Sexual Rights at Stanford has changed. Buyers Beware!
By Dr. Phil Taverna
Sex as the Stanford story goes: Has really been blown out of proportion. It was a white male so lets throw the book at him. And the lenient foolish judge was a white male as well lets kick him off the bench.
Men especially white men beware... There are different rules and attitudes toward males and sex. Look at Bill Cosby. Well maybe not. But in Clintons time... It was ok. It wasnt rape. It wasnt sexual harassment... It was between Bill and Hillary! What?
So there are new rules and new precautions. Well if this was a black man it would have made it to the liberal media and according to the libs he would have gotten life in prison.
So I have some advice for the young folks and even the Kobe Bryants out there
. You need to take precautions when you mix sex with drugs and or alcohol. New rules apply.
Lets see if we can review some of the facts. First off this is Stanford and it should not happen. Or at least get reported. The girl or the victim who was a graduate student had 4 shots of whiskey before she went to the frat party. To horn dog haven that would be a sign that she wanted some action. But under the new rules she has to be able to give consent. And any lawyer and MD or plain old nut job would tell you that after 4 shots she would be incapable of giving consent. Really? I am sure that there are tons of women out there who would beg to differ... Hick up!
And this genius from Stanford has a few more drinks at the frat party. And by all accounts she was still standing. She made some kind of written comment that the alcohol seemed to effect her more then when she was in high school. What? Maybe she was 21 in high school.
The horn dog seemed to be a touchy feely guy and he also had a bunch of drinks. Now he was an athlete and probably could handle his booze. Wink Wink.
So why would a university allow such parties. And why would people attend these parties just to hook up?
The story gets interesting. The girl ends up on the ground by the dumpster. And she claims she remembers nothing until she sobers up in the hospital. But she made phone calls during this time period. And she doesnt remember. So the question really becomes did she give consent to the swimmer. Of course the legal minds who say was she capable of giving consent. But did the horn dog think she had given consent. Or did he just trip over her while she was laying on the ground in the pine needles next to the dumpster.
Just because these folks attended Stanford doesnt mean they were very bright. So he claims he only used his finger. But the guys that chased him about 25 yards and tackled him claimed he was gyrating on top of her and she was not moving. Which really doesnt match up with the story.
The problem with our legal system is that the defendant does not have to testify. And in this case the girl really didnt know anything to testify about. She couldnt testify that she gave consent and could not testify that she did not give consent. That is why lie detectors should be perfected and used and relied upon for verdicts and sentencing. Today folks like Obama and Hillary can lie as easily as breathing. And they are not alone.
There is more to the story. After the 2 good Samaritans ran after him and tackled him the police were called and in the report they testified that his groin area was disheveled and he was still excited. Do you really believe that. Was the horn dog on ecstasy?
So when you see all this it may be easy to find the dog guilty but what do you sentence him for and for how long? This guy has to register as a sex offender and his swimming career may be over. How much time is enough? What if he is innocent?
His dad was kind enough to write a letter to the judge and stated 20 minutes of poor judgment should not be used to ruin a young mans life? And of course the liberals thought this had an affect on the judge.
My suggestion for all you horn dogs that drink and do non-violent drugs and engage in sex have a written statement signed by the woman. This goes for guys like Kobe. In his case they can afford to have a lawyer on the spot to take a sworn statement before the engagement.
And again this all is the fault of the liberals. They wanted to teach sex to everyone. Sex was ok. If they could they would teach it to children in kindergarten. They teach diversity climate change and all that liberal unsupported nonsense.
Here is one I found:
LGBTTIQQ2SA sit down and explain that to the children. But in the end did they teach the children about love making or just sex. Granted some of the female teachers seem to be into hands on teaching but making love is an art sex in not.
With all these numbers of rape is it rape because they agreed to make love but not just to sex. This could lead to an increase in the gay and lesbian populations. And maybe the liberals should have stayed out of the bedroom after all.
Put yourself in the judges shoes. The horn dog only wanted sex. The female who knows what she wanted and what she received? In her letter to the judge there was no pain. She never said this would effect her for the rest of her life. She just wanted to have the horn dog punished for something she never remembered or ever experienced. If he gave her the date rape drug if he gave her the alcohol maybe. But who in their right mind would take 6 shots of whiskey in one night and think she would be all right. If she stayed home fine but she didnt. This does not exonerate the horn dog if the victim was out cold when he found her. But what if she wasnt.
So the judge needs to look at this. The libs and lawyers thought they had the winning case that was to change rape on all campuses all through out the land. This nonsense has been going on for decades.
It is time the men wise up and get written permission to engage. Women seem to forget later what they consented to in the first place. And once the horn dogs are fired up who knows what they are hearing and thinking. Prosecutors can paint any picture they want. Most exaggerated and untrue. It is the judge that has to make the final call. And a wise man would never allow himself to be placed in that position without written consent.
There are colleges where the rape claims are non-existent. But the libs dont believe them. There must be rapes. If they think it it must be true.
You just need to define rape as a liberal would. In the end the woman can rescind the consent if it is oral after the performance. Harder to prove if written. Are you agreeing to sex or making love. If you dont know the difference maybe you should leave the women alone.
Eventually the libs will come up with the notion was the consenter sane enough to give consent. You better have the lawyer and Psychiatrist on site! That could be a mood killer. Maybe we should bring back marriage. It was simple then. This free sex is getting expensive!
YourDemocracyChange.Com
