy’s actions. “He chose his own way and made his own rules.” Yep, he just “created himself”, right there on the street corner, like magic. What kind of adult morons make up this self-serving utter nonsense?
How far would those morons get trying to apply that stupid rationale to girls?
It’s another part of the wide-spread practice in America of crippling boys before they even get a shot at life. The boy’s crime? He had somehow managed to escape from the town’s new “high security” juvenile detention facility. He was quickly picked up at his home – where he lived with his grandmother and older brother, who are well known for running a gang of thieves. The location of his parents? Unknown. I couldn’t help wondering where the mug shots were of his mother, his father and his grandmother – the adults responsible for this boy’s upbringing. But then those adults might be able to object and bring suit against both the police and the media; best to stick it to the defenseless boy, for “creating himself”. Like a chapter straight out of “Oliver Twist” – 175 years ago – this boy’s “proud” community tarred him for life, at age twelve, and gave the far more culpable adults in his life a complete pass. Aren’t “we” just “the greatest”?
If a 12-year old boy can be held unilaterally accountable for his actions, why cannot a 12-year old girl be held unilaterally accountable for her actions? Has anyone ever seen the public mug shot of a 12-year old girl victim of an adult’s sexual transgressions? Adults who fail to be responsible parents should be equally accountable for the actions of the children they teach. We certainly have no problem doing so with the owners of vicious dogs. But today most parents are single women, and most teachers and journalists, too, are women. Our courts, especially those dealing with children, like our child welfare agencies, our entire “child development” industry, are also overwhelmingly dominated by women. And they all see the world as something to be perverted solely to suit “me” and “my” group.
The most fundamental principle of American law is “all men equal under the law“; once you start playing around with that principle, for example, to designate “special” people or circumstances, you are firmly on the road to legalizing anything, including bigotry, slavery, even murder. You are also in violation of the United States Constitution. There is no “special” in equal.
The recently revised US Penal Code, Sec. 22.011.(a) creates a carefully delineated felony offence of sexual assault. This federal law views the offense from the point of view of the perpetrator’s intent – who can then be legally charged with a specifically defined illegal act. It states that an adult person commits such an offense if the person intentionally or knowingly: (A) causes the penetration of the anus or sexual organ of another person by any means, without that person’s consent; (B) causes the penetration of the mouth of another person by the sexual organ of the actor, without that person’s consent; or (C) causes the sexual organ of another person, without that person’s consent, to contact or penetrate the mouth, anus, or sexual organ of another person, including the actor. (Sexual assault of children under the age of 18 is presumed by any such action, consent irrelevant.)
One thing the new federal statute above does is finally make it possible to charge women with sexual assault (C), and especially against boys.
Note, however, how much this very clear definition differs from the popularly held view of “sexual assault” – which can run the gamut from rape to accidently touching an arm. Remember this the next time you see a survey showing the number of women who say they have been the victim of “sexual assault”. If you used the above legal definition, that number would be reduced by over 90%; American women will use any excuse possible to wallow in their eternal victimhood.
However, the above legal definition is not the case with many state and municipal statutes. For example, a male police officer was recently arrested in Missoula, Montana, for pretending to be a young woman on line in order to meet with a male child – with whom he then engaged in a sexual relationship for over a year. Under federal law the police officer had committed felony sexual assault, but he was instead charged only with “having an inappropriate relationship with a minor” – specifically of official misconduct and attempted unlawful transactions with children – all misdemeanors. In June 2013 he was given a six-month suspended sentence and instructed to stay away from children. If the victim had been female, it’s impossible to imagine that he would not have been charged with rape, due in no small part to the “abuse of power” aspect. An honest person would have to conclude that the outcome of this case stinks of high favoritism, not to mention abject sexism.
When are we ever going to end these incredibly stupid and disgusting double standards? Boys in this country are just road kill – until they screw up. And at that magic moment they simultaneously “create themselves”, assign themselves a male gender, and absolve everyone else of responsibility and accountability. They can do this, of course, because almost “everyone else” is a woman.
Footnote #3. Ray Frank Gricar (born 1945 in Ohio) was an American lawyer who served as the district attorney (DA) of Centre County, Pennsylvania, which includes the campus of Penn State University in State College, from 1985 until 2005 – twenty years. During his tenure as DA, in 1998, Gricar declined to press charges against well known, highly respected and longtime Penn State assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky following allegations of his “sexual abuse” of boys. Six years later, in 2004, Gricar announced he would not run for re-election and would retire from both the DA job and as a practicing attorney in December 2005, shortly after his 60th birthday. On 15 April 2005, Gricar, twice divorced and living with his girlfriend, went missing from his Bellefonte home under mysterious circumstances and has not been heard from since. Six years later, in 2011, Sandusky was finally arrested and charged by the Pennsylvania State Attorney General’s office on multiple counts of child (boy) sexual abuse (rape) dating back decades. It then surfaced that many very respected members of the community, including police and university officials, had known for many years of this pervert’s activities.
Gricar was declared legally dead on 25 July 2011, shortly after Sandusky’s arrest.
While Gricar has never been found, his missing computer was. Three months after his disappearance, on 30 July 2005, fishermen discovered Gricar’s county-issued laptop computer in the Susquehanna River beneath a bridge between Lewisburg and Milton. A Pennsylvania State Police computer expert analyzed the computer and found that its hard drive was missing. Two months later, a hard drive was recovered on the banks of the Susquehanna River about 100 yards (91 m) from where the laptop was found and is believed to be Gricar’s. However, the drive was badly damaged, and analysis by the FBI, US Secret Service and the Kroll-Ontrack company was unable to recover any data from it. In April 2009, four years after his disappearance, Bellefonte police revealed that, before he went missing, someone had used the home computer at Gricar’s residence to perform internet searches on topics such as “how to wreck a hard drive”, “how to fry a hard drive” and “water damage to a notebook computer”.
I have always wondered if the reason for Gricar’s disappearance was directly related to the Sandusky case, and especially to well-placed individuals dedicated to protecting Sandusky and Penn State’s revered football program, and that his computer contained damaging information in that case. Or perhaps Gricar was finally overcome with guilt for not prosecuting Sandusky and allowing him to continue preying on young boys. Unfortunately, the answers will probably never be known with any certainty.
Ray Gricar’s older brother Roy had disappeared from his West Chester, Ohio, home in May 1996. His body was found a week later in the Great Miami River, and authorities subsequently ruled his death a suicide. Is it possible that both Catholic brothers had been sexually abused as boys in the Cleveland area? This, too, will never be known.
Footnote #4. “Black n Blue Boys/Broken Men” is a play currently on stage at the Goodman Theater in Chicago. It is co-produced by the Berkeley Repertory Theater – and performed by a black woman. Pulitzer Prize finalist playwright Dael Orlandersmith plays five male characters as she “brings to life a series of harrowing stories that weave together each character’s friends, family, lovers and counselors ((of both genders)) into an explosive narrative that uncovers the darkest corners of humanity—and shatters our notions about predators and their victims.” Why it finally took a black woman to bring this subject into the light after a half century is just one more of the great perversities of twisted American society.
The play has received praise in most quarters except one: predictably our privileged self-involved white women seem to be able to find all sorts of faults with the play and greatly prefer to speak only of “children” in order to slickly diffuse the subject so as to keep the focus solely on “me” and “my group”. (It’s against their religion to mention the word “boys” without immediately affixing it to blame for some bad or stupid behavior that boys dreamed up all by themselves. Unlike other humans, you see, boys create themselves.) No group on the planet can match this lobby’s sophisticated use of self-serving propaganda.
Interestingly, one of the five characters is an Irish boy who moved from Belfast to Manchester. This is not solely “an American problem”; it is now endemic to western society, thanks in no small part to western women and their many powerful lobbies concerned only about “me” and seeing no responsibility for anyone or anything beyond themselves, rabidly intolerant of anything that might lessen the focus on “victim me”. Such “victims” literally wallow in their eternal victimhood – mainly to avoid their just share of responsibility for others.
Footnote #5: “Schools For Boys”. The following is extracted from a New York Times article, “At Boys’ Home, Seeking Graves, and the Reason“, dated 9 February 2013: (Note: “Schools for boys” are juvenile detention facilities for ages 6-18 that have operated in every state in the country under the auspices of the state judicial systems for the past 110 years; most are work farms where little, if any, formal education is offered. They are largely indistinguishable from state to state in how they operate and in the profits they return to community cronies. Some are lucrative for-profit enterprises, and all employ their share of demented thugs.)
The Arthur G. Dozier School for Boys in Marianna, Florida (in the panhandle about 60 miles northwest of Tallahassee) operated from 1900 to 2011 ((111 years)). Dozier became synonymous with beatings, abuse, forced labor, neglect and, in some cases, death. It survived Congressional hearings, state hearings and state investigations. Each one turned the spotlight on horrific conditions, and little changed. Almost from the moment it opened as the Florida State Reform School, there was a steady stream of reports of abuse, indentured servitude, crowding and neglect. So many children — among them incorrigibles and runaways — were sent to the institution that it became the largest in the country. Accounts surfaced early on of children as young as 6 chained to walls. Fierce whippings were common. Children were forced to pick crops, make bricks and print paper, all to profit the prison and other businesses, records show. A fire in 1914 killed eight boys who had been locked in a room. Flu epidemics killed others. Some runaways were shot. Other deaths were listed as due to pneumonia. The beatings continued well into the 1960s. In the 1980s, children at the school said they were hogtied and put in isolation.
A team of forensic anthropologists from the University of South Florida has spent the last year looking for buried bodies on the recently closed 1,400 acre campus. So far, the team has located 50 grave shafts there, 19 more than a 2009 Florida Department of Law Enforcement investigation said existed. With the help of school, state and historical records, they have so far counted at least 98 recorded deaths dating from 1913 to 1960.
Former surviving residents at the “school” have led the push for setting the record straight about the institution’s treatment of its young inmates, which came to light again in a 2008 expose in the Miami Herald. An investigation by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement concluded in 2010 that, although it found dozens of graves, there was not enough evidence to pursue criminal charges related to allegations of physical and sexual abuse of boys at the school, much less murder. The state’s Department of Juvenile Justice closed the school in 2011 as the federal government was investigating allegations of maltreatment and abuse. The federal government ultimately faulted the state for poor oversight and violating the rights of the inmates.
Over the objections of locals, the Florida state legislature placed $190,000 into the state budget to fund site research, determine the causes of death, identify remains, locate potential family members and cover the costs for any re-internment. It is believed that a number of burial sites are not located on the school grounds, but on neighboring farms which also benefited from the boys’ labor and whose owners would join posses to hunt down boy escapees ((for pay)).
(It’s likely that the number is much higher, and that they continued decades after the 1960s. As I said, there was nothing unusual about Dozier; it was just larger than most. When I studied such things in college, it was common knowledge that most of the boys who survived such brutal taxpayer-supported institutions would graduate to prison. A significant number simply vanished, listed as “run-aways”. In the early part of the 20th century, abject poverty was common, and large families often could not care for their own, so boys were often just cut loose – until states rounded some of them up and put them to work. It was especially prevalent during the Great Depression, when many of the brutal “school” practices became institutionalized, and universal. In America, you can STILL today do anything you want to boys, even if it’s all about whatever nonsense women want, and no one will ever say anything. When I listen to women’s lobbies today whining about how difficult life was for them until very recent times, I get a little nauseous. Most government employees charged with “overseeing” such institutions for boys were women. Women’s lobbies in America, focused solely on their glorious navels, have done a truly excellent job of re-writing history to favor themselves over the past forty years.)
Footnote #6. “Pedophile Priests”. Ireland has gone through a decade of confessions, investigations, court cases, class action law suits, and soul searching on this subject. The matter has received much wider publicity in much smaller Ireland than it has in the US, even though the American truth is every bit as horrific as it was in Ireland. Now it’s finally moving over to “Northern” Ireland (under the control of England).
Not exempt from Ireland’s shame ((extract))
The Irish Times (Ireland), 1 February 2014, by Eamonn McCann
The horrific child abuse perpetrated by so many Catholic priests and nuns didn’t stop at Ireland’s border. Ireland grappled with its unspeakable scandal several years ago, and now Northern Ireland is holding the U.K.’s largest inquiry into child abuse at church-run homes. I grew up near one of those homes, St. Joseph’s, and I remember my mother instructing us always to reserve the fifth decade of our rosaries to pray for “the home boys, God help them.” All over town, we whispered about “the poor crayturs”* locked up in those institutions, beaten by vicious nuns by day, preyed upon by depraved priests at night. “Everybody knew. But the idea of speaking out didn’t occur. You didn’t talk back to the church.” Finally, the victims have a chance to speak up, and they are telling the court how they were kicked and starved, how they would wet themselves on purpose at night and lie soaked in urine, hoping that would ward off molestation. Remember these boys the next time someone tries to tell you that today’s social ills are caused by society’s turning away from the church. “This is the reverse of the truth and an insult to the victims of an unforgivable sin.”
* ‘Craytur’ is Irish slang, phonetic spelling of ‘creature’ (a term of endearment, a wretch).
Note that Mr. McCann, unlike almost all American accounts, at least identifies the gender of the victims, but still prefers to describe the crimes as “molestation” instead of the accurate “rape”. (See ‘Re-labeling’ at “Marketing And Propaganda – Techniques”, for the “thinking” behind the use of “pedophiles” and similar terms associated with this bigotry.)