Dads Against the Divorce Industry

DA*DI is devoted to reinstating the societal valuation of Marriage and the traditional, nuclear American Family, with particular emphasis on the essential role of FATHERS.

DA*DI offers contemporary reports and commentary on culture; its aberrations and its heroes.

February 22, 2000

Holding women blameless


Paul Craig Roberts

     The publication of the consciousness-raising novel "Lolita" made us aware of the existence of the prematurely sexual female, the underage seductress. Today, barely pubescent females leer at us from fashion magazines and underwear ads, and Hollywood arouses lust with sexpots who have not yet reached the age of consent.
     Although our culture is cluttered with signs of underage female sexuality, feminists and child advocates, two well-organized interest groups, profess never to have encountered the phenomenon. They have jumped all over Maryland Circuit Judge Durke G. Thompson for saying that the underage female involved was not blameless when he sentenced a 24-year-old male to jail for a sex offense.
     Judge Thompson did not blame the girl and let the male off. He just said that the girl played a part in the sexual encounter that was not appropriate for one her age.
     For all we know, the judge was only bemoaning our Lolita culture in which girls lose their virginity (a quaint old-fashioned phrase) in elementary school.
     But that is not the way programmed and pre-scripted women and child advocates want. They want the judge "investigated" that is, dismissed or forced to resign.
     Maryland state Delegate Sharon Grosfeld, a member of the Women's Caucus, sees the judge's social comment as an "egregious action."
     "We just don't want something informal done," she says. The Montgomery County Democrat says that sentencing Judge Thompson to therapy and sensitivity training is not enough punishment to allow him to stay on the bench.
     The judge's removal is warranted because he did not automatically, unequivocally and unthinkingly assign all the blame to the man.
     The judge is in trouble, because he does not comprehend that assigning any blame at all to a member of a victims group is an unmistakable sign of moral turpitude.
     "If this is the type of treatment we can be subject to, then we need to speak out," declared Colleen Dermody, president of the Maryland chapter of the National Organization of Women. Note the use of the pronoun "we."
     Colleen Dermody is saying that women in general have been wronged by the judge's remarks and that all women have been harmed by the judge's comment about the inappropriate behavior of one individual.
     A person could understand the fuss if NOW had carefully investigated the case, found no evidence to support the judge's opinion of the girl's role, and demanded that he retract the slur on her reputation.
     But this is not what NOW is saying. The feminists are saying that the judge has to go because he assigned a piece of the blame to the female. Feminists rage at Judge Thompson's denial of the automatic victim status of women but utter not a peep of protest over real judicial outrages.
     For example, no feminist voice has been raised against the prejudicial actions of U.S. District Judge Norma Holloway Johnson, who protected President Clinton and the Democratic Party by assigning four criminal cases to FOB (Friends of Bill) judges. The four Clinton judges handed down the desired decisions but were overturned by higher courts.
     Judge Johnson is under investigation for impropriety, and a House investigative committee, which has oversight authority over the courts, has discovered that she also made inappropriate case assignments in other instances that were potentially embarrassing to Mr. Clinton and the Democratic National Committee.
     Neither have feminists uttered a word of support for Sheryl L. Hall, former White House manager of computer operations. Mrs. Hall recently revealed that the Clinton White House hid 100,000 subpoenaed e-mail messages having to do with the Monica Lewinsky affair, the purloined FBI files on Republicans, and various campaign-finance shenanigans.
     In the United States today, the most shrill and politicized groups are victims groups. These groups have no concept of a rule of law. For victims groups, law is a weapon with which to obtain special privileges and to destroy those who are perceived to have made them victims.
     A victims group that will raise no voice against political corruption on the federal bench but will pursue a judge for his social comment has no credibility. The National Organization for Women is a national disgrace.
     
     Paul Craig Roberts is a columnist for The Washington Times and is nationally syndicated.



Back DA*DI's Home

Dads Against the Divorce Industry Dads Against the Divorce Industry