Why Do So Many #FreeKate Fanatics Remind Me of a Jethro Tull Song?

Posted on Comments

You probably thought the title reference was to “Aqualung” (“watching as the frilly panties run“) but it was actually the opening line of “Locomotive Breath” that I had in mind: “In the shuffling madness …”

One cannot help notice the vibrations of desperate hysteria emanating from some of those whose intense emotional investment in the case of accused sex offender Kaitlyn Hunt was never entirely rational and which has become increasingly frantic in the weeks since the steady accumulation of facts began undermining mainstream support for the “Free Kate” cause. Even if these people are not all degenerate perverts enthused by a twisted hope of obliterating age-of-consent laws, the erratic vehemence of their rhetoric suggests the “shuffling madness” of the “all-time loser” hurtling “headlong to his death.”

Among the more deranged devotees of Saint Kate of the Blessed Finger is “Rachel Carson” (@rachiez3) the quotation marks around the name necessitated by the fact that it is often impossible to know whether Twitter trolls like this are actually sockpuppets.

Excuse me for losing count of exactly how many eruptions from this troll I ignored before responding, but my response seems to have inspired a lucid moment for the voices inside Rachel’s head:

Let’s ignore the ridiculous assertion that it is “cyberstalking” to report on a high-profile campaign that has sought to make an accused sex offender a cause célèbre of the gay-rights movement. Instead, let’s talk about Rachel’s claim that current Florida law, which makes it a felony for anyone 18 or older to have sex with anyone 15 or younger, is wrong, and that it would be a beneficial reform to change the law as she says.

Once a person reached their 14th birthday, they would be sexual “fair game” for anyone who was no more than 48 months older. The specificity of Rachel’s proposal, of course, most likely reflects a knowledge that Kaitlyn Hunt (born in August 1994) was 44 months older than her 14-year-old partner (born in April 1998). And so the proposal is to reform the law in just such a way as to legalize the acts for which Kaitlyn is being prosecuted. Convenient, eh?

What this would in effect mean, however, is that parents would have no legal authority for exercising restraint on their child’s sexual behavior once the child turned 14 — that is, as long as the teen’s partners weren’t more than 48 months older. Is that OK?

There are some states where the statutory age is 14 and probably most teenagers in those states don’t run rampant with orgies of promiscuity to celebrate their 14th birthdays. Perhaps there is some research that could give guidance on what (if any) influence on teenage sexual behavior is accomplished by differences in age-of-consent schemes. But that would be utterly irrelevant to the case at hand, wouldn’t it?

Whether Florida’s laws conform to some particular ideal is not at issue in the Kaitlyn Hunt case. Florida’s law regarding the age of consent has not been changed very recently. This is not a new and untested law, but one already well established, under which other offenders have been successfully prosecuted for acts no worse than those of which Kaitlyn Hunt is accused. In fact, prosecutors were willing to disregard what would appear to be Kate’s admission that she had violated this law, and instead have her plead guilty to a less offense in a deal that would have permitted her to avoid serving any time in prison.

The entire public controversy that the Hunt family and their supporters deliberately created — the fundamental cause of the “Free Kate” crusade — was her unwillingness to accept the offered plea bargain, and the insistence that prosecutors should treat her (admitted) felony as only a misdemeanor. This raises the question: “Why didn’t the prosecutors offer a misdemeanor plea?”

“Aggravating Circumstances,” as I pointed out May 25, and I’m not going to repeat that argument here. You can debate the merits  of the law or the wisdom of the prosecutors until the cows come home, for all I care. If officials in Indian River County say that sex in a school toilet stall or a night of playing Spin the Dildo with a 14-year-old runaway should be treated as a felony, I’m willing to defer to their judgment — and I expect most responsible adults would, too.

(If any publisher wants me to write a book called 101 Freaky Fun Ideas You Shouldn’t Try in Indian River County, drop me an e-mail.)

Whether or not Florida’s laws are ideal is irrelevant to the question of whether they should be enforced. Personally, I don’t think it should be considered a “crime” to drive 110 mph on I-4 with an open can of beer between your knees, but the cops in Florida are such hateful bigots about these things that I usually try to avoid it. Also, when visiting Florida beaches, I always insist that females in bikinis provide a photo identification proving they are at least 18 years old before I’ll even look at their impressively pendulous breasts. But I digress . . .

My point is that these “Free Kate” people are crazy.

Never in my memory has anyone tried to make a civil-rights hero out of someone who admits diddling a 14-year-old, a precedent that might inspire rather amusing new arguments by any teenage boy who should in the future find that his ninth-grade girlfriend is reluctant to let him get past second base. (“Stop oppressing me, Heather! This is like Selma, and your panties are the Edmund Pettus Bridge!“)

The absurdity of the Jailbait Rights Movement — which is really what this whole “Free Kate” thing boils down to — could be laughed off as a joke were it not taken so seriously by Kaitlyn Hunt’s supporters that they are willing to denounce as homophobic bigots anyone who dares to criticize their arguments. Their grim humorlessness suggests a fanatical determination to overturn any law that stands between them and complete sexual anarchy, and their depraved cause has attracted a flock of gibbering lunatics to their disgraceful banner.

There’s such a backlog of screen-caps showing the craziness emanating from the inner circles of the “Free Kate” crusade, I’ll probably never catch up. Until this case is resolved one way or another, I expect this non-stop carnival of madness to continue. Now cue the theme song . . .

;

 




 


63 comments

  3. The whole #freekate thing, dunno, they’re all fkng lunatics and I really don’t give them much thought anymore…but Tull on the other hand.

    While jamming to Aqualung I accidentally stepped on the cat…so the wife is due home any minute now and I have a fkng dead cat on my hands, you bastard!

    God I love Tull.

  4. Actually, even lowering the age of consent does not let the parents of the allegedly consenting child off the hook. In my jurisdiction, they remain liable for that child’s care and welfare until age 18 and have the right to control their child’s behavior until then. If the child refuses to submit to parental authority, they can be placed in a juvenile facility as a delinquent. Of course, if the child gets pregnant or impregnates another, it is the parents who foot the bill. Somehow, I don’t think the abusers wish to get those laws changed, because, you know H8!!!!!!!

  7. So, a 48 month age gap ought to be OK, but what about 49 months? You can have 18 and 14 be as much as 59 months apart.

  8. It would be funny if these nut jobs weren’t so serious about this!!!! Wait, they are fun to laugh at….. Anyone who can just flat out ignore the facts and take for facts things that one person or family is saying are truly off their rocker. Maybe a 12 yo can have sex with someone who is 12 months older? Wow.

  13. Sort of off topic:

    http://tinyurl.com/nnml85a

    Note this sentence: “One surprise is that they kept moving from state to state, to avoid social services paying them a visit, and that Florida is not among these states.”
    You’re welcome.

  17. “What this would in effect mean, however, is that parents would have no legal authority for exercising restraint on their child’s sexual behavior once the child turned 14 — that is, as long as the teen’s partners weren’t more than 48 months older. Is that OK?”

    If you’re a pedo, chickenhawk or general Western Civ-hating liberal, yeah, it’s not only okay but necessary. It’s one more vital step toward their Utopia of sex on demand with anyone at any time, under penalty of law (which, by the way, if legalized, everyone eventually MUST advocate and celebrate, just as we’re all about to be forced to do with sodomites).

  21. I don’t know. “Sitting on the park bench / Eyeing little girls with bad intent” fits both #FreeKate and that Gary dude pretty well.

  23. School nutritionist, 43, ‘plied boy, 13, with alcohol before she had sex with him on multiple occasions’
    This is an epidemic.

Comments are closed.