A sex offender in Washington state who has spent most of his life behind bars, convicted of an assortment of different crimes ranging from check kiting to child molestation, is close to his release date. Not surprisingly, given his long history of preying on young girls, prosecutors are pushing for him to be sent instead to a facility for sexual predators, as a recent story on SeattlePI.com notes.
A state psychologist has described Donald “Theo” Holmes as a remorseless psychopath and a pathological liar who has managed to rack up an impressive array of crimes, many involving underage girls, during his stints outside of prison. As the psychologist observed:
“He uses women and children to feed his sexual desires, and he uses other members of society to supply him with money, clothes, and cars that make him look important and fuel the grandiosity which is an ingrained part of his personality. …
“He admits to multiple sexual conquests and is proud of the fact that he has 22 children and that he has had mothers and daughters … pregnant at the same time with his child.”
Holmes, for his part, simply describes himself as a “womanizer.” Apparently 12-year-old girls count as “women” in his world.
Over on The Spearhead, W.F. Price uses this case as an example of what is wrong with, you guessed it, women.
Fathering 22 children is not easy even without spending so much time incarcerated, so one can only assume that his criminality had absolutely no ill effect on his success with women. In fact, it may have enhanced his love life.
Here again, we see that being a good man has nothing to do with one’s success with women, and often is an impediment. One of the big lies of feminism is that women will shower affection on well-behaved men, and have no desire for the low-life thugs of society. Sadly, this is not the case.
Perhaps the most important message we can get out there to young men is that there is little connection between what turns women on and what is objectively good for society.
I don’t know any feminists who think that women only go for “good” guys; indeed, the feminists I know spend a lot of time discussing (and trying to help) women who are or were involved with not-so-good-guys. Evidently the imaginary feminists Price hangs out with, though, are reincarnations of Victorians who assume all women are perfect little angels.
Price is bad enough. Do we have to look at the comments too? Yes, yes we do. Let’s start with the very first one, from Opus, who asked:
but is he really so bad [?]… there is nothing to suggest that the minors were anything other than enthusiatic. Whatever views one may have as to the age of consent, the girls were not infants or children but adolescents.
Yep, in Opus’ mind, sex with 12- and 14-year-olds is no problem, so long as we assume (based on nothing) that they were “enthusiastic” about it. Last I checked, this comment had 16 upvotes and only 3 downvotes, so apparently he’s not the only one willing to blame underage girls for being raped. Sorry, having “enthusiastic” sex with a career criminal many decades older than them.
Meanwhile, Anonymous Reader (in another heavily upvoted comment) takes aim at:
the state of Washington. There’s no way this guy could have spawned 22 children if he had to support them on his own. How many are on AFDC, WIC or other welfare programs, paid for by ordinary, working Beta men? Yes, this is a result of liberalism but it also is a result of feminism.
AFDC and WIC are, of course, intended to make sure that the children of poor women don’t, you know, starve to death. Now, I’m pretty sure Holmes wouldn’t have given a shit if his kids all starved. But apparently neither would Anonymous and his numerous upvoters. Why exactly should the children – some of whom may well be the result of the rape of underage girls — have to pay the price for Holmes’ despicable actions?
Yes, you can blame liberalism and feminism for the fact that these children are being fed. That’s not a bad thing. The actions of Holmes weren’t the actions of a liberal or a feminist; they were the actions of a seemingly psychopathic sexual predator who assumed, like many traditionalist men, that women and girls are put on this earth for men to use as they see fit.
NOTE: I didn’t set out today to write yet another post about The Spearhead. But I read Price’s post and sort of had to say something. My next post will have nothing to do with The Spearhead. I promise.
EDITED TO ADD: Picture credit: Zampieri, “God reprimanding Adam and Eve,” detail; photo G. Piolle.
@Captain Bathrobe I saw an interesting theory once about Rome’s Fall, that it was actually the Catholic Church’s fault. Before Constantine, conquered lands were usually allowed to keep thier own religion and culture intact. Upon the entrance of Christianity, this stopped. As such, Rome had a much, much harder time recruiting soldiers and thus expanding, and then on is history.
. Sometimes the old ways are the best ways.(NWO)
Try reading a book called “Sex at Dawn”, it talks about the really Old times. It might enlighten you a bit about sexuality.
Something to do with not enough babies being born of the right sort CB.
Social Darwinism for the (non)Win!
Oh my God. NOWslave: if you are going to hark back to the olden days, please refer to the ones that actually existed. You are correct that violence has always been used against women by men in their society to punish them for seeking civil emancipation, but everything else you say has all the historical authenticity of a Georgette Heyer novel.
We know you think women should not have any civil rights, and should be completely under the control of their husbands and fathers. The mystery is why you think women should want this, as well.
@Kendra, the bionic mommy…You’re under a false assumption. Only the elite learned to read/math in schools hundreds of years ago. The common man and woman would teach themselves in their homes. For every man whose wife/daughter couldn’t read the reverse was true as well, where a wife or daughter would read to the father/husband a story from a coveted book they owned.
The “wife” beatings of so many “fictional” stories are just that fiction. If they weren’t the letters written from long ago would be riddled with these stories. These evil men as you seem to assume would have been practically non existant as opposed to today.
I have two brothers and two sisters, many years ago one of my sisters had a boyfriend. He was a great guy except for the “juice” he tried to quit and since none of us drink he tried. But, he couldn’t stop, he wasn’t voilent towards her, but he once punched a wall in her house while drunk. My brother and I went over and gave him a stern talking to and a bloody lip and such, (so much better than calling the cops). He went to AA but the juice was too strong, he couldn’t quit. So we went in and kicked him the fuck out, (literally). My sister weakly protested because she knew we were right. She is now married to a real stand up guy.
The moral of the above story is, back in the olden days everyone had extended families, (one of the perks of large families). So if a man were to hit a woman back then, the womans father, sons, uncles, ect. would come over and beat the ever loving shit out of him. Even his father and brothers would join in. The propaganda machine that will tell you about a womans daily beatings back then are false. DV simply wasn’t acceptable back then and was more or less unheard of. TV lies in case you didn’t know.
As far as vaccines go, do you know whats in those injections? Next time you toss down a tylanol maybe you should think twice. Ya never know, I just might be helping by reccomending not eating tylanols like candy.
16 or 18 as the age of consent? Isn’t that a bit…late? Here in Germany, the age of consent is 14 (and 16 for booze), and so far, it doesn’t seem to me that young girls are systematically taken advantage of. But then again, we don’t have pageants for toddlers, either. And we don’t fuss so much about children being born in caring, loving relationships that happen to be unwed. And our contracepts seem to work most of the time, therefore not resulting in a massive teen pregnancy rate.
Maybe in the end a youngster’s sexual maturity depends on what we teach them as a society…?
@Catherine: “girls my age are better looking than you.”
Ewwww.
Seriously, ewwww. Ok, maybe forget what I wrote above. You really manage to sound like a child whore here. Where are your parents, girl?
@MRAL: *OMEGA* *HUSBANDS*??? I thought omegas never get a woman.
Also, if women just want to abuse men, shouldn’t you be glad about not getting one? You really need to decide, man.
Lydia-yes. The US has had some pretty weird hang ups about sex since our founding. However I am kind of puzzled that your country would not look even a little askance at a 14 year old with a 54 year old.
DV simply wasn’t acceptable back then and was more or less unheard of.
See, kids, this is what happens when you get your history from right-wing talk show hosts and The History Channel: you start to think that your own ass is a legitimate source of information.
The massive amount of fail in your claims makes babies cry NWOslave.
Do you know ANYTHING?
@Nobby,
I think that theory is far more plausible than “they fucked themselves to death.” But, hey, what do I know?
@Captain Bathrobe…Last comment of the night, I’m tired and have a long day tommorow.
You said…”Ah yes, the idea that men are salivating dogs who can’t control themselves! What a dim view of men you have, NWO.”
So women slut walking, dressing in less, wearing practically nothing on the beach, perfume, jewelry, high heels, ect, ect, ect. Is this an example of women “restraining” their sexuality? Don’t women do this, use their sexuality to attract men? Or is doing this just to feel good about yourselves, because if it is, I’m guessing women do this when they plan to stay home alone. I mean women want to feel good about themselves when they’re alone as well, right? Do srtippers use their sexuality to get money? Do prostitutes use their sexuality to get money? And how do they dress? Use your superior logic ladies and debunk away.
He knows quite a lot, Elizabeth. It’s just all wrong.
Um, NWO, you stated that women failing to restrain their sexuality would result in “rape culture” like we’ve never seen before–i.e., men would not be able to restrain themselves and start raping uncontrollably, or something. I said, bullshit; men can learn to, you know, not rape. Then you went off on some tangent about women dressing sexily like that was somehow the same thing as men raping indiscriminately.
I’ll give you a clue: it’s not the same thing. Women who dress and act in a sexually attractive manner ARE NOT ATTACKING OR HURTING ANYONE. Whereas rapists definitely are.
Women who dress attractively
ARE
NOT
ASKING
TO
BE
RAPED.
Seriously, dude, what the fuck is wrong with you?
You know what else? We had such a greater sense of community when we practiced human sacrifice every spring to make the crops grow. And I, for one, miss how efficient slavery made a city’s economy. There’s certainly nothing to bring a family together like raiding your neighbors or putting a pogrom together, either.
There are reasons that these things aren’t done anymore, and it’s because they are harmful, bad and wrong.
There’s also a big problem, one that I’ve bought into at times, when talking about the ‘olden days’. Just which olden days are we talking about? Victorian social, marital and sexual mores were quite different from the late medieval mores, and even late medieval mores changed subtly from country to country. That’s to say nothing of the way things were done in China, India, Japan or various tribal societies; or how early man lived before widespread agriculture. I don’t doubt that in some cultures, a woman’s male relatives would rein in an abusive husband – but in other cultures, it would have been seen as the height of rudeness to interfere in a man’s own household.
@Elizabeth: I forgot to mention, we do.
In fact, I even faintly remember the case of a 14-year-old girl and a 41-year-old man. But even in that case, if the girl really WANTS to stay with that man, you can’t do anything about it.
According to the girl, living with her (apparently not so great) mother was even worse for her. Of course, now you could start assuming why she was staying with that guy, father figure or something else.
But in this case, it wasn’t any kind of abuse, just a regular parental/CPS agency failure, but, of course, that happens every day, as long as any jerk who can’t even keep his driving license is allowed to have children.
@Slave: Maybe he started drinking because he felt sorry for his wife to have you as her brother?!
I mean, what’s worse: DV or more DV, now perpetrated by NWOSlave? I didn’t think you were that much of an asshole in real life too, but obviously you are. Unfortunately, your sister didn’t have the ovaries to report you. I would have, believe me.
Also, NWO, ‘slutwalks’ aren’t about attracting men, they’re about affirming women’s right to their own sexuality, no matter how they dress, act or have sex.
At least attempt to google things before making long-winded rants about them.
As the Captain said, wow NWOSlave, and you say feminists hate men? At least we don’t think they’re all rapists just waiting to be unleashed by the power of unrestrained female sexuality.
Unrestrained female sexuality will always lead to unrestrained male sexuality. And when that happens, you’ll know what a real rape culture is, and all the bruqa’s in the world won’t help then.
I think men as a class can handle some unrestrained, passionate, enthusiastic, consenting sexuality. *fans self* Oh, yeah.
Titfortat, most feminists are not conservative because, you know, we want to keep our reproductive rights, etc. As to the age of consent, I said it when it first happened, and I’ll say again now: that was the only good thing Stevie ever did for this country, and likely the only thing he ever will. Feminists =/= leftists. Both Left and Right have gone against feminist interests numerous times; it’s just that the Right is a lot worse.
@Captain Bathrobe…One last comment, what the hell.
I got a delicious hoagie and I’m parading it around in front of starving people. I am showing it off. Aw man it smells so goooooood, just like perfume. When ya look at it it is goooorgeous, it’s just making your mouth water and I’m really grinding it in those poor sap starving peoples faces. But I “own” it baby and you can’t have it.
Do I deserve to get bonked on the head and have someone take it? Some will say no some will say yes. If I continually do this WILL someone bonk me or another innocent person who happens to have food on the head and take it. You betcha. But it’s not the saaaaame.
Okay-but that sounds awfully exploitative to me because she is trying to escape her terrible mother unless 14 year olds can work?
As to the age of consent, I said it when it first happened, and I’ll say again now: that was the only good thing Stevie ever did for this country,(Alex)
I agree, I just find it ironic that he did it and not a feminist.
Expanding your metaphor, NWOslave:
What if you and people in your same general demographic continuously had your sandwiches stolen by another general demographic? What if the bonk on your head was rather damaging to you, and put you at risk for developing things like epilepsy or short term memory loss*? What if the people who kept taking your sandwiches weren’t even starving, and were capable of either making or buying their own? They just took your sandwich because they wanted to take your sandwich. What if the police only sometimes believed that you’d been the victim of assault and theft, and said that, because you’d made donations to soup kitchens before, or given your sandwich away before, you didn’t have a right to complain when someone took a different sandwich away from you?
*Yes, I know rape doesn’t cause that, but I’m drawing a parallel between the risks for epilepsy and things like pregnancy, PTSD and HIV.
Or, you know what, NWOslave, what if sexuality is nothing like a freaking sandwich?
For fuck’s sake. Sex and sexuality isn’t an object you can steal. Comparing it to a sandwich is just… gross.
Ugh. Ugh. Ugh. NWOslave. The way you describe rape and sex is disgusting. Seriously. It makes my skin crawl.
Being horny is not a need, not like being hungry. And sex isn’t a fucking sandwich.
I’m sorry for the double post, but the amount of rage and ickiness I’m feeling right now is just so… ugh.
NWOslave, of course teasing people isn’t nice, but neither is it, in itself, an excuse for committing a crime. But we can distinguish your made-up hypothetical from real-life instances of rape because your story involves something you have whereas rape involves something a person is. You can leave your sandwich at home. You can eat it in the car. I gotta bring my body with me.
Most rapes — at least most that I’ve had any experience with — are committed against a person who is mostly covered up, not flashy, not provocative. Sweatpants. Jeans. A sweater. Pajamas. A work uniform. Your contention that rape only happens because of a style of dress is incorrect and purposefully misleading. Blame it on women, and we can all ignore the actual problem of real rapes that happen to real people. It’s disgusting that you’d even try to do that.