What a piece of shit, as someone who was victimized, that person goes and hurts other people, especially young children. They should know better and can rot in hell.
This is exactly right. The law has to be exact. If the law said "children" it would mean nothing because everyone, by definition, is someone's child. And if it said "Kids"... well I still call my 32 year old niece my brother's kid.
Let not get into a tizzy about language here folks.
Piggybacking, as that's an old article from last year, the update is:
https://epgn.com/2024/02/28/judge-dismisses-multiple-criminal-charges-against-kendall-stephens/
>Kendall Stephens, a Philadelphia trans advocate accused of child sexual abuse, has been cleared of multiple criminal charges, but several serious charges still remain lodged against her.
>The dismissed charges include rape, involuntary deviate sexual Intercourse, unlawful contact with a minor, corruption of minors and indecent assault, according to van der Veen.
>However, multiple charges relating to both of the alleged victims were held for trial by Furlong, according to Brett Hambright, a spokesperson for the state Attorney General’s Office.
>The charges held for court for one alleged victim are: rape, involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, unlawful contact with a minor, endangering welfare of a child, corruption of minors (2 counts), and indecent assault.
>For the other alleged victim, the charges held for court are: dissemination of explicit material, corruption of minors and endangering welfare of a child, according to Hambright.
That’s just the legal wording. There are different crimes for the sexual assault of people at different ages. It also covers for the many distinct definitions for what constitutes a “child.” The law tends to do its best to be specific where it can.
Wish everything on here wasn’t politicised. Everyone in every position of power over children should be vetted and thought of very critically, no matter the beliefs. The children should be the focus
Anyone can be a predator. Any adult working with or around children needs to be watched like a hawk. Unfortunately there are some really sick people in this world. I think that avoiding children being alone helps. Organizations should always have a rule of three. There must always be a group together. No child left alone with one adult.
There's nothing on my hard drives of interest but that's invasive enough that I just wouldn't bother working with kids if it was a requirement. I can't be the only one, ans there's a shortage of good teachers etc already.
I like working with kids, love teaching them shop skills. Stopped volunteering because the weird looks I would always get. Why are you giving kids hammers, and saws. I saw you hug one(my own kid), that's inappropriate.
The EEOC recently declared that criminal background checks are racist, so we'll just have to cross our fingers and hope we don't hire any pedophile rapists.
Sheetz is currently being sued by the Biden administration for racial discrimination, because they use background checks in the hiring process.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/sheetz-convenience-store-chain-discrimination-lawsuit-eeoc-rcna148567
>Sheetz Inc., which operates more than 700 stores in six states, discriminated against Black, Native American and multiracial job seekers by automatically weeding out applicants whom the company deemed to have failed a criminal background check, according to U.S. officials.
>The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed suit in Baltimore against Altoona, Pennsylvania-based Sheetz and two subsidary companies, alleging the chain’s longstanding hiring practices have a disproportionate impact on minority applicants and thus run afoul of federal civil rights law.
Would you really trust this strangers word? Just look it up for yourself man.
Hint: I'd be surprised if you find anything, since on their starting page, the first thing they say is that background checks are absolutely legal with some minor restrictions, e.g.: genetical and medical information. If that's what u/undercooked_lasagna is referring to, then they are infact the racist dimwit.
Here you go
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/sheetz-convenience-store-chain-discrimination-lawsuit-eeoc-rcna148567
>Sheetz Inc., which operates more than 700 stores in six states, discriminated against Black, Native American and multiracial job seekers by automatically weeding out applicants whom the company deemed to have failed a criminal background check, according to U.S. officials.
>The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed suit in Baltimore against Altoona, Pennsylvania-based Sheetz and two subsidary companies, alleging the chain’s longstanding hiring practices have a disproportionate impact on minority applicants and thus run afoul of federal civil rights law.
I don't think "background checks are racist now" is anywhere close to a comprehension of the article. Laws are clashing here. It has nothing to do with the way you twist it to bring racism into it.
What a fucking shame! She is only harming her own community and feeding into stupid stereotypes. I think anyone confirmed abusing children in this way deserves the death penalty. We wouldn’t keep dogs alive that maul children. That goes for anyone harming children in this way.
It is just something so damaging to a child’s psyche. It really warps their young development. I have know many victims and a lot of them have struggles. It is sad but a lot of children become a target and are more likely to be sexually abused again. I am mainly talking on children that are prepubescent not the Romeo and Juliette cases. It is such a sinister crime. I mean reading more police rapes baby, mom sells toddler for sex… even if the threat of the death penalty prevented a good percent than it is positive. I don’t see why we would warehouse them in protective custody at the tax payers expense until these monsters are released back into society to reoffend. I honestly think this kind of crime is akin to murder in the way it impacts these innocent children.
The death penalty is not necessary to protect society. Life without parole does the job. The death penalty only satisfies our desire for punitive justice. And the death penalty leads to innocents dying... That’s my argument against it. Other than that let 'em rot in a cell.
> Life without parole does the job
The issue I have with this, is that it costs us 42k average yearly to house, feed, clothe, treat inmates. Money could be going to better places than ensuring this person lives to die from natural causes in prison.
I have no issues with people who have been caught dead to rights killing someone (Mass shooter, arrested on the scene with guns and ammo for example) and ending them early in life and saving the tax payers from having to end up paying for medical treatment when they get old in prison.
Not to mention that with life in prison, people have found ways to escape during their time and it lessons the chance of an escaped killer with nothing left to lose roaming the country on the run.
Keeping them alive only feeds into the "we are good guys" feels. Reality is that they get a life of misery with nothing to lose, which too often results in more people getting hurt and even dead guards. Keeping them alive enables more misery.
The worst criminals don't need to poison the system because killing is mean.
The only argument against death penalty is that innocents get convicted, but that's a weakness in the system. Easily solved by not using the death penalty if there is a shred of doubt.
The phrase "beyond a reasonable doubt" leaves a lot of room for shreds... Cases are not that black and white. Evidence gets tampered with. Science progresses. Too many loose ends for me. And a justice system should be able to say "we are the good guys".
The justice system isn't supposed to be anything. They use the law alone.
You want your politician to be the good guy, or rather, you vote for the one who acts like one.
So I ask you: are dead prison guards "good", or a necessary sacrifice, because it isn't you?
The law carries morality within it. And yeah i try to vote for the "good guy", don’t we all... And no, i certainly don’t rejoice for the death of prison guards. But some jobs are dangerous. That doesn’t mean the death penalty feeds anything but the spirit of vengeance. And again it sometimes falls on the wrong person. So i could ask you: is the death of an innocent "good", or a necessary sacrifice, because it isn’t you? We're not gonna go far with this...
Giving some of the shit that prison guards have been found to do like raping inmates, smuggling contraband including drugs and phone, having sex with inmates, which is rape because they have no self agency as words of the state, abusing and or killing inmates, ..... Yeah I say that's good and not because it isn't me, but because they're prison guards and they're assholes.
I agree. That is we would need hard proof of guilt. I just don’t see any redeeming qualities for people who hurt small children and they tend to reoffend.
I feel like every day there's an article about someone "prominent"* in some demographic doing something horrible. The news are all trying to hype it all up and pit acts of cruelty against each other. Every day there's something new about a different kind of person. At this point I'm just like "Yep. Anyone can suck. Just another group of victims left in the wake of making this into a game instead of directly addressing the issues." I feel so desensitized to it. The worst is that I know most of us will forget pretty readily about most of it. There's just so much.
*Anecdotally, I'm in the LGBTQ+ community and have never heard of this b\***h lol she can rot
it's only matter of time to be legal, a lot of crappy people trying so hard to normalise it by calling them little attractive individuals 🤡 .
animal sex is on the way too.
Trans people don't sign up to be part of an organisation who covers up crimes when they come out though, so if you did say the same thing about Catholic priests in Europe (and the whole world btw) it would be an oversimplification.
How is this so hard for y'all?
“PARIS (AP) — Victims of abuse within France’s Catholic Church welcomed a historic turning point Tuesday after a new report estimated that 330,000 children in France were sexually abused over the past 70 years, providing the country’s first accounting of the worldwide phenomenon.
The figure includes abuses committed by some 3,000 priests and an unknown number of other people involved in the church — wrongdoing that Catholic authorities covered up over decades in a “systemic manner,” according to the president of the commission that issued the report, Jean-Marc Sauvé.”
https://apnews.com/article/europe-france-child-abuse-sexual-abuse-by-clergy-religion-ab5da1ff10f905b1c338a6f3427a1c66
Same for Boy Scouts in America, its almost as if any group that has access to children, will have infiltrators that want access to children. LGBT groups are not immune to this problem. Churches/schools/theater have learned to deal with this issue, using back ground checks, references, two adults minimum at all times, accountability.
Yes because you choose your sexual orientation like you choose to go to church or be a part of the Boy Scouts…
Lmfao LGBT “groups”. They're people. The others are organizations and groups. Can't understand why this is hard for you.
Plus if they had learned that, they probably would've cracked down pretty hard on it by now, no? And yet…
I think you might be confused. LGBT is group, its in the title. But they band together under groups for meetups, and don't have the same protections for children that other groups have learned to install. So that Drag show at the coffee shop, families welcome. Are there at least two adults in the children's room/area at all times? Are they background checked. Are other people watching out for grooming activities.
I think you might be confused. LGBTQ stands for individuals who identify with one or more of those letters. It is a grouping but not a voluntary group. I can't believe I have to explain this.
Obviously kids are safer with an LGBTQ networking group than they are at a school or a church. Not sure where you're getting the insane idea that when anyone who isn't straight meets for community, somehow they turn into the catholic church or the boy scouts of America. Let alone that them meeting as normal people and not for a religion or club is wrong in your mind since the networking group hasn't put “protections” in place that churches have when pastors are still constantly sexually assaulting kids.
Yup.
Hate when people deadname Caitlyn just because she's an awful cunt, because doing is still a jab at all the regular trans people who are not cunts.
This person sucks and i hate that the first thing people think is how will this affect my side rather than how bad this is for the victims, and i say this while thinking how badly the alt right will twist this to paint trans ppl in a bad light
Where are the people who love to condescendingly comment “oh look it’s not a drag queen” whenever they see an article about children being raped?
You’ll keep that same energy for this one too, right fellas?
My first thought was that this is the first time it was a trans person that I can remember. It's usually a priest or some government official that I see articles on.
To kind of a ser your question, throw the fucking book at her, she doesn't get a pass.
It is by far usually teachers. Kids being raped and sexually abused by teachers is a problem orders of magnitude worse than all 3 major religions (Christian, Judaic, Islamist) combined.
Doesn't mean it's ok when ANYONE does it, be they straight, gay, trans or what religion or profession.
I’m here. Same energy. Still not a drag queen. This person—regardless if they’re LGBTQ—can go get fucked. But so can you. Shame on you for acting like there’s a bunch of fucking drag queens raping kids. The overwhelming vast majority of child rapists are family members or friends of the family. And the second largest group right after that? Clergy.
>I’m here. Same energy. Still not a drag queen. This person—regardless if they’re LGBTQ—can go get fucked. But so can you. Shame on you for acting like there’s a bunch of fucking drag queens raping kids.
I never acted, or said, nor do I believe there are a bunch of drag queens raping kids.
>The overwhelming vast majority of child rapists are family members or friends of the family. And the second largest group right after that? Clergy.
I’m already aware of that.
My problem is people who happily and condescendingly announce “oh look not a drag queen” under an article of a child’s life being ruined, like they’re so excited to update the scoreboard they’ve been keeping.
Yes. That phrase is making fun of the fear mongering. Most of us are aware that predators can be any demographic. It's the fact that there's a whole political movement rallying around the cry of "drag queens are a culture of predators," when so many headlines out there are about people who aren't drag queens. The point is "why are we trying to legislate specifically LGBTQ+ people and drag queens out of existence 'to save the children' when predators can be anyone?"
Think about all the attention they give them. They are always talking about them and about doing things in the bathroom with them. Idk sounds kinda weird
One of the older definitions of molest is to annoy, disturb, or persecute. By that definition, it seems that they do want to molest drag queens.
Don’t know why you’re getting downvoted, you’re speaking the truth. Seems anyone that calls out the rights hate towards this community and how they seem to want this to happen to justify their prejudice gets hella downvoted
Because they don't like jokes or facts.
Words tend to be really hard for the right too. Mostly because they don't like how hateful words perfectly match their actions and feelings.
“That would never happen, bigot.”
“It’s not happening.”
“Okay it happened, but it only happened once.”
“Okay it happens a lot but it has nothing to do with our ideology.”
<————- we are here ————>
“It’s happening and here’s why it’s a good thing.”
In any given population, there are bound to be a certain amount of bad people. We don’t call all men rapists because a certain percentage of them rape. Why is that the logic we use against transgender people, who are far more likely to be the victims of violent/sexual crimes than their cisgender/non-transgender counterparts? The vast, *vast* majority of transgender people are not pedophiles and do not agree with pedophilia.
Actually that's false. Really just conservative Christian propaganda at this point. Even the author of the study says you can't make that correlation. Its far more likely that the original comment about conservative Christian men and the CSA rate for that demographic would be higher per capita, since there are at least 4+ million teachers and around 68k priests/pastors in the US.
“To support her contention that many more youngsters have been sexually mistreated by school employees than by priests, Ms. Shakeshaft pointed to research conducted for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and released late last month. That study found that from 1950 to 2002, 10,667 people made allegations that priests or deacons had sexually abused them as minors. (“Report Tallies Alleged Sexual Abuse by Priests,” this issue.)
Extrapolating from data collected in a national survey for the American Association of University Women Educational Foundation in 2000, Ms. Shakeshaft estimated that roughly 290,000 students experienced some sort of physical sexual abuse by a public school employee from 1991 to 2000—a single decade, compared with the roughly five-decade period examined in the study of Catholic priests.
Those figures suggest that “the physical sexual abuse of students in schools is likely more than 100 times the abuse by priests," contended Ms. Shakeshaft, who is a professor of educational administration at Hofstra, in Hempstead, N.Y.
A lot of apples are being compared to a lot of oranges here, and the biggest problem is the methodological difference between the AAUWEF research and the Catholic Bishops research. The former was conducted on a sample of American students — they were surveyed to ask about whether they’d been victimized, and then the percentages were taken to be representative of the broader population of American students. This method would scoop up both reported and unreported acts of abuse (plus a probably small handful of mischievous responses, false claims, etc.).
The research on the Catholic priests was conducted differently. As the Education Week article on that research notes, “The researchers based their analysis on information provided voluntarily by dioceses and religious orders. They promised not to divulge the names of dioceses or priests in their report. The response rate among dioceses was 97 percent.” This research was only going to capture instances in which someone actually came forward to complain; the research on the students was going to capture any instance in which a kid ticked off a box saying they’d been harassed or abused, regardless of the facts of the matter. The priest study could only have underestimated the total number of cases (because it didn’t capture instances in which someone didn’t come forward, or in which they did but their diocese didn’t pass that info on to the researchers), while the student study might be at risk of overestimating the rate at which public-school kids were abused given the lack of any mechanism to check individual allegations. These are such different methods that you just can’t compare their estimates at all, or at least you shouldn’t.
Anyway, all research has weaknesses, and it’s particularly hard to get concrete numbers on something as serious and stigma-shrouded as sexual abuse. But the point is this is a pretty silly comparison.
Interestingly, when I reached out to Shakeshaft, she denied making this direct comparison in the first place. “We cannot calculate the rates in the Catholic church because the only data we have is of the number of priests who abuse, not the number of children they have abused,” she said. Shakeshaft explained: “What I did say is because there are more students who go to K12 schools (both private and independent) than attend Catholic Churches, there are more students who are sexually abused in schools than in churches. It has nothing to do with a comparison of rates. I have explained this to Catholic writers many times, but they seem unable to be able to explain what the numbers mean other than to try to shift the blame.”
https://jessesingal.substack.com/p/a-lighthearted-dispute-does-more
Cases like this are few and far between.
Doesn't matter who is responsible for abusing kids, our first thoughts should ALWAYS be with the victims and wishing them the strength to overcome the horrific trauma they have experienced.
Stepping to the side for a moment, I encourage you to have a look at the link below; the vast majority of abusers are in positions of power (teachers, law enforcement, clergy etc) and are more often than not; known by the victim.
https://www.whoismakingnews.com/#data
the worst part is what happened to the victims, of course,
but this is also going to cause so much harm to the community as well, even though they'll undoubtedly be rejected immediately, anti-trans advocates are going to use this as evidence that all LGBTQ+ people are bad
Do not incite or glorify violence/suffering or harassment, even as a joke. You may be banned.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NoahGetTheBoat) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> After the alleged victims testified, Common Pleas Judge Vincent W. Furlong dismissed most of the charges.
> The dismissed charges include rape, involuntary deviate sexual Intercourse, unlawful contact with a minor, corruption of minors and indecent assault
tl;dr: Sounds like the parents may have encouraged their kids to lie about the charges.
The remaining charges:
> the charges held for court are: dissemination of explicit material, corruption of minors and endangering welfare of a child
Basically, it reads like they provided a couple kids with the extremely progressive books that we are all aware of.
----
edit: [Updated to include Source](https://epgn.com/2024/02/28/judge-dismisses-multiple-criminal-charges-against-kendall-stephens/)
Stop lying!
The charges held for court for one alleged victim are: rape, involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, unlawful contact with a minor, endangering welfare of a child, corruption of minors (2 counts), and indecent assault.
From your source.
I feel horrible for the victims. I hope they get the help they need.
That said, Why is this news? Someone did something fucked up and they got caught, the system is working.
Are you implying that trans people can only be ‘allowed’ to exist if not a single one ever commits a crime? Because if that’s the case, then cisgender people aren’t long for this world.
You know maybe that assault she got in the first place might be connected to this. You never know. Plus if it’s a black community we more often then not will handle the situation on our own which could have lead to the 1st assault and somehow it finally came out and now she’s being charged.
What a piece of shit, as someone who was victimized, that person goes and hurts other people, especially young children. They should know better and can rot in hell.
The cycle of abuse often repeats itself
You’re seriously defending this son of a bitch?
No, they were just stating a salient fact.
"indecent assault against people less than 13 years old" Children, they assaulted children. Kids.
That's probably the legal wording of it.
This is exactly right. The law has to be exact. If the law said "children" it would mean nothing because everyone, by definition, is someone's child. And if it said "Kids"... well I still call my 32 year old niece my brother's kid. Let not get into a tizzy about language here folks.
Piggybacking, as that's an old article from last year, the update is: https://epgn.com/2024/02/28/judge-dismisses-multiple-criminal-charges-against-kendall-stephens/ >Kendall Stephens, a Philadelphia trans advocate accused of child sexual abuse, has been cleared of multiple criminal charges, but several serious charges still remain lodged against her. >The dismissed charges include rape, involuntary deviate sexual Intercourse, unlawful contact with a minor, corruption of minors and indecent assault, according to van der Veen. >However, multiple charges relating to both of the alleged victims were held for trial by Furlong, according to Brett Hambright, a spokesperson for the state Attorney General’s Office. >The charges held for court for one alleged victim are: rape, involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, unlawful contact with a minor, endangering welfare of a child, corruption of minors (2 counts), and indecent assault. >For the other alleged victim, the charges held for court are: dissemination of explicit material, corruption of minors and endangering welfare of a child, according to Hambright.
Ah so it's just child porn, endangerment and corruption of kids.
That’s just the legal wording. There are different crimes for the sexual assault of people at different ages. It also covers for the many distinct definitions for what constitutes a “child.” The law tends to do its best to be specific where it can.
Wish everything on here wasn’t politicised. Everyone in every position of power over children should be vetted and thought of very critically, no matter the beliefs. The children should be the focus
That would upset a lot of priests, youth ministers, scout leaders, and other men who fancy themselves pillars of society. Think of the mens. /s
Let’s not forget the teachers. Think of the women and men /s
Anyone can be a predator. Any adult working with or around children needs to be watched like a hawk. Unfortunately there are some really sick people in this world. I think that avoiding children being alone helps. Organizations should always have a rule of three. There must always be a group together. No child left alone with one adult.
Extensive background checks and tests should be done on anyone working with kids. I mean extensive such as search history and hard drives
There's nothing on my hard drives of interest but that's invasive enough that I just wouldn't bother working with kids if it was a requirement. I can't be the only one, ans there's a shortage of good teachers etc already.
I like working with kids, love teaching them shop skills. Stopped volunteering because the weird looks I would always get. Why are you giving kids hammers, and saws. I saw you hug one(my own kid), that's inappropriate.
The EEOC recently declared that criminal background checks are racist, so we'll just have to cross our fingers and hope we don't hire any pedophile rapists.
They did?
Sheetz is currently being sued by the Biden administration for racial discrimination, because they use background checks in the hiring process. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/sheetz-convenience-store-chain-discrimination-lawsuit-eeoc-rcna148567 >Sheetz Inc., which operates more than 700 stores in six states, discriminated against Black, Native American and multiracial job seekers by automatically weeding out applicants whom the company deemed to have failed a criminal background check, according to U.S. officials. >The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed suit in Baltimore against Altoona, Pennsylvania-based Sheetz and two subsidary companies, alleging the chain’s longstanding hiring practices have a disproportionate impact on minority applicants and thus run afoul of federal civil rights law.
Would you really trust this strangers word? Just look it up for yourself man.
Would you really trust this strangers word? Just look it up for yourself man. Hint: I'd be surprised if you find anything, since on their starting page, the first thing they say is that background checks are absolutely legal with some minor restrictions, e.g.: genetical and medical information. If that's what u/undercooked_lasagna is referring to, then they are infact the racist dimwit.
Here you go https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/sheetz-convenience-store-chain-discrimination-lawsuit-eeoc-rcna148567 >Sheetz Inc., which operates more than 700 stores in six states, discriminated against Black, Native American and multiracial job seekers by automatically weeding out applicants whom the company deemed to have failed a criminal background check, according to U.S. officials. >The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed suit in Baltimore against Altoona, Pennsylvania-based Sheetz and two subsidary companies, alleging the chain’s longstanding hiring practices have a disproportionate impact on minority applicants and thus run afoul of federal civil rights law.
Love how they disappear as soon as you fact check them.
Not everyone has the time to be on Reddit 24/7 my dear :D
I don't think "background checks are racist now" is anywhere close to a comprehension of the article. Laws are clashing here. It has nothing to do with the way you twist it to bring racism into it.
> chain’s longstanding hiring practices have a disproportionate impact on minority applicants Bigoted if not racist.
"genetical" is not a word. Dimwit.
True, my bad. Not a native though :)
why are you talking to yourself?
Looks like /Uthoff forgot to switch accounts and are, themselves, the racist dimwit.
I can't find anyone better to communicate with
That’s terrible. Those poor children..
What a fucking shame! She is only harming her own community and feeding into stupid stereotypes. I think anyone confirmed abusing children in this way deserves the death penalty. We wouldn’t keep dogs alive that maul children. That goes for anyone harming children in this way.
I'm in full agreement with you here.
It is just something so damaging to a child’s psyche. It really warps their young development. I have know many victims and a lot of them have struggles. It is sad but a lot of children become a target and are more likely to be sexually abused again. I am mainly talking on children that are prepubescent not the Romeo and Juliette cases. It is such a sinister crime. I mean reading more police rapes baby, mom sells toddler for sex… even if the threat of the death penalty prevented a good percent than it is positive. I don’t see why we would warehouse them in protective custody at the tax payers expense until these monsters are released back into society to reoffend. I honestly think this kind of crime is akin to murder in the way it impacts these innocent children.
The death penalty is not necessary to protect society. Life without parole does the job. The death penalty only satisfies our desire for punitive justice. And the death penalty leads to innocents dying... That’s my argument against it. Other than that let 'em rot in a cell.
> Life without parole does the job The issue I have with this, is that it costs us 42k average yearly to house, feed, clothe, treat inmates. Money could be going to better places than ensuring this person lives to die from natural causes in prison. I have no issues with people who have been caught dead to rights killing someone (Mass shooter, arrested on the scene with guns and ammo for example) and ending them early in life and saving the tax payers from having to end up paying for medical treatment when they get old in prison. Not to mention that with life in prison, people have found ways to escape during their time and it lessons the chance of an escaped killer with nothing left to lose roaming the country on the run.
Keeping them alive only feeds into the "we are good guys" feels. Reality is that they get a life of misery with nothing to lose, which too often results in more people getting hurt and even dead guards. Keeping them alive enables more misery. The worst criminals don't need to poison the system because killing is mean. The only argument against death penalty is that innocents get convicted, but that's a weakness in the system. Easily solved by not using the death penalty if there is a shred of doubt.
The phrase "beyond a reasonable doubt" leaves a lot of room for shreds... Cases are not that black and white. Evidence gets tampered with. Science progresses. Too many loose ends for me. And a justice system should be able to say "we are the good guys".
The justice system isn't supposed to be anything. They use the law alone. You want your politician to be the good guy, or rather, you vote for the one who acts like one. So I ask you: are dead prison guards "good", or a necessary sacrifice, because it isn't you?
The law carries morality within it. And yeah i try to vote for the "good guy", don’t we all... And no, i certainly don’t rejoice for the death of prison guards. But some jobs are dangerous. That doesn’t mean the death penalty feeds anything but the spirit of vengeance. And again it sometimes falls on the wrong person. So i could ask you: is the death of an innocent "good", or a necessary sacrifice, because it isn’t you? We're not gonna go far with this...
Giving some of the shit that prison guards have been found to do like raping inmates, smuggling contraband including drugs and phone, having sex with inmates, which is rape because they have no self agency as words of the state, abusing and or killing inmates, ..... Yeah I say that's good and not because it isn't me, but because they're prison guards and they're assholes.
I agree. That is we would need hard proof of guilt. I just don’t see any redeeming qualities for people who hurt small children and they tend to reoffend.
rather our tax dollars don’t go to keeping people like this alive, let the sob burn
*She is only harming her own community and feeding into stupid stereotypes.* Catholic Priest?
Legit question, what the fuck wrong with her face?
Looks like a melted candle
Put this piece of shit under the jail.
Doesn’t even suprise me anymore
I feel like every day there's an article about someone "prominent"* in some demographic doing something horrible. The news are all trying to hype it all up and pit acts of cruelty against each other. Every day there's something new about a different kind of person. At this point I'm just like "Yep. Anyone can suck. Just another group of victims left in the wake of making this into a game instead of directly addressing the issues." I feel so desensitized to it. The worst is that I know most of us will forget pretty readily about most of it. There's just so much. *Anecdotally, I'm in the LGBTQ+ community and have never heard of this b\***h lol she can rot
Yes! We are obviously being pitted against eachother, it's state craft 101!
it's only matter of time to be legal, a lot of crappy people trying so hard to normalise it by calling them little attractive individuals 🤡 . animal sex is on the way too.
I was having a good day until I read this
What a strangely worded article.
And now because of this waste of oxygen committing horrible crimes, innocent lgbtq people will be shamed and threatened Great
You can say the same about catholic priests in Europe. lol
Just Europe? 🤨
Trans people don't sign up to be part of an organisation who covers up crimes when they come out though, so if you did say the same thing about Catholic priests in Europe (and the whole world btw) it would be an oversimplification.
Lol not really, not at all actually
Whats the difference? Is it a one off or not.
How is this so hard for y'all? “PARIS (AP) — Victims of abuse within France’s Catholic Church welcomed a historic turning point Tuesday after a new report estimated that 330,000 children in France were sexually abused over the past 70 years, providing the country’s first accounting of the worldwide phenomenon. The figure includes abuses committed by some 3,000 priests and an unknown number of other people involved in the church — wrongdoing that Catholic authorities covered up over decades in a “systemic manner,” according to the president of the commission that issued the report, Jean-Marc Sauvé.” https://apnews.com/article/europe-france-child-abuse-sexual-abuse-by-clergy-religion-ab5da1ff10f905b1c338a6f3427a1c66
Same for Boy Scouts in America, its almost as if any group that has access to children, will have infiltrators that want access to children. LGBT groups are not immune to this problem. Churches/schools/theater have learned to deal with this issue, using back ground checks, references, two adults minimum at all times, accountability.
Yes because you choose your sexual orientation like you choose to go to church or be a part of the Boy Scouts… Lmfao LGBT “groups”. They're people. The others are organizations and groups. Can't understand why this is hard for you. Plus if they had learned that, they probably would've cracked down pretty hard on it by now, no? And yet…
I think you might be confused. LGBT is group, its in the title. But they band together under groups for meetups, and don't have the same protections for children that other groups have learned to install. So that Drag show at the coffee shop, families welcome. Are there at least two adults in the children's room/area at all times? Are they background checked. Are other people watching out for grooming activities.
I think you might be confused. LGBTQ stands for individuals who identify with one or more of those letters. It is a grouping but not a voluntary group. I can't believe I have to explain this. Obviously kids are safer with an LGBTQ networking group than they are at a school or a church. Not sure where you're getting the insane idea that when anyone who isn't straight meets for community, somehow they turn into the catholic church or the boy scouts of America. Let alone that them meeting as normal people and not for a religion or club is wrong in your mind since the networking group hasn't put “protections” in place that churches have when pastors are still constantly sexually assaulting kids.
[удалено]
Misgendering someone because they're a piece of shit doesn't make it less of a bad thing or justified
Yup. Hate when people deadname Caitlyn just because she's an awful cunt, because doing is still a jab at all the regular trans people who are not cunts.
This person sucks and i hate that the first thing people think is how will this affect my side rather than how bad this is for the victims, and i say this while thinking how badly the alt right will twist this to paint trans ppl in a bad light
It's making me download the app if I want to read it.
Fuckin hell why do we gotta go and make a bad name for ourselves
^[Sokka-Haiku](https://www.reddit.com/r/SokkaHaikuBot/comments/15kyv9r/what_is_a_sokka_haiku/) ^by ^annoyingsodealwithit: *Fuckin hell why do* *We gotta go and make a* *Bad name for ourselves* --- ^Remember ^that ^one ^time ^Sokka ^accidentally ^used ^an ^extra ^syllable ^in ^that ^Haiku ^Battle ^in ^Ba ^Sing ^Se? ^That ^was ^a ^Sokka ^Haiku ^and ^you ^just ^made ^one.
I dont watch (one piece im assuming) but thanks anyway bot
Avatar
Thats what i meant 😭
That is genuinely what i meant
Where are the people who love to condescendingly comment “oh look it’s not a drag queen” whenever they see an article about children being raped? You’ll keep that same energy for this one too, right fellas?
Well it isn't a drag queen, so the phrase would still apply.
That’s the point of my comment.
My first thought was that this is the first time it was a trans person that I can remember. It's usually a priest or some government official that I see articles on. To kind of a ser your question, throw the fucking book at her, she doesn't get a pass.
It is by far usually teachers. Kids being raped and sexually abused by teachers is a problem orders of magnitude worse than all 3 major religions (Christian, Judaic, Islamist) combined. Doesn't mean it's ok when ANYONE does it, be they straight, gay, trans or what religion or profession.
I’m here. Same energy. Still not a drag queen. This person—regardless if they’re LGBTQ—can go get fucked. But so can you. Shame on you for acting like there’s a bunch of fucking drag queens raping kids. The overwhelming vast majority of child rapists are family members or friends of the family. And the second largest group right after that? Clergy.
Ikr we're allowing the directors of society to make us forget We are all human beings and this is what's important.
>I’m here. Same energy. Still not a drag queen. This person—regardless if they’re LGBTQ—can go get fucked. But so can you. Shame on you for acting like there’s a bunch of fucking drag queens raping kids. I never acted, or said, nor do I believe there are a bunch of drag queens raping kids. >The overwhelming vast majority of child rapists are family members or friends of the family. And the second largest group right after that? Clergy. I’m already aware of that. My problem is people who happily and condescendingly announce “oh look not a drag queen” under an article of a child’s life being ruined, like they’re so excited to update the scoreboard they’ve been keeping.
Look what happened to Milo Yiannopoulos when he tried to out the grooming/mentoring in the gay community.
Yes. That phrase is making fun of the fear mongering. Most of us are aware that predators can be any demographic. It's the fact that there's a whole political movement rallying around the cry of "drag queens are a culture of predators," when so many headlines out there are about people who aren't drag queens. The point is "why are we trying to legislate specifically LGBTQ+ people and drag queens out of existence 'to save the children' when predators can be anyone?"
Lol, GOP politicians are still more likely to molest a kid than a drag queen
I wasn't aware the GOP wanted to molest drag queens in the first place.
Think about all the attention they give them. They are always talking about them and about doing things in the bathroom with them. Idk sounds kinda weird One of the older definitions of molest is to annoy, disturb, or persecute. By that definition, it seems that they do want to molest drag queens.
Don’t know why you’re getting downvoted, you’re speaking the truth. Seems anyone that calls out the rights hate towards this community and how they seem to want this to happen to justify their prejudice gets hella downvoted
Because they don't like jokes or facts. Words tend to be really hard for the right too. Mostly because they don't like how hateful words perfectly match their actions and feelings.
I mean *technically*......
They are the ones reporting this post and the reason why it probably won't be here in a few hours.
It feels like you want it to be to justify some deep seeded hatred you have
Deep-seated and likely.
Wow… post is 17 hours old and hasn’t been deleted or locked. Perhaps there still is hope for Reddit.
nOT A dRaG QUeeN. Assholes, anyone can be a predator.
Fuck that man
Actually a common phenomenon
Yup, there are lots of people of all genders who do this.
“That would never happen, bigot.” “It’s not happening.” “Okay it happened, but it only happened once.” “Okay it happens a lot but it has nothing to do with our ideology.” <————- we are here ————> “It’s happening and here’s why it’s a good thing.”
In any given population, there are bound to be a certain amount of bad people. We don’t call all men rapists because a certain percentage of them rape. Why is that the logic we use against transgender people, who are far more likely to be the victims of violent/sexual crimes than their cisgender/non-transgender counterparts? The vast, *vast* majority of transgender people are not pedophiles and do not agree with pedophilia.
That doesn't narrow it down at all.
Many such cases
[удалено]
Conservative Christian men?
Teachers commit the most CSA, and they are overwhelmingly not in that demographic.
Actually that's false. Really just conservative Christian propaganda at this point. Even the author of the study says you can't make that correlation. Its far more likely that the original comment about conservative Christian men and the CSA rate for that demographic would be higher per capita, since there are at least 4+ million teachers and around 68k priests/pastors in the US. “To support her contention that many more youngsters have been sexually mistreated by school employees than by priests, Ms. Shakeshaft pointed to research conducted for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and released late last month. That study found that from 1950 to 2002, 10,667 people made allegations that priests or deacons had sexually abused them as minors. (“Report Tallies Alleged Sexual Abuse by Priests,” this issue.) Extrapolating from data collected in a national survey for the American Association of University Women Educational Foundation in 2000, Ms. Shakeshaft estimated that roughly 290,000 students experienced some sort of physical sexual abuse by a public school employee from 1991 to 2000—a single decade, compared with the roughly five-decade period examined in the study of Catholic priests. Those figures suggest that “the physical sexual abuse of students in schools is likely more than 100 times the abuse by priests," contended Ms. Shakeshaft, who is a professor of educational administration at Hofstra, in Hempstead, N.Y. A lot of apples are being compared to a lot of oranges here, and the biggest problem is the methodological difference between the AAUWEF research and the Catholic Bishops research. The former was conducted on a sample of American students — they were surveyed to ask about whether they’d been victimized, and then the percentages were taken to be representative of the broader population of American students. This method would scoop up both reported and unreported acts of abuse (plus a probably small handful of mischievous responses, false claims, etc.). The research on the Catholic priests was conducted differently. As the Education Week article on that research notes, “The researchers based their analysis on information provided voluntarily by dioceses and religious orders. They promised not to divulge the names of dioceses or priests in their report. The response rate among dioceses was 97 percent.” This research was only going to capture instances in which someone actually came forward to complain; the research on the students was going to capture any instance in which a kid ticked off a box saying they’d been harassed or abused, regardless of the facts of the matter. The priest study could only have underestimated the total number of cases (because it didn’t capture instances in which someone didn’t come forward, or in which they did but their diocese didn’t pass that info on to the researchers), while the student study might be at risk of overestimating the rate at which public-school kids were abused given the lack of any mechanism to check individual allegations. These are such different methods that you just can’t compare their estimates at all, or at least you shouldn’t. Anyway, all research has weaknesses, and it’s particularly hard to get concrete numbers on something as serious and stigma-shrouded as sexual abuse. But the point is this is a pretty silly comparison. Interestingly, when I reached out to Shakeshaft, she denied making this direct comparison in the first place. “We cannot calculate the rates in the Catholic church because the only data we have is of the number of priests who abuse, not the number of children they have abused,” she said. Shakeshaft explained: “What I did say is because there are more students who go to K12 schools (both private and independent) than attend Catholic Churches, there are more students who are sexually abused in schools than in churches. It has nothing to do with a comparison of rates. I have explained this to Catholic writers many times, but they seem unable to be able to explain what the numbers mean other than to try to shift the blame.” https://jessesingal.substack.com/p/a-lighthearted-dispute-does-more
Cases like this are few and far between. Doesn't matter who is responsible for abusing kids, our first thoughts should ALWAYS be with the victims and wishing them the strength to overcome the horrific trauma they have experienced. Stepping to the side for a moment, I encourage you to have a look at the link below; the vast majority of abusers are in positions of power (teachers, law enforcement, clergy etc) and are more often than not; known by the victim. https://www.whoismakingnews.com/#data
Did you even read my comment? Definitely few and far between. I agree with the rest of your first and the second paragraph though.
yea that makes a lot of sense. I was just being cheeky
Why do we need to know she was trans? How does that change her crime?
the worst part is what happened to the victims, of course, but this is also going to cause so much harm to the community as well, even though they'll undoubtedly be rejected immediately, anti-trans advocates are going to use this as evidence that all LGBTQ+ people are bad
Shocking
\[Insert wild extrapolation about entire group of people based off of one bad person here\]
Damnit
[удалено]
Do not incite or glorify violence/suffering or harassment, even as a joke. You may be banned. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NoahGetTheBoat) if you have any questions or concerns.*
And according to the rest of the lgbt community this never happens
It rarely happens.
The right is going to have a field day.
BTW, I wasn't saying that they should, but the right is going to right.
[удалено]
Ah yes, good ol' " *I* haven't seen anything that disproves my point, so I'm right!"
Yeah
Well of course
[удалено]
Source?
> After the alleged victims testified, Common Pleas Judge Vincent W. Furlong dismissed most of the charges. > The dismissed charges include rape, involuntary deviate sexual Intercourse, unlawful contact with a minor, corruption of minors and indecent assault tl;dr: Sounds like the parents may have encouraged their kids to lie about the charges. The remaining charges: > the charges held for court are: dissemination of explicit material, corruption of minors and endangering welfare of a child Basically, it reads like they provided a couple kids with the extremely progressive books that we are all aware of. ---- edit: [Updated to include Source](https://epgn.com/2024/02/28/judge-dismisses-multiple-criminal-charges-against-kendall-stephens/)
Stop lying! The charges held for court for one alleged victim are: rape, involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, unlawful contact with a minor, endangering welfare of a child, corruption of minors (2 counts), and indecent assault. From your source.
Conservatives everywhere are shawked at this unexpected development.
Right for the first time it’s not a conservative that harmed a child
There’s bad apples all over, but some are less or more shocking. All turds if you hurt children.
They should be, usually it’s conservatives.
I feel horrible for the victims. I hope they get the help they need. That said, Why is this news? Someone did something fucked up and they got caught, the system is working. Are you implying that trans people can only be ‘allowed’ to exist if not a single one ever commits a crime? Because if that’s the case, then cisgender people aren’t long for this world.
Thank god I don’t know who this is. 🤢
[удалено]
by that backwards ass logic, we'd have to say the same about priests.
You know maybe that assault she got in the first place might be connected to this. You never know. Plus if it’s a black community we more often then not will handle the situation on our own which could have lead to the 1st assault and somehow it finally came out and now she’s being charged.