What made you go WTF today?

Last evening, two Marine recruiters rang my doorbell. Apparently my son's cell phone number and voice mail was caught in provider purgatory...but he'd checked the box agreeing to a "home visit". So these two Marines appeared at my doorstep, in full uniform, and proceeded to ask questions about my son. Trying to figure out if he was eligible....while also trying to recruit him.

Was he married? Did he spawn have any children? Did he use alcohol or "drugs"? Have any tattoos or piercings? Did he have bone implants, heart murmurs, allergies, or asthma? Was he taking any medications? Has he been treated for concussions, brain injuries, anxiety or depression? Has he been accused or convicted of a felony? Why is he interested in the military? Is he looking for educational benefits under the GI Bill?

The whole thing left me feeling defensive and very sour. :mad:

Well, did you answer any of the questions? You don't have to...or is this something he wants?

I answered some of their basic queries. But I also made it clear they should schedule a personal interview with my son, and not use me, his mother, as his best proxy. I told them flat out that I'd rather he go to college first, or take a few years to make his decision....and he didn't need the GI bill to do either.

but yes, he's always been drawn to "military service".

He doesn't seem like the kind who likes discipline...

Nah, that's my older son who's anti-establishment and rebels against authority. They're pretty much opposites that way, an inverse of the birth-order personality stereotype. :weird:

Well, if it makes you feel any better, I doubt we'll be putting non special ops troops on foreign ground in the next 4 years. :o

Thanks, but he's interested in ammunitions ('bomb squad') and precise shooting ('sniper'). :cry:

Screw all that...were they hot?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

Thanks, but he's interested in ammunitions ('bomb squad') and precise shooting ('sniper'). :cry:

---

He's not becoming a sniper unless he passes some pretty intense psych evaluations...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

He's not becoming a sniper unless he passes some pretty intense psych evaluations...

---

He knows that. That's why his anxiety and depression has been very difficult to treat. :(

Tell your son this is a dumb way to try to fix things. He should start playing cello or meditating or something.

Quote:

---

UN urges people to eat insects to fight world hunger...

---

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-22508439

Eating insects is already a common practice in poor countries. Collecting tarantulas and frying them is considered a delicacy in some Asian countries. I learned this from the Food Network, or reality TV, or some combination thereof. The fried hairy spider legs reportedly taste similar to crab claw meat.

*shudder*

Which is no surprise since crabs share a lot of similarities with spiders... they're both arthropods after all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

Eating insects is already a common practice in poor countries. Collecting tarantulas and frying them is considered a delicacy in some Asian countries. I learned this from the Food Network, or reality TV, or some combination thereof. The fried hairy spider legs reportedly taste similar to crab claw meat.

*shudder*

---

I'm guessing Loki's WTF is more at the UN proposing eating insects as a serious solution to world hunger than the act of eating insects itself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Timbuk2

I'm guessing Loki's WTF is more at the UN proposing eating insects as a serious solution to world hunger than the act of eating insects itself.

---

Why should it be a WTF? Insects are easy to breed and demand less resources per protein unit than normal beef ;)

My mum's cook book from when my parents lived in Africa has recipes for ants, caterpillars, grasshoppers, etc. Not the first time I hear of it as a solution for world hunger either, and I don't think it's very wtf, but I don't expect it to become very popular any time soon.

The internet hero Mr. Hatchet Wielding Hitchhiker, is wanted for murder.

He supposedly put on his facebook it was because he was drugged and raped.

Who would have thought that someone who jumps into a road rage incident swinging a hacket would be a little unstable...

Xbox sent me an avatar prop as a reward for the time I spent playing arcade titles last month.

It a couch. It looks like the casting couch. :bulb:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Timbuk2

I'm guessing Loki's WTF is more at the UN proposing eating insects as a serious solution to world hunger than the act of eating insects itself.

---

Oohh. :noob: I heard a blurb on NPR about "farming insects" to meet world hunger needs. There's a farm the size of a football field "growing" hundreds of thousands of scorpions in China, apparently quite successfully. The flip side of that kind of single-species insect cultivation was a cricket farm--that sprayed pesticides outside the building that killed the whole crop. (Millions of dead crickets must have smelled really bad.)

So, when exactly will the US come out of the Dark Ages regarding sex?

http://www.examiner.com/article/flor...x-relationship

hehe. florida

I seem to remember that those laws are pretty much everywhere.

yeah, but most states have gray area protections. if the relationship starts when both are within a certain age bracket they are protected if one hits 18 before the other.
in fact, I thought florida did have such protections, which may explain why the older one isn't being charged with statutory rape.

this is one girls parents using the legal system to hide behind the fact that their child might be gay.

Well, Texas certainly doesn't have those checks and balances. California doesn't have them as well, by the way (where even minor-on-minor action will get one or both of them labelled as sex offenders)

http://www.today.com/id/43909060/ns/...e#.UZqHr7X0F8F

don't get me wrong. the US has serious problems with criminalizing natural sexual behavior, especially with teens and their sexting, its just that the case in florida is something more.

I'm not sure that it is "something more" besides being about a lesbian instead of a straight relationship. Not to mention that all those people are fucked up for life because of this idiotic registry they're registered in and all those laws restricting their place of residency and such.

I mean, in the example from Texas I posted above, the guy was not allowed to live in the same house as his sisters or his new-born child, for chrissakes!

One of the people was 18 and the other was 15. That's statutory rape. I'm not saying that this is why the younger girl's parents brought this to police attention, but a law was clearly broken.

They began their relationship when the older girl was still 17. But, of course, it makes total sense:

"We have to break up! I'm turning 18 tomorrow!"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

One of the people was 18 and the other was 15. That's statutory rape. I'm not saying that this is why the younger girl's parents brought this to police attention, but a law was clearly broken.

---

Yeah, but at the same time the judge said she should finish her high school, yet they expelled her which I doubt would have happened if it had not been a gay relationship.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro

They began their relationship when the older girl was still 17. But, of course, it makes total sense:

"We have to break up! I'm turning 18 tomorrow!"

---

The statutory rape laws are there for a reason. Unfortunately, any law must have an arbitrary component to it. I don't think it's unreasonable to require teens to be no more than 2 years older than the teens they're sleeping with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flixy

Yeah, but at the same time the judge said she should finish her high school, yet they expelled her which I doubt would have happened if it had not been a gay relationship.

---

I think you'd get a similar outcome if one set of parents created a similar kind of stink over it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

The statutory rape laws are there for a reason. Unfortunately, any law must have an arbitrary component to it. I don't think it's unreasonable to require teens to be no more than 2 years older than the teens they're sleeping with.

---

Spoken like someone who never has been around teenagers for a longer period of time. I have now more than 15 years of experience of working with teenagers - and stuff like this is really something you don't need to worry about.

And, by the way, yes, the statutory rape laws are there for a reason. This, however, isn't that reason. It's the same as with fundamentalists, however, blindly using the letter of the law to excuse their inability to think for themselves. As, I'm sorry to say, you just did.

If the law was actually that unyielding and unbending, we could as well do away with judges, juries and lawyers and simply replace them with mindless automatons.

Yeah, because older teens aren't able to manipulate or use their position in a school's hierarchy to coerce a younger teen (especially someone who just joins a school) into having sex with them...And of course we know that 15 year olds are just as developed mentally, including having an ability to appreciate consequences, as are 18 year olds...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

Yeah, because older teens aren't able to manipulate or use their position in a school's hierarchy to coerce a younger teen (especially someone who just joins a school) into having sex with them...And of course we know that 15 year olds are just as developed mentally, including having an ability to appreciate consequences, as are 18 year olds...

---

Did this go to trial and was that proven to have been the case?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

Yeah, because older teens aren't able to manipulate or use their position in a school's hierarchy to coerce a younger teen (especially someone who just joins a school) into having sex with them...

---

I'm not quite sure why a 2 year limit would hinder those older teens from doing just that. It's probably magic.

Quote:

---

And of course we know that 15 year olds are just as developed mentally, including having an ability to appreciate consequences, as are 18 year olds...

---

When it comes to long-term versus short-term consequences, 18 year olds are not that different from 15 year olds. Or do you actually think that the brain is fully developed when you turn 18?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

Yeah, because older teens aren't able to manipulate or use their position in a school's hierarchy to coerce a younger teen (especially someone who just joins a school) into having sex with them...

---

We should have laws against popular kids sleeping with other kids, too :mad::up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro

When it comes to long-term versus short-term consequences, 18 year olds are not that different from 15 year olds. Or do you actually think that the brain is fully developed when you turn 18?

---

So you're saying the age should be raised? :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aimless

Did this go to trial and was that proven to have been the case?

---

What permanent consequences has the accused girl faced? She's not in jail and she hasn't been permanently kicked out of the school. She was transferred while the investigation is pending...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flixy

So you're saying the age should be raised? :p

---

Heh. One thing I've learned over the years: If something holds an inherent attraction to teenagers, they will do it. And when it comes to sex, telling them to forget sex because "we forbid it!" is not exactly a good or intelligent thing to do. I mean, with the kind of news coverage they don't really have the greatest role models in that regard. And if those really important figures they see in the TV every day don't show the faintest inkling of staying true to their spouses, then why should an unimportant teenager feel bound by those rules?

Which in essence means: Acknowledge that teenagers will have sex, whether you as a parent want it or not. Educate them on the matter. And that should be about the height of your involvement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

What permanent consequences has the accused girl faced? She's not in jail and she hasn't been permanently kicked out of the school. She was transferred while the investigation is pending...

---

Maybe you should try reading the article for a change.

Quote:

---

Kaitlyn has been offered a plea deal of house arrest for two years, plus a year of probation. This would delay her entering the next phase of her life and stay on her permanent adult record, limiting her career choices.

---

That means an entry in the sex offender list. Which means that she'll be a pariah for the rest of her life.

It is you who needs to read better. She hasn't faced those consequences yet. She'll face them only if she's convicted of the crime. Minx was claiming that the girl was punished without a trial.

Yeah, fat chance of that not happening, not with your moronic laws in that regard.

And I'm a bit confused: "To face a consequence" does not mean that you already suffered the consequence. Nor do those consequences have to be certain. Unless you rewrote all the dictionaries.

"I'm facing a grim future." By your logic, this shouldn't be possible.