Posted on | March 22, 2013 | 21 Comments
From fame to shame: NFL cheerleader (left) in her police mug shot (right)
Elizabeth Leigh Garner, a former Tennessee Titans cheerleader, was indicted last week on charges of aggravated sexual battery and solicitation of a minor for child rape.
The 42 year-old denies the allegations and told police “that she was drunk that evening and that she got the boy confused with a man that was also at the residence.”
According to the Mufreesboro police report, the boy stated “she was asking him if he had ever been with a woman,” and that Garner then touched him “on the outside of his pants” and made “an attempt to take his shorts off” while offering to “perform oral sex on him.”
Well, if being drunk were a valid defense against criminal charges, there would be a lot fewer people in prison, but given the description of her actions in the police report, does anyone buy this over-the-hill NFL cheerleader’s excuse that she was “confused”?
It is routinely expected that lots of guys reading this will react by saying, “Where were these sexually aggressive NFL cheerleaders back when I was an adolescent fantasizing about them?” We are all reminded of that famous scene in Animal House where the Playboy Bunny comes flying through the kid’s window: “Thank you, God!”
Yet there are reasons why sexual fantasies – lust for things that are abnormal or taboo — are best restricted to the realm of fantasy. Sexual taboos serve a social purpose; the indulgence of what advocates of sexual liberation call “transgressive” behavior inevitably leads to trouble.
The seemingly widespread phenomenon we might call the Mary Kay LeTourneau Syndrome, of middle-aged women seeking to validate their sexual attractiveness by seducing boys, should be viewed as disturbing evidence of cultural decadence. Perhaps some “pro-sex” feminists would defend this trend as evidence of advancing equality, but if so, it is the worst sort of equality, namely a descent into utter degeneracy. (And, to do the feminists’ work for them: If men value women primarily for their sexual attractiveness, isn’t the patriarchy to blame if women feel compelled to seek validation in this perverse manner?)
On the fringes of society, we have seen those who argue that pedophilia should be understood as a valid “sexual orientation,” rather than as a dangerous perversion. We have seen such attitudes apparently embraced even among the elite, as in Judith Levine’s Harmful to Minors, the tip of an academic iceberg of pro-pedophile intellectualism, or in the Columbia University professor’s “consensual adult” incestuous affair.
In a society where the Supreme Court has declared that an “emerging awareness” should govern the legal status of sexual behavior, who can say which way this awareness will further emerge? A constitutional right to donkey sex may seem far-fetched today, but there was a time when the idea of ex-NFL cheerleaders stalking boys with offers of oral sex seemed equally far-fetched. Our society has already slid far down the slippery slope, and who knows when we’ll hit rock bottom?