do NOT insert a smiley face here

On the bus the other night on my way home from work, I was sitting by a young girl who was obviously coming home from school or the babysitter's, along with her mother. Her mother was in the seat next to her and a guy was standing in front of her (rush hour bus = packed). For almost the entire ride, from when the guy got on and when I got off, he stared at the little girl. Now and then, he'd have to move aside for someone getting off the bus or the crazy-assed bus driver who went entirely too fast for having a full bus and every time, the guy's gut (he was a bigger guy with a belly) seemed to go directly in the little girl's direction. Every now and then, she kind of wriggled in her seat a bit or cozied up to her mom. That's when he smiled the most.

It was fucking creepy. I came super close to saying, "hey asshat, do you think maybe you could not stare at this 6- or 7-year-old girl for the entire fucking bus ride?" but I didn't because I had no idea what stop he was getting off at and if it was mine...not a desireable situation.

So when I got off the bus, I very obviously must have looked disusted because two additional asshats were walking toward me and stopped and asked, "damn baby, why you look so pissed? Who you pissed off at?"

To which I replied, "fuck off" and went along my merry way. I think the next time, I'm going to say something along the lines of, "the next time I find out my mother just died, I'll slap a smile on my face for ya!" or "just found out I have HIV. Here's my cheery smile...hope it makes your day!"

I don't generally smile when I'm walking around. I generally look pretty much like a bitch. Most of the time, it's not because I'm in a particularly pissed off mood or because I'm constantly a bitch, it's just who I am. When I want to smile, I smile. But my default face isn't "everything's coming up roses."

Which is apparently a good thing because my smile may just be interpreted as provocative and cause someone to beat me to death with a fire extinguisher.

I don't care if this woman had a vagina or an obvious-to-the-world dong. Or two obvious-to-the-world dongs.

I hope this dude's ass rots in jail.

if only, if only, if only

Killer taped boy's torture, prosecutor says

The crime was meticulously planned, the killer choreographing every step from his surveillance of the doomed family to the videotaped torture of one of his youngest victims. Yet something as simple as a locked back door, or fiercer family dogs, might have turned Joseph Edward Duncan III away.

It's good to know victim blaming is alive and well with good ol' fashion brutal slayings and not just when talking about raping drunken sluts.

Later on in the article...

"He made a decision: 'If that back door is locked, I'm going to abort,"' Moss said Duncan later told police.

Oh, Mr. Duncan, don't toy with me. If you think anyone is actually going to believe something as simple as a locked door was going to prevent your sociopathic ass from killing this family, you're even more deranged that your crazy-assed photo with this news piece would lead us to believe.

I do believe there are things one can do to try and prevent nasty, horrible things from happening to them. When I come home late at night, I take my headphones off, I have my keys in hand, I try and be aware of everything around me. But you know what? Even if I was singing and skipping along to my tunes while talking on my cell phone and painting my nails, it still wouldn't mean it's acceptable for someone to attack me. And it still wouldn't mean it's my fault. Does the article say, "silly family, it's your fault you're all dead!"? Of course not. But how many people really think friends and family members of these poor people aren't already thinking, "my god, what could I have done? How could we have stopped it?" I think for most, it's a very basic response to try and think of what could have gone differently. If only this...if only that...

But the bottom line is that nothing this family did directly led to this whackjob killing them. The fact that he's a whackjob is what did it. They didn't put a sign on their door saying "how's about a killing spree?" and I find it seriously difficult to believe anything they could have done would have saved their lives if this guy was feeling the urge to "terrorize the Groene family, all because he wanted to "live out his fantasy" and exact revenge on society for perceived wrongs."

Can we pretty please stop suggesting as much?

oh, delightful douchebaggery...

Wherever do I start?

Opponents of abstinence-based education reject shame as a value. When it comes to teen sex, their strategy is to immediately declare defeat and insist that kids are going to have sex no matter what.
I reject shame as a value simply because it's pointless. Anyone get picked on as a kid? Called a sissy boy? Called a fattie? Called a dirtball because Mommy or Daddy didn't have a job and couldn't buy you the latest clothes the kids were wearing? Did it feel good? No. It's cruel. And it speaks volumes about the person dishing out the shame and not a thing about the person receiving it. I also am an opponent of abstinence-based education, not only because I believe kids are gonna have sex no matter what but I don't believe instilling fear into kids is the right way to about suggesting to them it may not be in their best interest to be having sex at a young age. Sure, we should be sure to explain what kind of emotions can often come along with sex but we shouldn't be telling them it's the absolute worst thing you can do in life. Human sexuality isn't a war that someone is either winning or losing. It's sexuality. Nobody's going to "conquer" it and nobody should be fighting to do so. Sex feels good. And it's meant to feel good. And what happens when these girls grow up? They're being shamed sex as teenagers and when they hit adulthood, they'll be expected to be wanton sex goddesses capable of blowing their partner's mind. Riddle me that one.

When the same girl shows up at the school clinic for five pregnancy tests in one month, shouldn't’t somebody be mocking her for it?
Seriously? So, the next time Peter Pedophile gets arrested for fondling little Timmy, how about we just point and laugh? That'll keep him from doing it again, right? It's like the death penalty. No murderer sits at home thinking, "wow, I could fry for this, I guess I'll just stay in and watch American Idol." How about someone actually sits down with that girl who showed up at the clinic for pregnancy tests and talks to her about sex and the consequences and gives her the resources she needs to make sure she's not in for a 6th test. If she's been in 5 times, it's pretty clear that she's fucking. Repeatedly. Teach her what she needs to know in order to take care of herself. And while we're doing that, how about we have the same discussion with the boy who may have knocked the girl up? Because last time I checked, it takes at least two people to have sex and both ought to be held accountable.

But I’ll take one Beverly Farms, belly-rubbing dance routine over a dozen sex-ed bureaucrats any day. It’s probably more effective, and definitely more fun to watch.
It's more entertaining to you because you're a fucking tool who thinks watching people mock others actually accomplishes something other than demonstrating the mocker's douchebagginess.

Dearest Writer of This Article: Grade school is over. Welcome to adulthood. Join us, won't you?

Most of the time, I love words

Other times...not so much.

Let's take a look at this lovely CNN article today:
Victim or vixen? Contrasting views at R. Kelly trial.

#1: Let's start by remembering that in almost every article you read regarding this trial, at some point they say something along the lines of, "on the tape, Kelly is having sex with a girl as young as 13" or "Kelly's sex with a 13-year-old." Which is erroneous right there. You can call it whatever you'd like to call it, CNN, but a grown man doesn't have sex with a 13-year-old girl, he rapes her. He may not be dragging her into the bushes or beating her face in and he may not be a stranger who pulled her into an unsuspecting van off the street. But he's not having sex with her. He's raping her.

#2: Now, let's look at the definitions of vixen, since CNN seems to think vixen / victim is an "either / or" situation.

A. Vixen: a female fox
Okay, irrelevant since beasiality is an entirely different topic. Although, still, I'd like to point out that once again, here's an oh-so-handy comparison between women and a sly, sneaky animal who's out to trick you. 'Cause really, that's what all of us with tits are tryin' to do.

B. Vixen: an ill-tempered (argumentative, belligerant) or quarrelsome woman. A malicious woman with a fierce temper. Shrewish or malicious.
None of those things automatically put a woman into a "non-rapeable" category. I can be ill-tempered. I can be argumentative. I could be malicious, I don't consider myself to be, but I could be.

And you know what? I can still be raped.

And it still wouldn't be my fault. And I still wasn't askin' for it 'cause I had a short skirt or a low-cut top on. And it still didn't happen because I've had sex before and if I've had it once, hell, I'm ready and willing to have it anytime anywhere with anyone. And it still wasn't because I was sneaky and sly enough to snatch myself a guy who just wasn't strong enough to resist my feminine wiles.

It would simply be because despite all of those things, somebody made the choice to rape me.