The Relentless Blogger

First, the article from military.com:

GRAFENWOHR, Germany -- Legislation that would restrict the sale of certain men's magazines on U.S. military bases around the world would be bad for morale, according to soldiers at Grafenwöhr.

U.S. Rep. Paul Broun, R-Ga., has introduced legislation that would close a loophole in the current law that allows the sale of some sexually explicit material on military bases by lowering the threshold required to deem material "sexually explicit."

A Department of Defense committee that reviews materials sold on bases ruled last year that magazines such as Playboy and Penthouse are not pornographic. But Broun's Military Honor and Decency Act includes language that could make those magazines eligible for the ban.

The prospect of missing out on men's magazines was not welcomed by soldiers at Grafenwöhr.

"We all read 'em," said Pfc. Paul Rubio, 31, of Bakersfield, Calif. "There are times we just read 'em for the technological parts like the new gadgets that come out. They have good stories sometimes too."

Sgt. Simon Brown, 34, of Daytona Beach, Fla., said men's magazines build morale. "It's not all about the pictures, although 80 percent of it is," he said.

Pfc. Greg Smith, 21, of Northboro, Mass., a regular Playboy reader, said soldiers should be allowed to buy nudie magazines at the exchange.

"Playboy is good entertainment while you are on the can. They have jokes and good stories," he said.

Broun, a Marine veteran, told Newsweek recently that the magazines sold in military exchanges are partly responsible for a rise in sexual assaults in the military and other problems.

"Allowing the sale of pornography on military bases has harmed military men and women by: escalating the number of violent, sexual crimes; feeding a base addiction; eroding the family as the primary building block of society; and denigrating the moral standing of our troops both here and abroad," Broun says on his Web site.

The legislation would require the DOD to annually review material that is not currently deemed sexually explicit to determine if it should be prohibited, according to the Web site.

Some soldiers say magazines that could be banned are particularly important downrange.

Brown deployed to Afghanistan in 2002 and 2005 and is preparing to go to Iraq with the 12th Combat Aviation Brigade this summer. When he was in Afghanistan he was one of the first to pick up a new copy of Maxim or FHM when it came out, he said.

"It would suck if they ban it," he said. "It's bad enough we are down there to begin with. Taking that away would be like a knife in the chest. I'm not saying I'm depending on Maxim to keep me alive over there, but it helps."

Publications such as Maxim and FHM are not named by Broun, but lowering the threshold of the sexually explicit definition might mean such magazines would be targeted for a ban.

Some troops in the Pacific region said the proposed legislation would impinge upon their personal freedoms.

"They're making it a point of undermining soldiers to almost make them feel like we're back in elementary school," Pfc. Nickolas Sears said Friday at Camp Red Cloud, South Korea. "We're all adults here, and if it's something we want to do, we should feel free to choose as we please."

Other than on base, there's no place in South Korea to buy magazines like Playboy, he said.

"I believe it's a breach of freedom of speech," said Senior Airman Garrett Deese, 25, of Elk Grove, Calif., who just completed a tour with the 8th Aircraft Maintenance Squadron at Kunsan Air Base, South Korea.

He said he wonders whether such a ban would lead to barring other types of magazines lawmakers chose to challenge. He also questioned whether Broun's link between magazines and sexual assaults within the military would stand close scrutiny.

At Yokota Air Base, Japan, military spouse Roberta Woolley said she understands the need for balance between rules and individual rights, but said the military has tougher standards than the rest of American society.

"It's a good idea," she said of the proposed ban. "I think there's better literature out there.... In the military, we sell cigarettes and alcohol legally. But it's also questionable whether they promote a healthy lifestyle.

"I've seen all these magazines, and they don't make men or women intelligent or beautiful. And even though they're hidden, there is still exposure to children as well. It's the parents' responsibility to give ideas about body awareness to their children. I don't think Mr. Hefner presents a positive image of men or women in his magazine."

A female soldier at Grafenwöhr -- Sgt. Pou McCall, 23, of Riverside, Calif. -- said men's magazines don't bother her a lot, but she'd support a ban.

"What if it was their (soldiers') sisters (in the magazines)? It doesn't take a magazine for sexual harassment to happen but it increases it," she said.

Army and Air Force Exchange service public relations manager Judd Anstey said AAFES sold $231,000 worth of Penthouse, Playboy and Playgirl magazines in Europe last year.

"Sales of these three titles account for 2.7 percent of total European magazine sales ($8.5 million) at AAFES facilities," he said.

The sales accounted for 0.5 percent of worldwide AAFES magazine sales of $46.4 million, he said.

Stars and Stripes' reporters Vince Little, Franklin Fisher and Erik Slavin contributed to this report.

How do you feel about this issue?
Let your public officials know how you feel.

Ya know, we really need to get over this idea that viewing a picture of a naked woman makes men commit sex crimes and instinctively start demeaning women. If this were true, wouldn't Europe lead the world in sex crimes? They are "forced" to deal with nudity on television at every turn. How are they not all slavvering sex fiends?

Oh yeah ... because nudity is only a bad thing to a vocal minority of folks who are still clinging to those bizarre Victorian era ideals. In terms of sexuality, the Victorian era was the worst thing that ever happened to America. Read up on it; it's amazing how far up our own butts we managed to twist ourselves in a very short time.

(Likewise, the "Flapper" generation was by far the greatest thing to ever happen to our nation in terms of sexuality. Hippies and "free love" were nothing compared to what these rebellious upstarts pulled off. Go you, Grandma! Yep. I'm proud to say my own grandma was a Flapper ... and a school teacher.)

Sexual predators commit sex crimes, and they'll do it with or without a visual trigger.

I'm thinking the day you become a soldier, you have most definitely put on your big boy (or girl) pants, and you are old enough to decide for yourself what does and does not offend or entertain you. If you don't want to look at "nekkid pichers" of women, don't. To attempt to extend that personal value to all people is to attempt to legislate morality - which not only cannot be done; but also flies in the face of respecting every other individual's right to their own values.

My son is a soldier, and as far as I'm concerned, if he's over there fighting for human rights, freedom and democracy; give him a Playboy if he wants one! It is the VERY LEAST we can do to bring him some comfort, entertainment, and perhaps (dramatic pause) even some sexual release. I know my son, and I know damn well looking at pictures of a beautiful and naked woman are not going to warp his mind and distort his values. I mean, PLEASE!

Remember back in the (... I think it was the late 80s? Early 90s?) when the "religious right" started picketing 7-Eleven stores to get them to stop selling magazines THEY deemed inappropriate? They didn't ask for the "offending material" to be covered, or kept behind the counter where a kid couldn't just walk by and pick one up (not that any kid over 10 years old hasn't already scoured the house for this particular type of educational literature). No, the stores were already doing that. The picketers wanted to be the Holy Authority on what the Southland Corporation can and cannot sell in their own stores. The nerve!!

When I saw this, the first thing I did was go inside and buy a copy of Playboy. The next thing I did was subscribe to Playboy. Turned out I really enjoyed it. Yeah, I was jealous of the beautiful bodies since mine had stopped looking like that two kids prior. They really are beautiful pictures, though, and even a jealous woman can appreciate beauty when she sees it. Yep, I admit it: I didn't just read the articles.

Last time I checked, I'm still your average middle-class wife, mother and corporate droid. Reading (okay, looking at) Playboy didn't change anything about me. I didn't start starving myself and vomiting to look like the girls in the pictures. I didn't become a pervert. I didn't start committing sex crimes. (I am REALLY choking back the obvious one-liners here).

It's just a friggin' magazine. It doesn't MAKE anyone do anything. It's entertainment - and precious little at that in comparison to what our soldiers in action deserve. Show me ANY valid study - conducted and reported scientifically - that proves "soft porn" of the Playboy ilk has ANY affect on the number of sex crimes committed, and I will show you 99% of the male population of the United States committing sex crimes.

The only way to make a reader of magazines like Playboy into a criminal is to criminalize the magazines themselves. If we're going to do that, we'd better re-think how many of those little "house arrest" ankle bracelets we have in stock, because most men and a lot of women are going to be wearing them.

Don't we have anything more to worry about where the well-being of our troops are concerned than whether or not they are looking at pictures of naked women?

I was driving my two sons - U.S. Army soldiers - home from the Veteran's Day parade yesterday. My son had been given the tremendous honor of placing the wreath in honor of the unknown soldiers during the post-parade ceremony at the Capital, and we were all awash with patriotism and pride. So many wonderful citizens thanked my sons for their service, and I never loved the people of Austin more for that gesture.

We drive through Dell's campus in Round Rock, and again, we are proud and honored to see Dell flying the flags of each and every branch of military service and support. To honor our troops in this manner makes me proud that Dell hasn't entirely sold out to cheap overseas labor, as is the trend in the IT industry.

Ah, but then the shock ... across the drive from the military flags are three more flags flying high: the American flag, the Texas flag, ... and the DELL FLAG?!?! I'm no rocket scientist, but isn't this a colossal disrespect to the American flag? I'm not even a Texas native and even I know that Texas joined the Union by treaty, making Texas an exception to the rule of flag etiquette of always flying the American flag ABOVE the state flag. The Texas flag can rightly be flown at the same level as the American flag.

...but the DELL flag flying at the same height as the American and Texas flags? Has Dell as an entity suffered, bled, and died for all that the United States (and Texas) symbolize with our flag? Is Dell really that arrogant ... or just that stupid?

Think your freedom of choice and your ability to recieve the medical care you need is safe? If you're a woman, you might want to consider the following:

• April 2007: Police confirm that a device placed outside a south Austin women's health care facility (which provides birth control care and counseling among its services) was a live bomb, intended to destroy the facility.

• April 2007: The United States Senate passes legislation banning partial-birth abortions (a specific method used under specific circumstances) in all 50 states. This ban makes it a criminal act for any physician to perform this procedure - irrespective of the patient's health needs or condition - and carrying with it a penalty of two years in Federal prison for any physician who defies the ban, even if the procedure is deemed medically necessary to protect the patient's health.

• April 2007: The Seattle Legislature took the lead in an increasingly heated debate over the "morning after" pill (known as EC or emergency contraception, Plan B, mifepristone or RU 486) by mandating all pharmacies to fill all lawful prescriptions, including EC. This decision came in response to an increasing incidence of women being refused the prescription pill by pharmacists - most notably, at Wal-Mart stores. Now patient access to Plan B "will not be undermined by personal, non-medical judgments," said Karen Cooper, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Washington.

• April 2007: The Oklahoma Senate votes 32 to 16 for a bill critics say restricts doctors from recommending abortions in medical emergencies for women who are on Medicaid or have no insurance.

• April 2007: New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer introduces the Reproductive Health and Privacy Protection Act. Spitzer's proposal would remove abortion from criminal statutes and make it a matter of professional and medical discretion. It would also repeal an old statute "that criminalizes, among other things, providing nonprescription contraception to minors," according to the governor's office. The Act would only impact residents of the state of New York.

• April 2007: In Washington DC, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) reintroduced the Compassionate Assistance for Rape Emergencies (CARE) Act – a bill that would ensure that sexual-assault survivors are offered emergency contraception in hospital emergency rooms; Rep. Steve Rothman (D-NJ) also recently reintroduced his companion bill in the House. The CARE Act would ensure that survivors of sexual assault are offered emergency contraception (EC) in the emergency room. Emergency contraception is a concentrated dose of ordinary birth-control pills that can dramatically reduce a woman’s chance of becoming pregnant if taken soon after sex. EC does not cause abortion; rather it is a safe and effective way to prevent pregnancy and was recently approved for over-the-counter sales for adults. Senator Clinton's support of the CARE Act was in response to attempts last month in South Dakota to make it illegal to offer emergency contraception - or even information about EC - to assault victims in emergency centers.

 
... and that's in just ONE MONTH of this year. Below is an overview of "Choice" bills that are currently in consideration in Texas' 80th Legislative Session. If you still believe your rights and freedoms are guaranteed, you're not reading the facts.

I am offended that my right to make my own choices and decisions in respect to my own body and health are under constant attack and "re-evaluation". I'm doubly offended that while the majority of the U.S. population is either "pro-choice" or neutral on the subject of abortion, the minority has been vocal enough to supercede MY rights. I'm even more offended that these decisions are being made FOR WOMEN mostly BY MEN - men who could not possibly understand the myriad circumstances under which one might need factual medical advice relating to an unwanted pregnancy.

Most of all, I am offended at the stupidity of WOMEN protesting to have their own Constitutional rights revoked. We give ourselves labels like "pro-life" (suggesting those who do not share one's political and moral values are against life?) and "pro-choice" (suggesting that those who do not share these values are against freedom?), choose up sides, and go at each other while we demand our mostly-male political representatives vote to determine what is best for us all? Does this make ANY sense?

You have the right to believe what you choose to believe, stand up for the causes you choose to support, place your faith where you choose to place it, and live your life by the moral code that is right for you. You have every right to embrace the religion, values, ethics and morals of your own choosing. You have the right to fight (peacably) for what you believe in; but while you are embracing YOUR rights, don't forget the rights of others. We are a free country because we respect and value the differences that make our culture so rich. As individuals, some of us may not REALLY "celebrate differences and diversity", but as a nation, we have agreed to hold each individual's rights sacred.

As women, we enjoy more freedoms than women in most any other nation in the world. WHY are we trying to take our own freedoms away from ourselves? As an individual, I may not believe that abortion, contraception, sex education in public schools, different religions or faiths, or any other "hot" issue is right. I may, in fact, believe it is very wrong. I may even believe that I am mandated by my higher power to stand up for what I believe, and shun all those who oppose what I believe ... but my rights end where someone else's physical person, mind, and rights begin. The line is clear.

You have every right to decide what is right and best for you. I have the same right - even if the decisions we ultimately make for ourselves are different. What neither of us has is the right to decide for the other what is ABSOLUTELY so. "There are many truths, but only one reality," as they say.

The reality is, we are forgetting that no matter how powerfully we as individuals hold a thing to be true, that doesn't give us the right to impose our beliefs on the entire population. To do so is disrespectful, ignorant, selfish, and wholely un-American.

Texas
The Texas Legislature's regular session runs from January 09, 2007 to May 28, 2007. Bills that have not been enacted by the end of this legislative session will not carry over to next year.

You can track these bills as they make their way through the 2007 legislative session at: Texas Legislature Online.


Pro-Life Legislation:

Pro-Life Clinics
Bill Number: TX H 224
Summary: Establishes "Choose Life" license plates; allocates funding for pro-life clinics that do not offer a full range of reproductive options.
Sponsor: Paxton (R)
Introduced: 01/09/2007
Last Action: Introduced


Pro-Life License Plates
Bill Number: TX H 224
Summary: Establishes "Choose Life" license plates; allocates funding for pro-life clinics that do not offer a full range of reproductive options.
Sponsor: Paxton (R)
Introduced: 01/09/2007
Last Action: Introduced


Biased Counseling and Mandatory Delay
Bill Number: TX H 21
Summary: Modifies existing law that requires women receive state-mandated lecture, which may include medically inaccurate information, prior to obtaining abortion services.
Sponsor: Corte (R)
Introduced: 01/09/2007
Last Action: Introduced

Bill Number: TX S 1567
Summary: Modifies existing biased counseling law to require that a doctor tell a woman seeking an abortion that the state will pay her $500 to choose adoption instead of abortion.
Sponsor: Patrick (R)
Introduced: 03/08/2007
Last Action: Introduced


Emergency Contraception
Bill Number: TX H 23
Summary: Requires pharmacies to post a sign with biased information regarding emergency contraception (EC).
Sponsor: Corte (R)
Introduced: 01/09/2007
Last Action: Introduced


Legislative Declaration
Bill Number: TX HCR 87
Summary: The Texas Legislature declares its opposition to a young woman's right to confidential family planning services.
Sponsor: Smith T (R)
Introduced: 02/12/2007
Last Action: Introduced


Mandatory Ultrasound
Bill Number: TX S 920
Summary: Requires a woman to undergo an ultrasound even if not medically necessary. Requires a woman to view ultrasound images before she may have an abortion. Requires abortion providers obtain costly ultrasound equipment, even if not medically necessary for patient care.
Sponsor: Patrick (R)
Introduced: 04/12/2007
Last Action: Introduced


Near-Total Abortion Ban
Bill Number: TX H 175
Summary: Imposes near-total criminal ban on abortion. Includes an exception only to prevent a woman's death. Would take effect if Roe v. Wade is overturned by the Supreme Court or constitutional amendment.
Sponsor: Chisum (R)
Introduced: 01/09/2007
Last Action: Introduced

Bill Number: TX S 186
Summary: Imposes near-total criminal ban on abortion. Includes an exception only to prevent a woman's death. Would take effect if Roe v. Wade is overturned by the Supreme Court or constitutional amendment.
Sponsor: Patrick (R)
Introduced: 01/10/2007
Last Action: Introduced


Refusal to Provide Medical Services
Bill Number: TX H 1996
Summary: Allows pharmacists to refuse to provide or dispense contraceptives in all or most circumstances.
Sponsor: Toureilles (D)
Introduced: 02/26/2007
Last Action: Introduced


Sex/STD Education
Bill Number: TX H 311
Summary: Restricts minors' access to comprehensive medically and factually accurate sex education by requiring parental consent.
Sponsor: Chisum (R)
Introduced: 01/09/2007
Last Action: Introduced

Bill Number: TX S 1807
Summary: Prohibits minors' access to comprehensive medically and factually accurate sex education by requiring parental consent.
Sponsor: Brimer (R)
Introduced: 03/09/2007
Last Action: Introduced


Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers (TRAP)
Bill Number: TX H 22
Summary: Amends existing law to subject additional abortion providers to burdensome restrictions.
Sponsor: Corte (R)
Introduced: 01/09/2007
Last Action: Introduced



Pro-Choice Legislation:

Emergency Contraception
Bill Number: TX H 2161
Summary: Ensures that sexual assault victims receive information about and access to emergency contraception (EC).
Sponsor: Farrar (D)
Introduced: 02/28/2007
Last Action: Introduced


Guaranteed Access to Prescriptions
Bill Number: TX S 1591
Summary: Requires a pharmacy or pharmacist to fill valid prescriptions and fulfill all lawful requests for contraceptives approved for OTC use.
Sponsor: Shapleigh (D)
Introduced: 03/08/2007
Last Action: Introduced


Healthy Childbearing
Bill Number: TX H 1455
Summary: Promotes healthy childbearing by establishing a pilot program to treat substance abuse in pregnant women.
Sponsor: Bohac (R)
Introduced: 02/14/2007
Last Action: Introduced


HIV/STD Prevention/Education
Bill Number: TX H 1846
Summary: Promotes prevention of HIV/STDs by offering education on the transmission and prevention of communicable diseases, including HIV and assists program participants in obtaining HIV testing.
Sponsor: Ortiz (D)
Introduced: 02/22/2007
Last Action: Introduced

Bill Number: TX H 856
Summary: Promotes prevention of HIV/STDs by authorizing the establishment of disease control programs, including an education program on the transmission and prevention of HIV and STDs.
Sponsor: McClendon (D)
Introduced: 01/25/2007
Last Action: Introduced

Bill Number: TX S 308
Summary: Promotes prevention of HIV/STDs by authorizing the establishment of disease control programs, including an education program on the transmission and prevention of HIV and STDs.
Sponsor: Deuell (R)
Introduced: 01/24/2007
Last Action: Introduced

Bill Number: TX H 1370
Summary: Promotes prevention of HIV/STD's by reinstating the Interagency Coordinating Council for HIV and Hepatitis. Amended on 4-5-07 to specify duties and responsibilities.
Sponsor: Coleman (D)
Introduced: 02/13/2007
Last Action: Introduced


Insurance Coverage for Contraception
Bill Number: TX H 268
Summary: Requires health insurance plans that provide prescription drug benefits to cover contraceptives.
Sponsor: Anchia (D)
Introduced: 01/09/2007
Last Action: Introduced


Legislative Declaration
Bill Number: TX SR 443
Summary: The Texas Senate declares March 10, 2007, National Women and Girls HIV/AIDS Awareness Day.
Sponsor: Ellis (D)
Introduced: 03/12/2007
Last Action: Introduced

Bill Number: TX HR 221
Summary: The Texas House of Representatives declares February 2, 2007 as National Black HIV/AIDS Awareness Day.
Sponsor: Davis Y (D)
Introduced: 02/01/2007
Last Action: Passed House
Last Action Date: 02/07/2007


Prevention and Treatment of Gynecological Cancers
Bill Number: TX S 1696
Summary: Expands eligibility for medical assistance coverage for cervical cancer screening services.
Sponsor: Nelson (R)
Introduced: 03/09/2007
Last Action: Introduced


Regulating Pro-Life Clinics
Bill Number: TX H 2142
Summary: Prohibits 'crisis pregnancy centers' (CPCs) from deceptively or fradaulently advertising with regard to pregnancy-related medical services.
Sponsor: Rodriguez (D)
Introduced: 02/27/2007
Last Action: Introduced

Bill Number: TX S 1174
Summary: Requires crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs') to maintain quality-control practices for their facilities.
Sponsor: Ellis (D)
Introduced: 03/06/2007
Last Action: Introduced

Bill Number: TX H 2878
Summary: Requires crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs') to maintain quality-control practices for their facilities.
Sponsor: Thompson (D)
Introduced: 03/07/2007
Last Action: Introduced

Bill Number: TX H 2036
Summary: Requires 'crisis pregnancy centers' (CPCs) to provide medically and factually accurate information to women seeking information or counseling about pregnancy or abortion.
Sponsor: Dutton (D)
Introduced: 02/27/2007
Last Action: Introduced

Bill Number: TX H 2223
Summary: Requires crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs) to provide factually and medically accurate information.
Sponsor: Villarreal (D)
Introduced: 03/01/2007
Last Action: Introduced


Sex/STD Education
Bill Number: TX H 1842
Summary: Improves sex education in schools and communities.
Sponsor: Strama (D)
Introduced: 02/22/2007
Last Action: Introduced

Bill Number: TX HB2161
Summary: Relating to providing information and other services relating to emergency contraception to sexual assault survivors
Sponsor: Farrar (D)
Introduced: 03/08/2007
Last Action: Introduced

Bill Number: TX H 3165
Summary: Improves sex education in schools and communities.
Sponsor: Watson (D)
Introduced: 02/22/2007
Last Action: Introduced

Your elected legislators are in session right now representing you. ARE they representing you? Now is the time to make your opinions known. Tell your elected officials where you stand on important issues, or live with the decisions of those who do speak up.

This is for the single parents out there, looking for their perfect match. You already know that, because you have a child or children, you have more to consider in finding that Right One than mutual attraction and chemistry.

There is great goodness in this world of ours, but there is unspeakable danger and deviance as well. As parents, we want to believe that we would recognize a danger to ourselves or our children if we saw it, but that is a myth. It's something we tell ourselves so we can believe we are safe and there is order and logic and advance warning in this world. To be truly safe in your search for that perfect partner, it is imperative to keep your eyes and mind open, and understand what to look for to ensure the future safety and security of your beloved children. Do not fall into the easy trap of believing you will "just know" a dangerous person when you meet one. The following information may be the most important you ever apply to your criteria in searching for your life's mate.

Most folks know what a pedophile is: one who seeks sexual pleasure from or is sexually attracted to a child or children. Pedophilia is a psychological disorder frequently characterized by a genuine belief that the subject child or children feel a mutual attraction and interest in the offender. They view compliance of any kind (voluntary, forced, coerced, etc.) as evidence of mutual consent and pleasure. Pedophiles often ascribe to their victims feelings and actions a child's mind is incapable of processing or comprehending. The pedophile mistakenly believes that if they feel it, the child must feel it as well.

Surprisingly, pedophiles often don't realize they are disordered. This is what makes them so dangerous. No matter how much we would like to believe to the contrary, there is no way to know a pedophile by looking at one. In fact, most pedophiles go out of their way to appear to be extremely mild-mannered and have a general appearance of being harmless, likeable, and trustworthy. This also makes them dangerous.

Paraphiles are a larger class of the sexually disordered, and include sex offenders and sexual deviants. Paraphilia is a psychosexual disorder characterized by sexual fantasies, feelings, or activities involving a nonhuman object, a nonconsenting partner such as a child, or pain or humiliation of oneself or one's partner. Paraphiles take pleasure in indulging in sexual practices that are socially prohibited.

Paraphiles include stalkers of the voyeuristic and Peeping Tom variety, and collectors of massive amounts of pornographic material. We're not talking about Playboy or like magazines, but large collections of sexual fantasy books, fetish materials (books, magazines, videos, props), and those who frequently engage in socially or sexually risky behaviors such as sex in public places, webcasting their sexual activities via the Internet, and engaging in "alternative lifestyles" such as BDSM (bondage, discipline, sadism and masochism).

The doesn't mean that every consenting adult couple who ever engaged in a sexual fantasy or role-playing game or spanked or blindfolded a willing partner during foreplay qualifies as a paraphile. The difference is these couples engage in consentual and mutually-pleasurable sexual play. They do not consider their interests a "lifestyle". They do not engage in illegal sexual activities. They are not sexually gratified by risky, dangerous or socially unacceptable sexual activities.

As with pedophiles, paraphiles rarely recognize that they are disordered or would consider themselves genuinely deviant. As with pedophiles, paraphiles have justified their thinking and activities and consider them normal. They do typically recognize and acknowledge that their sexual predilections are "outside the norm" and would be considered deviant by "average societal standards," but they are quick to point out how unenlightened and sheeplike the masses tend to be, thus elevating their deviance to the "more enlightened" level of thinking and reasoning.

Michael Jackson was acquitted of charges of pedophilia, and by the laws of our land, must be considered innocent. He is, however, perhaps the most famous example of textbook paraphiliac thinking and behavior. Mr. Jackson's oft-repeated creedo was, "I never did anything wrong." Not, "I never touched a child in a manner that gave me sexual gratification." While admitting to engaging in behaviors our society deems inappropriate like inviting numerous small children -- especially males who fell within a certain age range -- to share his bed; Jackson defended his actions by claiming to be a child himself in terms of his mental and sexual maturity. A classic symptom and mindset of the pedophile. What Jackson considered mutually-constentual "play" was, in fact, "play" no child is capable of understanding, let alone consenting to. What a child does, he or she does out of the motivation to be loved, to please, to be "good" and do as they are told, and to prevent disappointing a parent or adult.

As a true pedophile, Mr. Jackson will likely never be able to grasp that his fundamental thinking is flawed. Those who want desperately to believe in his goodness will never recognize how carefully (if unconsciously) his words of self-defense are chosen. Mr. Jackson and his fellow pedophiles will live and die with the honest and unshakable conviction that they are good, loving, devoted human beings who simply care more for and better understand children and their needs. They consider themselves more in touch with the "natural way" of things. They are not capable of understanding that sexual contact or gratification and children at any time, in any way, for any reason is unacceptable and wrong. They genuinely believe it is the rest of us who are wrong in our thinking.

So first and foremost, it is a mistake to teach a child to be blindly and absolutely obedient -- to you as parent or to any other adult. This obedience can and will be used against you and your child in the hands of a pedophile. Rather, teach your child that feelings of fear and discomfort are not to be ignored or overridden by their desire to please and to be loved. It is necessary to respect your authority and follow your instructions; but if ever they are placed in a position where they are asked to do something that feels wrong to them, it is okay to say no. They should then tell you about the feelings they have. Even if they have been told that you already know.

As for keeping yourself safe, there are specific warnings signs -- subtle as they may be -- to look for in the person you are considering as a partner. If you see them, do not ignore them! Do not assume that you may be jumping to conclusions or overreacting. Do not give the individual the chance to justify and explain what is clearly a social or sexual deviance. Pedophiles and paraphiles are masters of manipulation -- you honestly don't stand a chance no matter how intelligent or world-wise you are if you choose to close your eyes to the evidence that is in plain view.

WARNING SIGNS TO LOOK FOR WITHIN YOURSELF:
Certain life experiences predispose many individuals to victimization by sexual predators (and spousal abusers). Before you emotionally commit yourself to a relationship with anyone, consider in earnest the following warning signs that may indicate you may be unconsciously seeking the wrong kind of relationship partner:

• You have been abused, molested, or sexually assaulted (as an adult or child).
• Your previous spouse was abusive or you suspected an abusive relationship with your child might have taken place.
• You have previously abused or become sexually involved with a child (even as a child).
• You feel you need someone to be complete, or to survive, to maintain your standard of living, or simply to get by and pay your bills.
• You have previously been in a sexless or sexually oppressive relationship.
• You are attracted to someone because they seem to be so exotic and different from anyone you have known before.
• You know yourself to have obsessive or compulsive sexual desires, thoughts or needs.
• Your child displays sexual knowledge or behavior beyond that which is appropriate for their age.
• Your child behaves flirtatiously or provocatively with adults.
• You find yourself interested in securing a partner who will protect or "save" you.
• You have previously been in a paraphilic relationship and/or find you are unable to achieve sexual gratification without conditioned stimuli such as pain, pornographic imagery, or thinking sexually deviant thoughts.
• Your prospective partner seems perfect -- too good to be true.
• You find yourself "painting pretty pictures" of your relationship for your friends, family and colleagues that you realize are descriptions of the relationship you wish you had - not the relationship you have in reality. You describe your relationship as perfect or in idealistic terms, but when you are alone, you recognize that your descriptions are as far from the reality of the relationship as a fairy tale is to everyday life.

Having a history of sexual or physical abuse does not automatically mean you will be an abuser, or the victim of an abuser. It can mean you will be less likely to be able to recognize and identify warning signs in your own home and relationships when they present themselves. This is quite different from "choosing not to see" or "looking the other way," in that it is a conditioned and unconscious reaction. For your safety, and for the safety of your child, if these warning signs apply to you, please consider seeking counseling before you seek a life partner.

WARNING SIGNS TO LOOK FOR IN YOUR PARTNER:

• Rushes into a relationship, or quickly attempts to establish "permanence".
• Dominates activities and decision-making processes, or is overly submissive and agreeable.
• Displays rage; inappropriate temper, or displays no temper at all (conceals even normal feelings of anger).
• Frequently fails to acknowledge or respect your opinions, preferences, boundaries, or established house rules. May use "I was just playing" as a passive-aggressive excuse.
• Maintains a large collection of pornography: books, magazines, movies, computer images, web site bookmarks, sex toys, props, bondage gear, etc.
• Continues to encourage or attempts to convince you to engage in sexual activities in which you have stated you have no interest.
• Refers to his or her sexual preferences and activities as a "lifestyle".
• Makes inappropriate adult materials accessible or available to children in the home.
• Allows children to view materials or movies which are unquestionably inappropriate for their age and level of maturity.
• Perceives or states that children are capable of adult levels of maturity and emotional comprehension.
• Quick to lavish attention and affection on children, especially your children very soon after meeting them. Highly physical play.
• Doesn't appear to be aware of or respectful of a child's personal space.
• Appears to be especially trustworthy and respectable; has established an excellent reputation and good standing in the community.
• Prefers the company of children. Feels more comfortable with children than adults.
• Singles out children who seem troubled and in need of attention or affection for extra attention and affection.
• Often dates or marries women with children that are the age of his preferred victims.
• Rarely forces or coerces a child into sexual contact. Establishes solid trust and friendship with target victims. Physical contact is gradual, from touching, to picking up, to holding on lap, to kissing, etc. (May invest years in this "grooming" process.)
• Derives intense gratification from contact with children (physical or visual).
• Finds different ways and places to be alone with children.
• Are usually "family men", have no criminal record, and deny that they abuse children, even after caught, convicted, incarcerated, and court-ordered into a sex offender program.
• Former offenders refer to or explain their crime as a "relationship", i.e., "I had a relationship with a 16-year-old."
• Often troubled by sexual dysfunction with partners, which serves to conceal the pedophile's true preferences and practices.
• Are often themselves victims of some form of childhood sexual abuse (but not always).
• Even if the pedophile has no children, his home is usually child-friendly, with toys, books, video games, computers, bikes, swing sets, skateboards, playroom, pool, snacks - things to attract children to his home and keep them coming back. Usually the items reflect the preferred age of his victims.
• Some pedophiles recognize that their behavior is criminal, immoral, and unacceptable by society, and operate in secrecy. Some are quite open and militant about their practices and advocate the normalization of pedophilia or incest under the guise of freedom of speech, or the argument that children are capable of desiring, sustaining and benefitting from adult relationships.
• Shows an unusual interest in or makes inappropriate comments about the sexual development of children
• Volunteers much of his/her free time to be with children; offers free care or transportation to children.
• Gives expensive and often inappropriate gifts to children, i.e., buying affection, trust or loyalty.
• Offers to take the child fishing, camping or other places alone.
• Talks to children on the Internet, on the phone, or sends postal mail

Pedophiles and paraphiles can be heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual. They can be any age, though the typical pedophile "profile" is a 30-something male; a successful professional who claims strong religious beliefs. The typical paraphile -- though they too can be of any age and socioeconomic background -- will typically attempt to establish your sexual interests and limits especially early in the process of getting to know one another.

It is important to understand that both pedophiles and paraphiles can be exatraordinarily patient. They are typically of above average intelligence, and "read" people expertly. They understand that what you say no to today can be changed given enough finesse, patience, and manipulation. They may take years "grooming" you and/or your children to achieve their goals. You must always be willing and able to keep your eyes open in a relationship, and immediately terminate the relationship without allowing explanation and further manipulation should these signs begin to reveal themselves.

No matter how far into a relationship you are, if you find yourself involved with someone who turns out to be a sexual deviant, you must -- for yourself and your children -- seek help and get out. It is never too late, and it has never gone too far that you can't protect your children from further harm.

Above all, take the situation seriously. It won't get better if you ignore it or give it time. It will only get worse, and more damage will be done. Don't be afraid to "create a fuss" or "make trouble" for the offender. Don't be afraid to reach out for help, and do not fear what will happen to you or your child/ren if you make an outcry. You may not be able to imagine how, but help will be there once you speak up. If you know or suspect that abuse is taking place -- whether the victim is you or your child -- you MUST, by law, report it. As a parent, you are obligated to protect your children first. Failing to do so when you have knowledge of or strong suspicion of victimization, you as the parent will ultimately be held the most accountable for what happens to your child. That sounds harsh, but it is the law in every state of our union. Don't end up being victimized twice by an abuser. If you or your children are being abused, report it NOW. If you aren't sure if an abuse is taking place, ask your child directly, specifically, and non-threateningly.

The help will be there.

---

If you are a parent in need of help:

• Psychology Today's Child Abuse
• Your local Children's Advocacy Center
• Your local womens' shelter
• Your local police department

If you are an offender in need of help:

• Sex offender information and help
• Psychology Today's Diagnosis Dictionary: Pedophilia
• Mental Help Net: Sexual Disorders
  
  

---

MORE RESOURCES:

• Child Sexual Abuse: Intervention and Treatment
  from U.S Dept. of Health & Human Services,
  Administration for Children & Families
• Profile of a Pedophile
  from Mental Health Matters
• Paraphilias
  from Mental Health Matters
• Societal Myths about Sex Offending and Consequences for Prevention of Offending Behavior Against Children and Women
  from Institute for Psychological Therapies (IPT) Journal
• Smarter Adults - Safer Children
  from The Agos Group, LLC
• Fighting Child Pornography
• Sex Offenders
  from the Federal Judicial Center
• Sex Offender Characteristics
  from the Texas Commission on Law Enforcement
  
  

---

Sometimes people experience catastrophic circumstances in their lives, and they need some assistance to get back on their feet. We are a wealthy country, and I believe the majority of our citizens are generous-hearted people who are happy to do their part to help those who are suffering or downtrodden rebuild their lives.

We should not, however, be in the business of establishing and maintaining lifestyles for the convenience of those who are bodily and mentally able to care for themselves but choose not to.

Welfare as we knew it in the 70s no longer exists. Technically speaking, the system that enabled impoverished families to live for years and years on public assistance without seeking employment no longer exists. Neither does the system that paid families more money each month for every new baby or dependent they added to the household.

These days, public assistance is far more regulated. We offer assistance to displaced and low income families designed to supplement their income and resources to enable them to build better lives. "Welfare" payments -- now known as Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) -- now has a two-year benefit limit. Along with AFDC, families can receive assistance with utilities, rent/housing, medical care, education expenses, child care, and more. We even have programs that will pay for gasoline so a parent can get to work or attend classes.

So how does it happen that I can name a handful of people right off the bat who have been on public assistance for years, with no indication that they will lose their benefits? Umm ... a wild guess says they are lying to get their benefits? How, I have no idea. What I know is the same kinds of people who lie and misrepresent facts to gain benefits are the same people who firmly believe the benefits are an entitlement, and they are fully right to take all they can get. Why shouldn't they? It's free, and there is no mechanism in place to change their "entitled" mentality. They don't even have to work for it, or repay it when they are in healthy straights.

I have a very simple solution to welfare abuse -- and I am not referring to people who have a genuine need for a helping hand to get back on their feet, and accept their benefits responsibly. My solution, however, would benefit all recipients of assistance, not to mention all taxpayers.

The solution: benefits become loans that must be repaid. I'm not talking student loan "let you drown yourself in debt, then pursue you like piranhas on a cow in the river" loans. I'm talking in-kind exchanges: services and labor for benefits.

Let's say I am a factory worker whose position has been eliminated. I was given no advance notice, no severence pay, and have no savings (it's shocking how few people live any more securely than paycheck-to-paycheck). I register for unemployment, which will pay me a benefit of $300 every two weeks. (Unemployment is a benefit that has already been paid, and therefore would not need to be repaid under my proposed program).

The problem is, my future employment prospects aren't good. I know the position I held at the factory is being eliminated in all factories as automation replaces skilled tradesmen. I don't have much hope of finding comparable work, and I don't have the education or training behind me to do much of anything else.

Unemployment benefits may keep me from being evicted from my home, but they won't feed my family of four or pay our utility bills. I need some help feeding my family and keeping the utilities paid until I find work.

Enter AFDC ... which I think wrongly limits such benefits only to adults with dependent children. I visit the AFDC office to apply for the benefits I need. While I am there, I am made aware of a program that will help me gain new job skills to broaden my range of marketable skills. Now we're talking about financial and educational support -- something that will make it possible for me truly rebuild and restabilize my life.

In exchange, I provide the AFDC office with a checklist of my skills, talents and interests. AFDC uses my checklist to assign me to work that will allow me to work off my loaned benefits as well as keep me employed, raise my pride and spirits through useful employment, and decrease governmental expenses and long-term aid dependency. I am assigned to the shop where the city's buses are serviced. I work 20 hours per week, which leaves me plenty of time to search for other work.

My spouse, meanwhile, gets an assignment as an office clerk because he knows how to operate a computer. We know it would cost more to pay for daycare while he works than he can earn. No problem! AFDC matches us with a daycare provider (which is how that particular benefit recipient is repaying their loan).

Now my spouse and I are both gaining work experience, making new contacts, keeping ourselves busy and in touch with the working market, and repaying our benefits as we earn them. We feel the pride of knowing we are working for what we get -- not accepting a hand-out. Our government also benefits by not having to hire, train, and pay individuals or contractors to perform the services their enrollees can perform in exchange for benefits.

See? Simple. Disaster relief aside, you take what you need. You pay for what you take. No free rides. The policy is simple: provide a real opportunity to recover from a financial disaster to any adult individual who needs it and is able-bodied enough to perform some type of work or provide some type of service.

Austin is not the only city beset by an inordinate number of panhandlers. Aren't all human beings - irrespective of their marital status or whether or not they are custodial parents - deserving of a hand up when they are down? Is it not in our best interest as human beings and taxpayers to enable every capable individual to become better educated and employable (thus creating more taxpayers)? I've seen panhandlers who can tolerate walking up and down a median for hours on end in 115° heat looking for hand-outs from passers-by. That is an able-bodied person!

We cannot in good conscience make begging on street corners illegal unless and until we have viable alternatives for these people - alternatives that do not exclude them because they aren't married with children to feed. With such a system in place, it will quickly become evident who is willing to work, who is genuinely incapacitated and in need of special assistance, and who is just plain lazy and would rather beg for change than work an honest day and pay their fair share of taxes. The latter certainly deserve no sympathy or hand-outs in my book, and maybe we could heal this particular societal ill for the betterment of us all.