"Poundstone, 41, was arrested June 27 in Malibu and faces charges of three counts of committing a lewd act on a girl under the age of 14 ..."
I'm curious. The people who go around talking about "True Love" when a male minor gets an adult woman pregnant and/or that the young boy is considered to be "Lucky", I wonder if they think the same thing about this case? So is it True Love, seeing how it was an adult female with a minor? Is the young girl to be considered "Lucky" as well? C'mon now -- don't be a hypocrit: tell us like it is!
edited for UBB only
[ edited by Borillar on Jul 3, 2001 12:34 PM ]
posted on July 3, 2001 01:22:01 PM new
Short for Lesbian. I have heard the term often before and I am not aware that it was offensive to anyone. I used the shortened verion because of the title space for threads.
posted on July 3, 2001 01:25:23 PM new
>>>Lezbo<<<
Got my feathers ruffled, too.
Missed the claim for "True Love" also.
Do you have another link for how her plea was entered?
(pardon my ignorance, this is the first I've heard of this)
posted on July 3, 2001 01:26:51 PM newShort for Lesbian. I have heard the term often before and I am not aware that it was offensive to anyone. I used the shortened verion because of the title space for threads.
So by that logic, it's okay to refer to male gays as "Homos" in thread titles?
posted on July 3, 2001 01:34:04 PM new
As far as the linked article goes, there is no mention of anyone claiming "true love." I think it's an attempt on borillar's part to liken the situation to that of teacher Mary Kay Letourneau, even though there seems to be nothing in evidence to support such a comparison.
posted on July 3, 2001 01:44:33 PM new
I've been following this story since the beginning, and I hope it's not true. For one thing I really like her. For a more important reason, if it's true, it will hurt gay men and woman from adopting or fostering children.
Her neighbors say she is a good mother, and always had parties for her and the neighborhood kids.
She looked just awful when she was released from jail. Did anyone else notice her teeth?
posted on July 3, 2001 01:56:09 PM new
Hi everybody -- you might have noticed that I revised the title of this thread to remove the word "lezbo" as it is unnecessary and inflammatory.
Diana
Edited to add: Moderators cannot alter a thread title, and this was done as an exception to the rule, and only because there were several replies to the thread before we caught it.
posted on July 3, 2001 02:08:19 PM new
Sorry about the confusion, folks - I deleted Smitty's post and unlocked the thread. Had a bit of an overlap there!
borillar - in the future please refrain from using deragatory terms in posts and thread titles. Thanks...
posted on July 3, 2001 02:35:16 PM new
I have not heard yet what she is supposedly guilty of. They keep saying "offenses against children". WHAT offenses? Did she kiss one? Moon them? WHAT? Anyone know what offense she supposedly did??
I cant stand Paula Poundstone, myself. But, I thought people were innocent until proven guilty. Even if she is found innocent, she will have the stigma attached to her forever now.
posted on July 3, 2001 02:41:25 PM new
It could be a witch hunt, or it could be legit. Lots of people say she's a good mother, but the authorities say otherwise ...
In any event, these are very serious charges. Hopefully prejudice won't cloud the jury's eyes at trial. But either way, Poundstone will suffer. Not only the agony of the trial, but the aftermath. Because even if she's innocent, and the jury concurs, her career's still toast.
Of course, if she's guilty of these crimes, I could give a hoot about her career. She should get the full measure of the law.
posted on July 3, 2001 02:48:44 PM new
I can't stand her either but I still hope it isn't true. I don't like to see anyone abusing young children in any way.
Chococake, What about her teeth? I didn't see it!This sounds like something I NEED to know!
posted on July 3, 2001 02:51:33 PM newNo, homo & lezbo are not equal.
Can you explain this to me, ClearAsMud? I have heard both terms used as derogatory references. How did you come to the conclusion that they are not equal?
posted on July 3, 2001 03:42:28 PM new
Sorry, Joice.
I apologize. I will behave.
Spazmodeus:
I'm not sure where you are located geographically, (born and raised on the East Coast, myself) which could be the cause for differences in definition.
"Homo" is short for homosexual, generalized to both males and females, not necessarily considered as offensive as it is often interpreted as an ignorant slang slur. "Homo" is primarily just as a "stupid comment".
The connotations derived from "Lezbo" and "Fagg*t", however, are hateful, mean, and prejudicial. Definitely perceived as a personal attack, if not venomous.
This is just an abstract example of my interpretation:
homo = harmless Archie Bunker types.
fagg*t = KKK
posted on July 3, 2001 04:30:52 PM new
ClearAsMud,
I'm from New England. It's always been my perception that "homo" is just as derogatory as "fagg*t" Both are used to demean a certain type of person.
And for what it's worth, Archie Bunker types aren't harmless. They vote, they influence policy and treatment in the workplace, they deny rent and jobs to people on the basis of race, creed or sexual orientation, and they look the other way when prejudice and cruelty are perpetrated upon people who don't fit their narrow profile of how people should look or behave. Some of them even automatically suspect people of being guilty of crimes for the same reasons.
posted on July 3, 2001 05:06:40 PM new
I've personally known 3 people that were accused of child molestation. In all 3 cases they were innocent but the stress and stigma placed on them I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy.
1) Richard was a business partner. A friend of his was left with a 3 year old boy when his wife packed up and left one night. After the wife had been gone 5 months she decided she wanted her son back, to achieve this she charged that Richard had been molesting the boy when he had visited her ex-husband on several occasions. Richard was an innocent bystander that found himself in the position to be used as a tool to try and get her child back. Her attempt failed but not after causing Richard a lot of grief.
2) Jerry was a co-worker and my best friend. A social worker at his daughters school decided to interview some of the kids after the infamous McMartin incident in California. Jerry's daughter told her stories about men coming into her room at night when she was asleep ( 5 year old daughter.) When Jerry was asked to come to the school the social worker voiced her suspicions to him of his daughter being molested. Jerry had to be physically restrained from beating the social worker in her office. The social worker was later fired because she had opened up several such cans of worms by interviewing several children and getting them to tell her what she wanted to hear.
3) Dale was a co-worker. This one is hard to believe but totally true. Dale flew a 'red-eye special' from Anchorage to Detroit regularly to take care of his elderly parents. One trip the plane landed in Detroit, Dale walks off the plane and is immediately arrested for molesting a child! On the flight Dale had been sitting beside a 8 and 5 year old girl. They were acting unruly and Dale told them, "Stop this jumping around, don't be little monsters!" The oldest girl then got up and went to the stewardess and told her that Dale had been fondling her 5 year old sister. The stewardess simply came back moved the 2 girls to first class and notified the pilot of the report. Dale made the front page of the Anchorage Daily News, they gave his name, where he worked, and reported the incident as it had been reported to the stewardess. After some questioning the 8 year old confessed that Dale had just told them to behave and hadn't touched her or her sister in anyway, and she created the story to pay him back for calling her a 'little monster'. I lost touch and never heard the outcome of Dale's suit against Delta, I hope he got free tickets for life.
Child molesters are one of the lowest forms of life, and because of that emotions run wild just at the accusation. In the 1600s you called a person a witch, today you call them a child molester. If you don't think accusing one of child molestation makes them instantly guilty try and remember the hysteria over the McMartin pre-school incident and the end results. I wish Poundstone the best if she's innocent.
posted on July 3, 2001 05:08:59 PM newSpazmodeus:
Collectively, almost every "group" can be considered harmful to any other "group".
My meaning in the example was on an individual or personal level.
I guess I chose a poor example. Both references are derogatory and demeaning, hopefully you do not think I feel otherwise.
How about this example:
homo = nanny-nanny-boo boo stick your head in doo-doo.
f-t = hate crimes & other violent aggressive behavior.
or
The person who calls out "homo" makes a fool of himself and perhaps makes some people uncomfortable.
The person who calls out "f*t" instills fear and is not someone you want to reckon with.
or
I can call you a butthead or a f'ing a'hole.
While neither are complimentary, isn't one worse than the other?
Do I appear to be demographically challenged?
posted on July 3, 2001 07:04:25 PM new
This one's bound to get locked up because the insults are flying here.
Paula Poundstone is (like any of us) innocent until proven guilty. Unlike any of us, this arrest has made nat'l news - the price of fame.
As to those nasty nasty terms, say them until they mean nothing. Lesbo, homo, queer, #*!@ - who cares? My ancestors were called greasy guineas (sp?) and dagos (again sp?) and I could care less. Da Vinci was a dago I guess, so I'm honored.
I had a gay roommate in college (yeah I know the joke). I used to call her queer and she used to call me a breeder. It was a joke. We didn't care if anyone got it. 20 years later and 1500 miles between us and we still don't care if anyone gets it.
How we treat each other is a better indicator of who we are than anything else. I could care less about sexual orientation. Small mindedness, name calling, etc. make me want to puke.
posted on July 3, 2001 07:10:51 PM new
I guess nobody knows what poundstone is accused of? Its like hearing "oh, so and so was arrested for theft" and we all imagine someone robbing a bank and it was a gumball from a machine that fell out and he took it from the slot where it was just hanging out. I have been hearing she abused some girls in her care. What does that mean? So far, no answers from the news. Innuendo and dire hints. Enough to ruin her forever regardless of whether she is found innocent.
posted on July 3, 2001 07:18:23 PM new
I read a quote from the DA, something to the effect of "touching a minor in any way for sexual purposes". That was his clarification of the charges that were filed against her.
All I've heard is "lewd acts" upon a minor, and child endangerment, which pretty much leaves it to the imagination.
I don't know how all this will turn out, but I've had an uneasy feeling about it from the start. The lack of specifics in regard to the charges doesn't make me feel any better.
Though I recognize her name, I'm not familiar with Poundstone's work or personality. Nor have I ever heard her mentioned as a celebrity who is gay. Is she gay? Or was this just an inference drawn by the originator of the thread?
posted on July 3, 2001 08:19:47 PM new
I haven['t seen any specific charges laid out--simply a nebulous statement about "lewd conduct & endangerment of two other kids."
Strangely enough not one single person so far (that I have seen) has stepped forward to point a finger or give "eyewitness" statements. There *have* been plenty of statements, though, by neighbors, friends & family that they *haven't* witnessed anything of the kind & oodles of character-witness statements.
So who brought these charges against her? What, specifically, is she supposed to have done? Has she done anything at all...
posted on July 3, 2001 08:32:04 PM new
Here's a facsimile of the actual charge sheets presented in court. It's an odd color, so note that there are five pages following the first:
