In my book, Margaret Cho may not be a lesbian, but she does qualify as an honorary gay man. She grew up around them, and definitely has the sensibility down pat.
As far as the rest goes, my brother was falsely accused of molesting his children – what a coincidence! My sister-in-law made the accusation less than 24 hours after the judge granted him temporary custody. The poor guy was literally throwing up blood for months, he was so upset. It took him years to get them back – in fact, it wasn’t until after my darling (then ex-) sister-in-law had them removed by Child Protective Services for neglect.
So I agree – we don’t know a damned thing about what happened here, so let’s wait it out for awhile before jumping to conclusions. That is NOT to say that women don’t sexually abuse children. My (lesbian) girlfriend’s (heterosexual) mother used to sexually abuse her as a child. So, no, you never really know what’s going on.
Re: the above. I meant, my brother got the kids back after they were taken away from my sister-in-law, who was neglecting them. And that there was proof of – reams of complaints from teachers and school officials.
Hear, hear! First of all, who cares if she is lesbian - that’s not the prime issue here. The issue is whether she is guilty of what she’s been accused of, and even that’s still a little vague.
And what’s this business about seeing which other comediennes are lesbians? How’s that relevant?
I hope it’s not true at all, that somehow someone got his facts screwed up. Right now, it certainly appears as if her career is over, or at least on an extended hiatus.
The judicial system in the USA is built on the premise that it is better for ten guilty men to go free than for one innocent man to be convicted unfairly. I believe that this is based on the English judicial system. This, by the way, is why so many rotten souls are set free to wreack havoc on our society. Not that I disagree, but…
I was not referring to the legal system. I was referring to the “court” of public opinon, public belief, people who believe that if you are arrested, you must be guilty. Since this is an attribute of human nature, I doubt that it is any different in Great Britain. People are people all over the world. Sometimes they should be knocked alongside the head with a two-by-four.
I refer you, if necessary, to your British tabloids.
Ours are bad enough, but from what I have read…yours are worse. And can you honestly say that there aren’t people all over England believing whatever they read? NO, some people tend to enjoy being unkind. And in reveling in other peoples misfortunes.
The following information is based on my recall of sexual deviation classes and child development classes taken in college. Any faulty information is due to my faulty memory. That said, as I recall . . .
It depends on what you mean by child molesters. True pedophiles (those who are attracted to young children) are usually heterosexual males, and the sex of child that they prefer is unconnected to the sex of adults they are attracted to. That is, some prefer little boys of a certain age, some prefer little girls of a certain age, but in both cases, if they are attracted to adults at all (many aren’t) they are usually attracted to adults of the opposite sex.
Among those who prey on sexually mature children (say about 13-17) the object of their attraction is going to be consistent with their sexual orientation. Gay men are going to be attracted to teenage boys, and hetero men are going to be attracted to teen girls. And homosexuals are no more likely to molest children than heterosexuals.
In general terms, the answer is that no, sexual orientation is not linked to a predilection for child molestation.
As to the situation in the OP, wait and see. Charges are just charges. Remember McMartin Daycare. Dozens of people’s lives and careers ruined, Ray Buckey spends years in jail, and in the end we find out that no one involved ever had any inappropriate sexual contact with any child in their care. Don’t assume anything without some strong evidence.
This is not evidence gathered from a survey but somewhat personal experience.
I have known/lived near/been acquainted with several child molestors. Sexual orientation has little to do with it. My paternal grandfather, for example, molested his five boys and five girls. My paternal grandmother’s mother molested the same kids. And a few of my father’s siblings molested their sibs. So I’m inclined to say that people molest the available kids.
I think most people have already made up their minds about her guilt or innocence without seeing any evidence or even knowing what crime she is charged with. I’m waiting for more info before I leap to any conclusions. In any case, she is probably ruined professionally (at least).
That’s not quite what I meant. Of course, you probably know that I was referring to the current incarnation of the show, hosted by John O’Hurley with Meshach Taylor and Paula Poundstone as regular panelists.
SANTA MONICA, Calif. (AP)—Comedian Paula Poundstone pleaded innocent Tuesday to child molestation charges and was ordered to stay away from minor children unless their guardians or independent observers are present. Two protective orders issued by the judge apply to the five alleged victims as well as “all other minors.” She was specifically ordered not to threaten, harass or sexually molest children. The 41-year-old standup comic was arraigned on charges of committing a lewd act on a girl under age 14 and endangering two other girls and two boys. If convicted of all charges she could face up to 13 years and four months in prison. The arraignment was originally scheduled for late this month but a judge agreed to reschedule it for Tuesday. “Paula is eager to get the proceedings going so she can have her day in court,” her attorney Steven M. Cron said in a statement. Prosecutors have not released details of the allegations. All documents in the case were sealed. Poundstone has three adopted children and two foster children. All five are in protective custody. She posted $200,000 bail a short time after being arrested on June 27 in Malibu.
—Ummm, so if you DON’T have one of those protective orders against you, it’s OK to “threaten, harass or sexually molest children?”
Nope, he’s pretty much the same as he was on “Designing Women”. Having no cable just means you can’t watch the original on Gameshow Network. The current incarnation is syndicated; I watch it on a local broadcast channel.
*Originally posted by Eve * —Ummm, so if you DON’T have one of those protective orders against you, it’s OK to “threaten, harass or sexually molest children?”
*Originally posted by dantheman * That’s the first thing I thought of, too. It’s like talking to a person accused of murder and saying, "Now don’t go around killing anyone, okay?"
Oh, I know what y’all mean. But I think the protective order is the court’s way of saying, “We have your number. If you do anything that even looks like any of the above, your head will spin all the way back to jail.” Anyone can murder, or molest or whatever; protective orders are served against people who have shown the potential to do so.
But I agree with what my mom said when my sister was talking about getting a restraining order against her ex-husband: “The kind of person you have to get a restraining order against isn’t going to give a shit about a restraining order!”
And I was just explaining that yes, in the US legal system you ARE innocent until proven guilty. It is the court of public opinion I was originally referring to. Thus the reference to the tabloids.
Now, I can figure out how the child endangerment thing could be related to the alcohol issue, but lewd acts? (unless it’s just the ‘she was drunk when it happened’ which doesn’t excuse it)
What is lewd conduct, anyway? One thing that has occured to me as I have ben reading about this case is that things like nudity tabos vary widely from family to family. For instance, I know familys where same-sex members think nothing of undressing down to the skin in front of each other, and families where no one ever comes out of their room barefoot. For example, when I was 3-4 years old I considered it a special treat to take a shower with my big sister, who was 14 or so. There certainly wasn’t anything sexual about it–it was a chance to get attention and spend time with someone I admired very much. I got to use girly shampoo and cute-shaped soaps. I have a friend whose (single) mom was usually striped down to her underware ten minutes after whe got home from work (at least in the summer. It gets powerful hot down here). Once again, nothing at all sexual or weird. Nobody thought anything about it, but I imagene some families would consider that to be shocking behavoir.
Now, Poundstone has always struck me as falling closer to hippie on the hippie/puritian scale, so I wonder if perhaps someone could have blown something like casual nudity (by a lesbian, no less) out of proportion. But I have no idea what the standards for a criminal charge of lewd conduct are.
