In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

FNTT Season 5: the Just Say No round

Jill

Feministe’s Next Top Troll continues, this time with a pair of anti-teen-sex crusaders. Read and vote below the fold.

And remember that you can vote in the other Top Troll rounds by clicking on the “Feministe’s Next Top Troll” category.

Jason, from Condom liberation!:

I think it’s great that they lock up their condoms. It’s they same reason they lock up cigarettes and card for alcohol, because it’s illegal for minors. It’s illegal for minors to engage in sex, and CVS is doing the right thing by not allowing just anyone to buy them. Ouch…probably hurts don’t it! I’m sure your liberal hearts are just bleeding inside right now!

s@bac.com, from Buh-bye, abstinence-only education:

So why should abstinence-only funds be completely eliminated. Not all parents would want their daughters to be screwed by liberals and then get an abortion….

Posted in Uncategorized

38 thoughts on FNTT Season 5: the Just Say No round

  1. s@bac wins this for implying that there are some parents out there who actively want their daughters to be screwed by liberals and undergo abortions. The underlying assumption that the role of abstinence is to “protect” daughters, no mention of sons, is an added bonus.

  2. Ahahaha where in the world did the first one get the idea that (consensual) sex between two minors is illegal?

  4. I voted for Jason because the idea that teenage sex is illegal is both extremely prevalent and extremely wrong.

  6. It was tough, but I voted for Jason because of the ignorance of thinking it’s illegal for minors to buy condoms, and the obvious pride in what he thought was a “GOTCHA” moment.

  7. As the future parent of a daughter (currently overdue with my first), I have to say that I want her to eventually get screwed by liberals 🙂

  8. This was the hardest one yet for me. But Tiny Danza articulated exactly why I put s@bac over the top.

  9. Jason for his iteresting view of the law. And he makes me want to refute his argument, but at the sime time it is an argument that ishard to refute ecause it is completel basedon a lie and has n alternate reality a its underlying premise. This is no ordinary troll, thisperson knows their stuff. Though I wonder, is this Jason “the Taliban have the right idea” from the logic round? If so they’ve apparently calmed the f— down (I’d reallylike to know b.c I see a theme developng with this one re: body autonomy ,unless you feel it would bias voting)

  11. Oh where to begin…

    Jason, hands down, for:

    A.) Believing underage sex and condoms to be illegal in the first place.

    B.) Being wanky enough to believe that teens will think twice about having sex if condoms are locked up.

    C.) Moral high ground FAIL by advocating that condoms be considered a controlled substance thereby guaranteeing an increase in virtually every sexually related “moral failing” conservatives rail against: unwanted pregnancies, abortions, and STDs, not only for teenagers but for ANYONE who would consider buying condoms not worth the hassle under those circumstances.

    Unless he meant that only CVS should lock up their condoms and not any other merchant.

    Of course he did.

  12. Jason’s got it for me, with his complete FAIL at understanding laws regarding underage sex. Not to mention, even if sex completely WERE illegal for minors, that doesn’t automatically mean condom purchase is illegal. Logic fail ftw.

  16. Jason is too easy. He’s going out of his way to push “liberal” buttons — the bleeding heart reference is awfully cliched. I prefer a more subtle approach…. if you consider “screwed by liberals” subtle. (It’s a more entertaining visual, certainly, than bleeding hearts).

  17. Tough choice. I chose s@bac for implying that the girls who get preggers and then get abortions do so because their liberal parents want them to.

  20. Actually, in California, it is illegal for minors to have sex. Either or both can be charged with (misdemeanor, unless there is a sufficient age gap) statutory rape. Yes, there is an exception for marriage, but it is a long story.

    But still, you can card people without locking up condoms, and I don’t know that the illegality of underage sex translates into some kind of possessory offense re: condoms. (What if you just want to, um, make balloon animals out of them?)

  22. To be fair to Jason, there are places that sex between consenting minors IS illegal. Though he did get my vote.

  24. But wasn’t it recently in Kansas (or was that Nebraska?) that a 14 year old could get married with parental permission?

  25. Funny, my comment never made it. Yeah, sex between consenting minors is illegal in CA, one or both can be charged with statutory rape (misdemeanor if same age, felony if the gap is significant enough.) But I don’t think that makes carrying condoms a possessory offense.

  26. But wasn’t it recently in Kansas (or was that Nebraska?) that a 14 year old could get married with parental permission?

    Thats different. If they’re married clearly they’re only having sex for the purposes of procreation. Probably in the missionary position in the dark. As god intended. Or something….

  27. Jason- because he believes that teenage sex is illegal AND morally wrong..and that locking up condoms in some CVS stores might prevent teens from having said “illegal” relations.

  28. I’m ignorant about US laws, being a UK resident, but Jason didn’t really do it for me. s@bac, on the other hand, has given me a fantasy whereby only liberals are having sexytimes and procreating, so s@bac gets my vote.

  29. I like s@bac’s implication that they are of the group that wants their daughters to screw liberals and then not get abortions. Moar libral spawn!

  31. I looked up the consent laws for all US states. States where the age of consent is 18 and which have strict restrictions (no leeway for similarly-aged partners) are:

    Arizona
    California
    Idaho
    North Dakota
    Wisconsin

    Most states are 16. A few are 17. Most–even those that are 18 and which I didn’t list–have exceptions for peers. So if you’re 15 and have sex with a 16-year-old, in most states that is NOT illegal. Sorry, Jason!

    Just thought I would clear that up. I’m from Kansas, so I know the age of consent is 16 there and seeing people just suggest in that “lol kansas is so backwards” way that it’s, I dunno, 25 or something kind of ticked me off.

  33. Actually, Jason could be partially right. When I was a teenager they put us through a class on “all the laws that affect teenagers” and mentioned that in Virginia (as of the late ’90s early ’00s), it *is* illegal to have sex. Don’t let that “Virginia is for Lovers” slogan fool you, it’s a $250 fine without a marriage license. The cop said they’d even enforced it once — some girl’s mother caught her and her boyfriend, and the cops refused to prosecute rape because the girl was adamant about it being consensual. So the mom looked them up and made the cops charge BOTH kids with fornication.

    Still, it’s not exactly high on the prosecution list, and I had to vote for Jason for thinking no condoms were actually a deterrent for teenage sexoring.

  34. um…I voted for Jason.

    About the condom lock-up, exactly why did they have them locked up? the post quoted Advocates for Youth who wanted the condoms to be out with the other merchandise, but said nothing about sex between young people being the reason the condoms were locked up in the first place. i remember when i read it originally thinking that perhaps they were scared the condoms would be pocketed?

  36. Jason is a fool for thinking that locking up condoms is going to stop or even cut back on the amount of teens that have sex. And he apparently thinks it works for cigarettes and alcohol, too. Which it doesn’t, as is plainly obvious. (Or was it a dream that I smoked like a chimney and drank myself into a stupor every night during the summer I was seventeen?). You might not be able to smoke or get alcohol if you don’t have a hook-up, but since teen sex has been going on for thousands and thousands of years… I’m gonna go ahead and say that probably locking up condoms is not going to stop (and hasn’t been stopping) anything.

    But I voted for s@bac, because they apparently believe that only liberals have sex and get abortions. This lack of logic is perhaps more foolish.

  37. while s@bac gets points for being sexist (because it’s only important for daughters to be abstinent) and hating liberals, Jason takes it for hating liberals while also being incredibly stupid, thus hurting his cause

  38. I had to vote for s@bac. Is the first sentence a statement or a question? Is it rhetorical? Is this a genuine attempt to engage in debate? The improper use of punctuation has confused me, which I can only imagine was the poster’s diabolical goal. Also, the suspense one feels due to the ellipses makes this a page-turner troll. I’m quite curious about the rest of the thought.

Comments are currently closed.