Helmut Seifert, here is your honorary Sicilian flag.
Helmut Seifert, 47, got word that his daughter’s boyfriend was Phillip Genscher, age 57.
Helmut called the police, who said that they couldn’t do anything about it. So Seifert decided that he would do something about it. He got two buddies and a bread knife, went over to Genscher’s house.
“The man was forced to remove his trousers and, fully conscious, he was castrated. The severed testicles were taken away by the perpetrator.”
The man was close to bleeding to death but managed to call police. His life was saved but he remains a eunuch for life. (source)
Yep, he cut the old bastard’s balls off.
I see absolutely nothing wrong with that.
By Email
By RSS Feed
You should note that the girl was 17. Another year, and she’s free to bang whatever senior citizens float her boat though, right?
Yes, overnight, she will develop the ability to make rational decisions. The “age of majority” fairy visits every child at midnight on their 18th birthday and bestows upon them the ability to comprehend a student loan agreement, understand what joining the military really entails, and not to mention being charged as an adult!
Ahh. So you’re saying that demonstrated good judgement should be the criteria for the right to fully self-select sexual partners, not age? And our species would last how long with that guiding principle?
Given that the age of consent in Germany is 14, and given that this is a blatant act of premeditated assault and/or attempted murder, there is plenty wrong with this. Would this be more objectionable to Marc if Phillip was assaulted for being black, or for being Muslim, or for another reason aside from age?
Dear Helmut should have purchased birth control pills for his daughter, not brutally attacked the guy she’s dating. What a sociopathic, domineering father.
He wasn’t assaulted because of his age. He was assaulted because of his age plus fucking the wrong dude’s daughter.
Really? You condone — no wait, CHEER — torture and mutilation now, as well as taking the law into your own hands? That’s fucked.
The guy wasn’t even breaking the law. The age of consent in Germany is 14 (with a few restrictions which you can read up on if you’d like). The girl in question was 17.
I’d really like to see your thinking on this. What is it you object to? The guy’s age? Would it be all right if the boyfriend had been 24? How about 29? 35? 41? At what age do you advocate which punishment? Do tell! Give us the benefit of your legal education and your bar membership!
Would you propose punching a 29-year-old in the face, knee-capping a 35-year-old, scalping a 41-year-old, castrating a 57-year-old, and guillotining a 63-year-old? Is that the right approximate scale here?
Perhaps it has something to do with our dear editor’s recent foray into parenthood? Just a guess… :)
Admit.
IF it were my daughter, yes.
“IF it were my daughter, yes.”
OK. Now it’s the year 2039, your son is 29 years old, and he has a one-night stand with a 17-year-old girl he met in a bar. The next day, her father pays him a visitand batters him to a bloody pulp, breaking his nose, his jaw, and an eye-socket. Still fine with you, then? Is that about the right level of violence, would you say?
How many broken bones and cuts and stab wounds do you reckon your son deserves for such a “transgression” at age 29? How much torture would you say he must undergo at age, say, 34?
Will you buy the man who cut and beat your son to within an inch of his life a beer, and fondly slap him on the shoulder for administering a brand of justice that you unequivocally support?
It is a very weak rhetorical style to take the facts as they stand, draw them to absurdity, and then pose a hypothetical question applied to the absurd.
I’m sorry, you lost me. What’s absurd my question? You advocate severe physical violence against men who make out with women who are more than about ten or twelve years their junior. You answered ‘yes, if it were my daughter’ to my question if you would like to see a 29-year-old punched in the face and a 35-year kneecapped for dating a 17-year old girl.
I’m merely asking if your conviction holds if the person being severely assaulted is your son. There is no way that’s not a fair question.
No, you’re trying to narrow the age gap so that you can attempt to place me on the edge of the rhetorical cliff. I’m not taking the bait.
Return to the actual facts, and I’ll have the discussion with you.
Otherwise, I can twist the facts too. How about if a 70 year old held down your daughter and ass-raped her while stabbing her? Would you castrate him?
Don’t answer. Its irrelevant. The point I’m making is if you want to stretch the football field to 130 yards, then you’re not actually in the game of football anymore.
OK, fine. I note for the record that you answered YES to the question whether a 29-year-old ought to be punched in the face for making out with a 17-year-old girl, and that a 35-year-old deserves to get kneecapped for the same “infraction,” and so up the line. But let’s leave that be for now.
The year in 2067. Your son, 57, following the loss of his wife in an accident, has been lonely and depressed for a few years, and a 17-year-old girl from the neighborhood sets his imagination ablaze. He offers her tea, she hesitantly accepts, a friendship forms, and pretty soon the rumors fly that they’re making the beast with two backs.
Whether the allegation is true or not, the girl’s father, drunk with rage after hearing about it, barges into your son’s home with two friends who hold him down while the father saws off your son’s scrotum with a bread knife. Your son very nearly bleeds to death.
You hear about this in the old folks’ home and call the father of the girl to congratulate him on a job well done. You thank him for his service in the cause of justice, and compliment him on not getting the cops involved as you are a believer in private “supplemental” justice.
Correct?
Rogier, you’re doing it again. Where did the story say that it was an unsubstantiated rumor? Where did it say he was drunk with rage?
The actual story makes it sound like it was pretty methodical and thought out. You can question the judgment, and you’re entitled to your own opinion on the matter – but not to your own facts.
And, comments are closed now. That said, I will offer you your own guest post in which you can pwn the shit out of me, if you like. (I’d be honored to have your writing grace the blog anyhow).
Yup. This is about the lamest post ever put up here, with the exception of sports-specific stuff. Having sex with someone at the legal age of consent is not anywhere near as bad as being a terrorist. Since you support torture and mutilation here, you must therefore support the Bush Administration’s waterboarding policies.
Incorrect.
I support private vengeance as a means of enforcing certain rules.
I would, however, not support the government being involved in the equation.
The worst thing about this kind of cheerleading is that it infantalizes women and denies them agency in their own sexuality.
So let’s say the 57 year old man had been dating a 14 year old girl in Delaware, where the age of consent is 18? Would you guys be posting about primitive American dads, when everyone knows that in Europe this sort of thing is totally cool?
I agree that this case isn’t too much different from Hugh Hefner, but Hefner’s a creep too. He’s just a famous millionaire creep who lavishes gifts on the dumbasses.
There’s a fine line. This probably isn’t over it, but it’s close. If a 57 year-old guy had dated 17 year-old Meadow Soprano, and Tony had paid him a visit with Paulie and Sylvio, it would have won an Emmy. Sure, that’s entertainment, but the example illustrates a point.
Which is that 57 year old men who date teenaged girls are creeps who deserve, morally if not legally, to be castrated. Or at least beaten to within an inch of their lives.
Unless they’re rich and famous, and not Woody Allen. Because Mia Farrow definitely should have castrated him.
Yeah, but creepy isn’t against the law or anything. It’s just creepy. Sure, 16, 17, 18 are arbitrary lines to draw. I think Germany’s age of consent at 14 is way too young. But, at some point we have to give people the right to… be grown ups. Including the right to vote, and drink alcohol, and, well, do it with creepy people if we want to. I’m not saying its a good choice, but, it is a choice. And frankly, if all that happens is that she dates a creepy old guy at some point in her life, that’s not so bad. It certainly can be a lot worse than that.
And creepy should not be against the law either.
Creepy should get your ass kicked though.
I can dig that. I mean, you gotta be willing to take the consequences of doling out an ass kicking. But, if you are, then I agree.
There’s a big difference between 17 and 14 (law aside). There’s a similarly big difference between bread-knife castration and an a$$ kicking.
Not so much of a difference between 57 and 27.
Dad went way overboard. Daughter’s obvious daddy issues continue++.
So that means she’ll probably be single soon, right? I’m just sayin’.
HA!
Awesome
You ain’t right. A few bricks short of a cube. A loose screw or several.
COOKIE MONSTER!
The author states, “I see absolutely nothing wrong with that.”
Are you kidding or just stupid? Is there a “Sarcastic post Monday,” that I’m not aware of around here?
There is PLENTY wrong with this story. First of all throwing law to the wind and viciously attacking someone seems to be a problem. How cutting someone’s nuts off could be the right thing to do in any situation is beyond me as well.
I hope I don’t have to read another post championing an irrational maniac’s decisions and crimes. I expected more from this blog than that.
I expected more from this blog than that.
You did?
Which blog did you think you were reading?
You know, I will concur with Personal. This shit is beneath you. Worst LS post ever.
No way, there have been MUCH worse. MUCH MUCH worse!
A regular Héloïse and Abélard tale, although it seems fathers behave significantly worse today than old Fulbert did back in the 12th century.
I deeply dislike children and hope I don’t have any. As babies, they don’t do anything. From there, they grow into little liability monsters who get into fights, develop grudges, drive cars, and other stuff that you must try to cordon off with their own insurances where possible (motorist insurance at 16, and renter’s insurance as soon as you kick them out of the house at 18) and otherwise hope you can cover the remaining damage without getting spanked too badly. I think minors should be held to account for their actions as soon as possible, criminally or civilly, and in my experience the defense of “youthful ignorance” generally is disingenuous at best.
Sex, however, is a different matter altogether. Unlike knowing right from wrong, sexuality is something that people discover later in life and don’t fully figure out until well into adulthood, if they ever do at all. Many relationships do well with an age gap of 8, 10 or even 20 years, and the line where we define majority is admittedly arbitrary. With that being said, it is very difficult to comprehend a scenario where a 17-year-old is not being manipulated by someone four decades her senior. As observed in an early South Park episode, the age disparity between 12 and 22 is profoundly creepy. While the traditional conductors of female attraction – wealth, status, experience et al – tend to draw women to slightly older men, there is a significant experiential gap between a 17-year-old dating a 27 year old and a 24-year-old dating a 34-year-old. This gap is closed by experience in the real sexual jungle of getting ahead and figuring out what you want (and what others want from you) in the real world or in higher education, which is still a crappy substitute for the real “dating” marketplace. (An aside: who dates anymore?)
In light of that gap, I would kick the ass of a 57-year-old “dating” my daughter. I don’t care what she says; it’s inconceivable that they have anything in common that would create a legitimate relationship. The only conceivable exception would be if he was worth billions of dollars, wanted a virgin bride for religious reasons, and refused to get a prenup. Otherwise, I don’t see any set of circumstances that can support a “relationship.” If that same daughter came home after her first year of college at age 19 and dating someone 10 years her senior, we’d have a long talk about getting taken advantage of, but she’d be her own person and I’d have no standing to impose physical harm on anyone.
As a feminized culture that calls the ineffectual police over every perceived slight, we tend to forget that being the head of a household involves protecting it. Sometimes that involves having a CCW permit and a handgun collection that only you and the wife know about, a knife on you at all times that falls within your state’s laws for concealed carry of a weapon without a permit, or just kicking the ass of someone who threatens a family member’s physical or psychological wellbeing. Sometimes we need to stop intellectualizing conflict and remember the immortal words of Hank Hill: “I’m gonna kick your ass.”
TITCR
Oh for fuck’s sake.
No. You don’t get to dole out the punishment, really, to the creepy old guy that is banging your daughter. Any more than you get to use violence vengefully to address any other wrong to you and yours. I get it, I do. I have a 16 year old niece and I’d be more than happy to take a baseball bat to anyone, of any age, that I think has harmed or manipulated her, especially in terms of sex.
But, this is the deal. You live in a society with others, you agree to live by rules of law not rules of fists. If you choose to use your fists, then you go to jail. We do this because we’ve learned that while we understand the emotional drive to open a can of whoopass on the people who harm you and those you love, its just simply not a good plan for a society. It leads to bloody feuds and undermines democracy, etc. etc.
As “head of household” (or, perhaps just because you’re the grown up) it’s your responsibility to lead by example, and to use the system in which you participate, to create laws and rules that make people safer. You don’t like that plan? Call your Congressman. Vote for the vigilante party. Go live on an island all your own. Now, if the geezer breaks into your house to bang your daughter… then, ya, shoot him if you must. Otherwise, live by the same fucking rules as the rest of us and teach your family why that’s important, in spite of the harm.
And if you absolute, positively must kick someone’s ass, as occasionally will be tolerated, then do that. Kick his ass. But you don’t get to take a bread knife to his penis. I’m sure he “deserves” it, but, it’s not your right or your prerogative. Why? Because you live in the world with other people and the rest of us don’t wanna live in a vigilante society.
You don’t necessarily go to jail. They gotta find a jury to convict you.
Now, holding a guy down and cutting off his balls? They’d find a jury to convict you. But, just kicking his ass? Maybe not.
I see nothing wrong with having a system of rule enforcement that includes the ass kicking as a penalty. I can respect your position on the bread knife to the testicles, but the can of whupass must occasionally be opened. If we weren’t such a pussified society, we’d open the whupass a little more often.
I agree. Society can tolerate the occasional can of whoopass. And ya, the jury thing is a bitch, fair enough. But, it’s the best system yet developed for the civilized administration of justice.
Now, I’m sure that the words “civilized administration of justice” sound “pussified” to some. But, for those that know our history, the reality is that it took huge, big, hairy, balls of steel to move human beings from a club-or-be-clubbed world of waring clans, to creating systems of rules that integrate a more evolved intellect and a more nuanced understanding of how we can live together. There’s nothing pussified about that. That’s the hard work of strong men and women. Any asshole with a weapon can mame or kill.
Also, and this is a big factor here: there are some things worth going to jail for. For example, if my girlfriend were ever raped by someone while we were together, I would have no problem going to jail for killing that person. Society has a system in place for dealing with people that commit that act, but I find society’s system lacking in retributive justice. While I don’t necessarily agree that merely dating a guy who is 40 years senior warrants a castration, there are certain things that the courts are inadequate for dealing with, and I am willing to sacrifice my own freedom to right these wrongs when they affect me or those I love. I just hope I never have to make that sacrifice, both for myself and for whatever poor sap will find out just how irrational I can be sometimes.
Win.
Creepy. Fine. We’ll call it creepy. I’ll give you that. It’s creepy.
But it’s not unlawful.
And Marc isn’t talking about a mere “asskicking” either. He is full-on condoning and celebrating and whitewashing attempted murder, torture and mutiliation.
For a law blog, especially, that is WAY over the bloody fucking line.
What does this being a “law blog” have to do with it?
I think we would be much better off if the government abandoned certain areas of social-rule-enforcement, and left private vengeance to handle them. I don’t think there should be any legal age of consent. You just ought to realize that if you cross a line, a girl’s dad and brothers and uncles might show up at your house and geld you.
That would keep a lot more people in line than the threat of a statutory rape prosecution.
Nice plan. Assumes that those dad’s and brothers and uncles are (1) around, (2) give a shit, and (3) aren’t the ones having the sex with the daughter.
No thanks. Law please.
“What does this being a “law blog” have to do with it?”
For real? Well, see, there’s this thing called the law. It you take a big steaming crap on it by cheering some sociopath who cut another guy’s testicles off with a bread knife, ESPECIALLY if that other guy has done exactly NOTHING that’s legally actionable, you’re making a mockery of it. And considering that you not only sign off on the basic tenets of the American legal system (as you at least appeared to do when you passed the bar in Florida and again in California), but that you make your living off of it, you can’t then very well play the machismo-stricken assclown by openly celebrating mutilation and attempted murder on your blog. Not without people calling you on it, anyway.
I’m OK with mocking the law, up to a point. The law is (sometimes) an ass. But in this case? The girl is 17. Even in most states in the U.S., she is of the age of consent. She most certainly is in Germany. If she voluntarily and consensually makes out with some 50-something douche, go ahead and be revolted, go ahead and rant. You’re good at it, often entertaining. But this is not entertainment, Marc (and I am not amused). Some guy got butchered in the worst imaginable way, almost lost his life, and you are only too glad to celebrate and applaud his assailant? Because he violated your particular brand of morality?
Let me remind you, counselor, that if this is your line of “reasoning,” you have already irrevocably lost all moral high ground the next time some asshole jihadist slits the throat of a filmmaker, cartoonist, novelist, or publisher. The killer will claim that his victim gravely offended his sense of morality, and therefore deserved the death penalty that the western justice system refused to administer. How is that different from what you just “argued”?
Truly, you’re out of your mind on this one. Your post is primitive, barbaric, vile, and wrong. It is a huge stink stain on this blog.
It’s also a weird act of virtual self-immolation. I have a feeling that this irresponsible, atavistic piece of writing will follow and eventually haunt you for a long time to come. You’ve just given life-long ammunition to anyone with an axe to grind over anything you have written and will write; and handed a bizarre gift to anyone looking to discredit your sanity and credibility in the future.
Actually, I am admitted in Massachusetts, Florida, Arizona, and California. And, the law is what we say it is. What is to say that the law should not yield to, and embrace, a little more private justice? There is room in “the law” for that notion.
And, you’re missing the point. I don’t have a moral problem with a 57 year old and a 17 year old. Perhaps I’ve filled in facts here that are not in evidence – but I presume that this wasn’t just a situation where dad found out that the other guy was banging his daughter, and then immediately he and two of his buddies decided to lop the guy’s balls off. This seems to me that it very likely is the end of a road of escalation.
Trust me… if anyone wants to have an axe to grind with me, this blog is fertile ground. Let the cunts harvest what they will.
Wha…? You DON’T have a moral problem with a 57-year-old dating a 17-year-old? I’m flummoxed. Then what is it you’re having a problem with? And what are you “presuming” about this case that makes the torture, sexual mutilation, and attempted murder of a man a defensible act, even something to be cheered?
On another note, I’m sure I don’t don’t need to remind a former law professor who is licensed to practice in four states that the bedrock of any proper justice system, the U.S. one included, is the presumption of innocence. I personally don’t presume to know anything about the case other than what I’ve read in the article you linked to, but may I just ask: What if it was all a misunderstanding? Or what if the father acted on some malicious rumor, and the 57-year-old was a teacher or a friend or an older confidant of the girl, someone who actually WASN’T trying to get into the girl’s pants? It’s certainly possible, isn’t it?
There is no standard of evidence in vigilante justice, which is part of what makes it wrong, dangerous, and illegal.
There should be a strong presumption against the use of force, including for purposes of vengeance, by the State and private individuals alike. All this recently-fashionable cowboy talk of Alphas and Betas strikes me as overwrought. Talking tough doesn’t make anybody any tougher than he really is. But sometimes a man’s gotta do what a man’s gotta do. And when he does, we should still have that same presumption against force and punishment with respect to him that I referenced in the first sentence of this comment.
Lets make it nice and simple:
A guy’s daughter was taken advantage of. He administered private justice.
He’s going to have to answer for that. If I was on the jury, I’d be inclined to acquit. Naturally, the actual facts might push me to convict. However, I’m presuming that this was not an instantaneous sentence – that the situation escalated to this point.
I disagree with your assessment of private justice. I think that one of our societal ills is the absence of private justice. State-sanctioned justice should not wrap up as much conduct as it does, and private justice should return. There was a time when you could have a fuckin duel if you needed one. Now, the winner goes to jail for murder. An ass kicking is certainly a reasonable penalty for a lot of “crimes” that otherwise might burden the courts. Hell, by the time America completely undergoes its castration and feminization, you won’t even be able to address me in the harsh language you’ve used here (don’t worry, I’m cool with it) lest you be charged with “bullying.”
The place where we disagree is that you seem to believe that justice should be a state monopoly. That’s okay, that puts you in the sizeable majority.
I, on the other hand, am advocating the greater tolerance of private justice.
I would very much like you to address two matters that I brought up but that you’ve left unanswered:
(1) There is no standard of evidence in “private justice.” Whatever a distraught, potentially gullible man with a gun or a knife presumes to be true becomes the possible justification for castration and murder. Accuser, judge, jury, executioner, all rolled into one. That doesn’t bother you?
(2) By advocating going outside the law to administer “private justice,” you give license to every thin-skinned asshole, Islamists included, to take offense and exact revenge on those dastardly offense-givers. Your Sicilian code lets you knife a man who makes eyes at your young daughter; their Islamic honor gives them license to kill infidel cartoonists who mock Allah.
Please explain the difference to me.
(mostly) @ Jess:
1) I’m not advocating castration, merely ass-kicking – which may or may not involve broken skin or internal bleeding, depending on the parties and offenses involved. Generally, I discourage fighting with anything other than hands and feet (and discourage violence in general), but it’s stupid to preclude using objects when others may not share that ethos. I didn’t mention or endorse removing any paired organs in my defense of familial protection. While technically unlawful, there is the threshold matter of whether someone would convict you, or if a prosecutor would even bring the case. Plus, depending on the statutory laws of a state, would the older philanderer want to go to the police about his assault and create a reason for the family, which will already be entangled in criminal litigation, to pursue criminal charges against the victim?
2) Yes, we do live in a society of laws. In rare cases, though, those laws don’t cover every circumstance. In some areas of the law, self-help is allowed, or at least not punished. I’m not advocating mob rule, but sometimes the only way to get things done is to not rely on the police and act for yourself.
3) As for the head of household designation, yes, it goes beyond the IRC and reveals my belief in traditional gender roles in certain circumstances. Protecting your children, even from themselves, is such a circumstance for so long as they’re minors, and especially if living in your home. Generally, you should wait for your daughter’s lecherous, geriatric beau to come to you, trying to drop her off at 3 am under cover of darkness, but you may have to go to him if she’s sneaking off to meet him in secret at his urging. But I don’t think you need to wait for him to break into your house, or the equivalent thereof, to take action. That said, you can’t peemptively beat people up for being creepy.
As to 2… I think that sentiment applies regardless of traditional gender roles. But, I agree, sometimes the law fails. But, at least going on history, it fails a fuck of a lot more when it’s say… white on black violence, straight on gay violence, or grown men on grown women violence. So, if the yard stick is simply when the law is least effective… well, then this castration of the German situation doesn’t play into it all, since no law was broken.
But my point is, fellas, while I get it (and I really, actually do) that you FEEL perfectly justified if its your daughter, that doesn’t mean it is perfectly justified.
Yes, but that’s where the “lead by example” thing falls apart. I never saw my parents use force on anyone, and stressed that I was never to resolve any dispute with violence. I had no doubt, though, that if some pederast ever touched me, my dad would break several of his bones. When you’re an adult protecting your family, the rules go out the window. They shouldn’t, but they do. The important thing is expressing to your children that you make the once-in-a-lifetime decision as to when that happens, and live with those consequences, because you are an adult with significant responsibilities and they are not.
Actually, they don’t. Lots of kids (sadly) get molested, and all their parents aren’t doing time for assaulting the perpetrator. The dad in Germany is by far the exception, not the rule.
No relationship at all with America’s steep decline, amirite?
Which part? The seeming rise in pedophilia, or the wise and probably heartbreaking self restraint of modern parents?
Both. I know it’s a very retrograde view and one at odds with the law – while hardly a call to criminal violence against others – but I think that if you’re too beta to defend your family, you don’t deserve to have it.
So… if my sister is raped by her husband, I get to shoot the bastard? If my son gets beat up at school, I get to mow the bullying douchebags down with my car? That’s the problem with thinking in terms of “alpha” and “beta” that way. Do you defend your family more by seeking revenge, or by (however painfully) acting in a manner that maintains a legal system that UNDENIABLY keeps you and yours safer than they would be in a world where only the last person standing wins.
Right, but if it is my daughter, I’ll do it… justified or not.
I hear you.
Marc, I wonder what you think about Harold and Maude. Would Maude deserve an unsolicited mastectomy?
No. Harold was nobody’s daughter. In Randazzastan, we have gender-based double standards.
Yeah… because we all know that young men can’t be manipulated or abused by women.
Its totally different, and you know it.
No. I don’t. I disagree completely. I mean, assuming that we’re not talking about actual physical force being used to coerce a sexual relationship, women are just as capable of manipulating and abusing, mentally, emotionally and sexually men. And, the age difference plays into that in a big way.
Oh, of course they are. But, if the woman is hot, the guy gets enough of a consolation prize that it usually winds up being worth it to him.
I mean, when its that newscaster in New Hampshire who manipulated those kids into killing her husband, thats’ another story. But, the mere fact that she was fucking him was not really a problem in my mind.
Look, I find it personally a little lucky to think about any two people with an age difference of 40 years banging. And, I am for sure suspicious about that the younger party in a relationship with a 40 year age difference is being manipulated and is probably particularly vulnerable. But, it’s for sure no more wrong for the elder to be a man than for the elder to be a woman. Believe it or not, some women, for whatever reason, think old guys are hot. Or, they get to have a relationship that provides security. Or, the get to have some Oedipal experience — that’s between them and their shrinks.
So what if a pissed off dad walked into one of your clients’ porn studios where his 18 year old daughter was being filmed (for worldwide consumption) getting gang-banged by a bunch of old creeps and the dad massacred the whole crew, or just shot their balls off? I assume you would “see absolutely nothing wrong with that.”
That’s a financial transaction, not an emotional one. Hope dear ol’ dad likes his tortious interference with contract lawsuit from the studio.
Good challenge!
But, I do see that as different. She’s being paid. If she’s being paid, she’s fair game.
Plus, trust me, if she’s on a porn set getting gangbanged by a bunch of old creeps, her dad is either not in her life, or she really doesn’t like him to begin with.
So, if your daughter is being paid for sex with a 57 year old man… then that’s cool and you got no cause to castrate?
Correct
So. She meets… Einstein. And it turns out, she’s a prodigy with a brilliant scientific mind, and Old Albert is the only guy on the planet who can relate to her sheer genius. It’s love. She’s hidden it from you, her dad, because… well, your a bit of a Neanderthal. And, she read this post. You find out, and you rush over and give Old Al an ass kicking.
But, if she meets some guy in a Pontiac Seabreeze convertible, with a bad toupee and fake tan, who offers to “make her a star” and pays her to have sex with old men… no ass kicking?
I’m not saying that there is some Sith-like absolute rule on age differences. Yeah, if the only man in the world she can relate to is 50 years older than her, and he makes her happy, then shit… I’ll change the old bugger’s diapers for him at their bachelor party.
But, generally speaking, a guy has a right to open up the whupass on a 57 year old who is banging his 17 year old daughter.
And, generally speaking, a guy doesn’t have a right to kick the ass of someone who is paying his daughter to be in porn.
Now… if she winds up in a porn production, chances are that the producer will know whose daughter she is. And, yes, he’ll not only get an ass kicking, but I will cut his fucking balls off. If Natalia walks into a porn studio, the fucker that runs the place probably has my phone number. He calls me. I come over. I pick her up and drive her home. Any other result, yes, balls will be removed with no anesthesia. That goes for Cambria’s daughters, Walters’ daughters, Sirkin’s daughters, Nazzarine’s little girl, Contiguglia’s daughter, etc.
Ok, so, you’re totally down with what Daddy German did… assuming that its true that it wasn’t a truly healthy (or even moderately healthy) relationship between his daughter and the old guy, and assuming that he took the time to find out first, and assuming that after talking to all parties he discerned that in fact, the old guy had genuinely been deceptive or otherwise abusive to his daughter. Right?
And of course everyone in porn isn’t like that. But YOUR professional relationship to porn producers has nothing to do with the argument that a 40 year age difference in porn is somehow presumptively more ok than a non-paying may-december love affair.
I think that there is a rebuttable presumption that there is a problem in a 40 year age difference relationship when the girl is in her teens.
And there is an equally rebuttable presumption that once you’re legal, you go into porn, your dad has no right to be pissed off, unless the producer knows your dad and films you anyway.
I’m with you on the rebuttable presumption on the age difference…. I suppose I missed the part of the story on the German thing where he gave an opportunity for rebuttal.
I agree too that dad has no business getting pissed at the porn producers if his daughter is of age… but, there’s for sure hypocrisy in the idea that if the producer knows you, he/she needs your permission to enter into a contract with your kid.
Doesn’t anyone wanna talk about the secret homosexual agenda post?
Anyone notice that Jenna Haze picked up Jay’s tweets? Jenna Haze people.
http://randazza.wordpress.com/2010/12/13/the-legal-satyricon-is-interesting/
And you wanna talk about the throwaway castration post?
I can see why you’d rather change the subject. This comment thread is already really long, and I came to the party late, so I’ll just say it seems to me a father’s bloody vengeance against a porn crew filming his 18 year old princess getting gang-banged by a bunch of 25 year olds (i.e., even apart from any age difference) might get more popular sympathy (and justifiably so) than the bloody vengeance exacted by Daddy German. What if, as jesschristensen suggested above, Daddy German’s daughter was getting paid by the 57 year old to have sex with him? It’d be, in the words of J DeVoy above, a “financial transaction,” like the porn shoot, except having from Daddy German’s perspective the relative benefit of at least not being recorded for posterity for all the world to see. I get your point that an 18 year old getting gang-banged in a porn shoot is already, by the very fact that she’s getting gang-banged in a porn shoot, likely to not like her daddy very much. But I thought it was politically incorrect in the sex industry to admit a correlation between sex work and assorted “daddy issues.” (I haven’t kept up on such things, but I seem to recall it being popularly alleged that a rather large percentage of sex workers had experienced sexual abuse as kids.) Maybe Daddy German’s daughter had some “daddy issues” as well which led her to hook up with this 57 year old, a hypothesis made more plausible by the fact that Daddy German has revealed himself to be the kind of guy who’ll cut another guy’s balls off with a butter knife.
Or would the 57 year old be LESS deserving of castration if he paid Daddy German’s 17 year old daughter for the sex than if he got it for free. Is that because the “blame” would shift so dramatically to the daughter because she took money for sex that Daddy German could no longer blame the 57 year old. Or because by taking money for sex she’s dramatically established her autonomy, that she’s a “big girl” responsible for her own decisions, even though apart from her acceptance of the money her tender years are what would presumably justify whooping the old geezer’s ass for taking advantage of somebody who doesn’t know any better.
It’s unfair of me to harp on and over-analyze this, since you’ve already described this as a “throwaway” post, and I agree with what I think was your underlying point: that we as a society would be better off if we exercised just a little more self-help in matters of “justice” and were more tolerant of those who do, even if we don’t take it to the extreme of cutting balls off with butter knives.
we as a society would be better off if we exercised just a little more self-help in matters of “justice” and were more tolerant of those who do, even if we don’t take it to the extreme of cutting balls off with butter knives
Precisely. You win!
Just what every young girl needs: proof that her father is an absolute psychopath who needs to be avoided for the rest of her life. I’m sure these actions will have a positive effect on her emotional well-being for decades to come.
If this caveman manages to leave prison with his balls intact, I hope they’re removed shortly after returning home. I would use ants.
Are you kidding me? This guy was willing to go to jail for castrating the geriatric who was banging his teenage daughter. He will be a hero in prison.
It always makes me smile when Jesschristensen checks in to issue some ass whoppins.
While I agree mostly with Mr Devoy’s analysis, Marc has at least held down his position.
Final Score: JessChristensen 2: MarcoRandazza 1.
Woooohooooo!!
Marc, maybe you should troll a tad less obviously. For my taste anyway….
I’m closing the comments. 80 comments on a 30 word post is excessive. Anyone who has something to say, which has not already been said ad nauseum, can send me an email, and I’ll give you a 750 word column of your own in which to write on the subject.
[...] Randazza tells you what he thinks. It’s up to you to deal with that. // Last 5 posts by Patrick"Lives," "State Department Careers," What's The Difference? – [...]
Fortunately, the bastard is going on trial. I hope he suffers as much in prison as his victim.
You know, big brother. The girl is fucking a 57 year old because she obviously has father issues. I’m sure anyone who knows about this case doesn’t have a hard time seeing why.
Don’t you fucking use the Sicilian flag to back a sociopathic shithead who clearly has fucked his daughter up for life on numerous levels.
[...] He doesn’t advocate sex offender registries. He openly advocates self-help castrations. [...]