Rise for the judge

TWO “RAPE” CASES have gotten lots of buzz above the Rio Bravo.  Here’s how Judge Zapata would have ruled:

(1) At a Stanford University frat party, a young woman, 23, got herself plastered, passed out, and a horny boy, 19, had his way with her behind a dumpster. How romantic.

She reportedly was unconscious during the encounter, a vital point to remember as we move along.

New ImageA judge gave the frat boy a six-month sentence, which has hordes of people up in arms. A petition for his recall has many thousands of signatures.

The boy is the primary guilty party, of course. The girl is the secondary guilty party, in spite of feminist blather that the “victim” never shares any fault at all.

In this case, she does, big-time.

If she hadn’t drunk to excess — her choice — and passed out at a frat party surrounded by boozed-up, hormone-charged adolescents and young men, she would not have had her skirt lifted. Where was her brain?

Since she was unconscious during the booze-fueled event, she was not traumatized in spite of a long, weepy letter she sent to the judge after sobering up and hoping to excuse herself.

And she wasn’t a virgin. No university coed of 23 is these days with the possible exception of Brigham Young University students, certainly not at Stanford.

Had I been the judge, my sentence would be this:

For the horny frat boy: 40 days of community service.

For the very stupid girl: 30 days of community service.

I wouldn’t have been recalled. I would have been tarred, feathered, and run out of town on a burro’s backside.

Such are the silly times in which we live.

* * * *

(2) A woman schoolteacher — I forget where — was arrested and charged after it came to light that she had an ongoing sexual relationship with a male student, aged 13. She faces some very serious hard time in prison. Decades.

This is arrant nonsense.

A grown man taking advantage of girl of 13 is one thing, but it’s different when the roles are reversed. In spite of current cultural fads, males and females are very different.

The boy of 13 was not abused. As a former teenager — and every honest man is nodding his head — I can tell you without the slightest chance of being mistaken, that the kid has a smile plastered permanently on his face, and all his guy friends are giving him high-fives. The teacher is a looker.

Here is what Judge Zapata would do in this case:

Fire the teacher. Period. She clearly lacks sufficient sense and self-control for the job. Better that she works at Hooters.

But prison? Gimme a break.

* * * *

The court is now out of session. The judge is napping.

* * * *

(Note: The first sexual encounter would never have been publicized had not two European grad students happened by. It would have been just another of thousands of inebriated sexual encounters that occur at boozed-up frat parties.)

28 thoughts on “Rise for the judge”

  1. Oh my, oh my — had the girl been unconscious due to a medical issue would you feel the same? Yes, she is stupid to have gotten so drunk that she passed out, but seriously, that does not give this entitled jackdaw the right to “get some action.”

    As to the adolescent boy with the smile plastered across his face, yes, the teacher should be fired, and not able to work anywhere involving adolescents. I do feel she needs some time in incarceration. If it had been a male teacher and 13-year-old girl what would have been your reaction? Yes, I know you believe in a different standard with regards to the sexes, but the female teacher is in a position of trust. She can no longer be trusted. She committed statutory rape.

    My goodness, I had to wait a while to respond to let my head cool.

    Like

    1. Debi: If she’d been out cold due to a medical issue, it would be an entirely different situation. But you knew that.

      As for the fellow having the “right” to do something, of course, he did not.

      As for the second case, as I wrote, there is a big difference between a grown man and a girl of 13 and what happened with the teacher and boy.

      Boys and girls, men and women, are very different in spite of militant feminist dogma. Yes, she did commit statutory rape. Again, I think statutory rape laws should only apply when girls are the victim. Boys, in these cases, are not victims. They are happy campers. Trust me on this.

      What the teacher is guilty of, more than anything, is stupidity. But due to this being a victimless crime, she should never go to jail. Again, Hooters is a good match for her.

      As for your head cooling, I’m glad it did so. I wrote something similar a few years ago, and some gals went ballistic, leaving irrational comments that made no sense whatsoever, as if they had not even read what I had written.

      But it’s a hyper-emotional issue, especially for women, and some slack must be given.

      Like

  2. OK, how about switching the passed out female for a male and him getting sodomized?

    You know, for a fair and balanced perspective.

    Like

    1. Clete: Were it a gay fraternity, and the male student was aware of the atmosphere, sure, it would be the same if he got some unexpected butt time after getting falling-down drunk. But the two situations are not really comparable due to — insert drum roll! — men and women are different!

      Like

      1. Predictable response. I am becoming more and more convinced you are one of the top internet trolls of the blogosphere. Because much of what you post is sheer lunacy.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Clete: In my previous website, The Zapata Tales, I had a list running down the right side of quotes from comments, both positive and negative. It was fun. If I still did that, I would include your great line, “one of the top internet trolls of the blogosphere.”

          One always strives to be the best of anything. According to you, I have succeeded! Gracias for the accolade. I will continue to do my best to live up to it.

          Like

          1. And your appreciation is shown by billing me as “Moon’s Reader”? Geez, muchas gracias to you tambien!

            Like

            1. Clete: The little headline is not referring specifically to you. Moon’s reader feedback will be an collection from various people. Maybe I’ll copy a few from The Zapata Tales’ list to pad it out a bit, get it going.

              Like

  3. My friend, you have touched the third rail of our society. Any thing you do or say will not redeem you.
    It is kind of like me trying to convince my wife that the rooster is just doing what is natural. She will never under stand chicken love. In the end, he went home with the gardener and met his fate with some red chili. There was no redemption for him.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Señor Gill: Chicken love indeed. The Third Rail, yes.

      Whenever I spot an adolescent couple hereabouts holding hands with moony looks, I imagine those thought balloons over their heads. Above the girl: “Does he love me?” Above the boy: “Will she take her pants off?”

      It’s all chicken love. Women don’t really get it. With the exception perhaps of Camille Paglia.

      Like

    1. Ray: You’re a hoot. And I understand that’s as far as a man can go up in your nation without suffering severe consequences, up to and including prison time.

      Like

  4. Señor Gill: I saw an early version of that story this morning, and there was no mention of the shooter being a Mohammedan.

    The leftists will point to it as another reason to ban guns, but not to ban Mohammedans. I, of course, favor the latter, but let us not get off on a tangent right now.

    Like

  5. I just wanted to clarify something … there was no rape nor rape charge in the Brock Turner case. The charge was assault with the intent to rape. Just saying … as the media generally did not depict it as such.

    Like

    1. Bev: Thanks for the update. I did a little further sleuthing just now. He was initially charged with rape, but that was changed later to “assault with intent to commit rape of an intoxicated or unconscious person.” The charges were changed due to DNA results that showed he didn’t actually manage to get his dingus in the desired location.

      The basic points of the post, however, remain valid.

      Like

  6. The points are valid, but the ladies will not be satisfied until you are neutered and staked out in the yard. Although true, some things are best left unsaid. I hope your wife doesn’t read this. Good luck in this mine field.

    Like

    1. Señor Gill: Leaving things unsaid is precisely what they want. Don’t do it.

      My wife, being smart and not having been polluted by the U.S. culture, would agree with everything I wrote.

      Like

      1. Ohh! There are some arguments you can never win. It is best to just bend with the wind. I have the scars. Hen pecked is the term.

        Like

    2. Señor Gill: Let me rephrase my response. It’s less that my wife would agree with what I wrote than it is that these issues are totally alien to her. The controversial nature of the two “crimes” in question are products of the political correctness culture and that of militant feminism, both of which are not unknown down here, but nearly so.

      Mexicans have different things on their minds. Not this. It is a cultural difference that I very much welcome.

      Like

  7. It is a matter of perspective. My wife, being smart and the mother of daughters, thinks just the opposite of yours. And while I haven’t asked, I will wager none of her five sisters share your opinion either. None, of course, having been subjected to right-wing U.S. thoughtlessness, so they may be a bit more objective.

    Like

  8. The other day you were speaking of how political correctness (a bad thing in your mind) is not observed here, at least on the same level as NOB. Just wondered if you had seen the news about the Secretaría de Desarrollo e Integración Social (Sedis) de Jalisco official that was fired for his comments about the massacre in Orlando where he stated it was a shame only 50 and not 100 people were killed?

    http://www.sinembargo.mx/13-06-2016/3053935

    Also the despicable chant by Mexican soccer fans at the Copa America catching a lot of negative attention and movements are being formed to put a stop to it?

    Like

    1. Clete: Nope, had not seen that about the guy getting fired. It was, of course, a knucklehead thing for him to do. And I stand by the fact the PC down here is faint compared to the United States, and let us pray that it continues so. It’s sad that Mexico seems to want to pick up lamentable Gringo habits of that sort.

      Had not heard of the soccer controversy since I don’t follow sports at all. Had to look it up. I find it amusing that some people want to sanitize the brawling atmosphere of soccer. I’m with the puto screamers, or I would be if I gave a flip about soccer. The puto controversy is a classic example of the rank humorlessness of PC and the left in general.

      Like

    2. PS: You wrote that PC is “a bad thing in your mind” and, of course, it certainly is. Your phrasing/tone suggests you think otherwise, that PC is a good thing. This is shocking! With only one exception — a fat, gay Latino who was my boss at the Houston Chronicle who would readily confess to being PC and proud of it — I have never encountered any fan of PC who would admit to even knowing what the term means. You, it seems are No. 2.

      Like

Comments are closed.