J. Soltys's Weblog

August 28, 2008

Bikini Barista and Fox News Anchor Display “Perverted” Judgements

Last week a story made the rounds in the main stream media about an incident that took place at a coffee shop in Tacoma, Washington.
A man dressed in women’s clothing pulled up to a coffee shop called “Java Girls” and allegedly exposed himself to one of the baristas. The barista then threw a cup of boiling water in his lap before he had the chance to get away.

At the Fox News website, I had the opportunity to watch a video in which Fox News interviewed the barista who threw the cup of boiling water on the alleged suspect. (“Coffee Confrontation” in US news videos)
After watching the interview, and hearing the female anchor praise the girl as being brave, I have to challenge the estrogen bravado spun from this story and offer my opinion of the barista and the praise of Fox’s female anchor.

The name of the coffee house is called “Java Girls” for a reason. All the barista’s have to be female, and more importantly, the women must serve coffee in the tiniest bikinis they can find. In other words, the whole concept of the coffee house is to stimulate and manipulate the sexual perversions of men. From strippers, to call girls, to Hooter’s girls, to rap music, the concept is always the same – use the female body along with the allure of male sexual fantasies (whatever form it may take) to achieve one goal – to take money from men.

So my question is, “Who is the bigger pervert here?”

This woman took a job with the full knowledge that her job requires her to be scantily dressed with the main purpose of catering to the dark side of male sexuality. She spends hours each day, half naked, serving coffee to male clients along with other half naked women, with the full knowledge that she and her co-workers are catering to a clientele that views her and the other women in a highly sexualized “perverted” manner. But she is shocked by the “perverted” behavior of the man who exposed himself.
Is this irony or hypocrisy?

In the interview she claims the man went through the shop’s drive through three times. Each episode had about ten minutes between them. The barista said she brushed off her first encounter with the man as just a foolish prank. But she says after the second time, and especially the third time, she and her co-worker became really scared.

How scared were they? The women were so scared that they never called the police. Instead, the women enacted a scheme to douse him with boiling water if he should return for a third time. In the ten minutes they had between his second appearance and his third, the only “safety” measures the women procured was to create their plan, prepare the glass of boiling water, and lie in wait for their victim.

Does this sound like a vulnerable, frightened victim, or does it sound more like a psychotic vigilante?
The man made no attempt to harm them physically by trying to force his way into the coffee shop, however, the female baristas seemed to imply this was their biggest fear.
But contrary to their story, instead of fearing a physical altercation with a mentally unstable man, the women devised a scheme to purposely engage the man into a dangerous physical confrontation by dousing his genitals with boiling water. This female bravado had the potential to enrage the man as much as chase him away, and provoke the very physical altercation the women claimed they feared the most. Only after engaging him in this physical confrontation did they decide to call the police.

Jane Skinner, the female Fox News anchor taking part in conducting the interview with the barista is obsessed in the interview with finding out if the boiling water scolded his genitals. I’m not talking about a generalized curiosity. I’m talking about a contemptuous curiosity and a malevolent obsession that the man has received permanent, emotional and physical scars that will make his the rest of his life a living hell.
At the very beginning of the interview she states to her co-anchor that she can’t wait to find out if the barista “got him where it counts”. At the end of the interview she states maliciously to the barista, “I’m sure you got him where it counts.”
What’s the obsession?
Skinner accents the interview with moans and groans of disgust. She concludes her interview by telling the vigilante barista that she is brave, and opines, “A lot of women out there are saying, you go girl!”

A couple of comments:
— It’s disturbing to observe in our society that male genital mutilation is an accepted form of justice, empowerment, revenge, or humor, while anything resembling female genital mutilation is nothing short of barbaric. What the man did is criminal, but he does not deserve to have his genitals mutilated. The women were never in any immediate danger, and this is validated by the fact that they never called the police until after THEY instigated a physical confrontation with him.
As for Jane Skinner’s obsession with male genital mutilation, I’m wondering if she and others who feel similarly also feel the number of female school teachers that are raping their under aged male students should have their vagina’s mutilated to “teach them a lesson”. If she does not have the same emotional reaction towards female perverts, then she has serious issues with sexism, bigotry, and gender discrimination issues that need serious attention. It would seem completely asinine to think that a man who exposes himself to a woman deserves genital mutilation more than a woman who actually forces herself physically and emotionally on some mother’s pubescent son.

— The barista should have been charged with a crime as well as the man who exposed himself. For example, if their was a male manager on duty, who upon seeing what had happened chased the man down and beat him silly, the police would have arrested and charged the male manager with assault. Their reasoning? They would piously invoke the mantra of respect for laws, individual rights, safety of oneself and others, the need for calm and order in chaotic situations, taking the law into your own hands, etc., for not condoning this type of vigilantism. However, because the vigilante is a woman and the act of violence was directed towards a man, the crime is overlooked.
As an example, if a father caught his son’s female elementary school teacher having sex with his son, and in a rage, attempted to mutilated her genitals, do you think the police would ignore his violent act and arrest only the teacher? And if the police did react in that manner, do you think the media and women’s groups would stay silent?

— The hypocrisy from women in situations like these is overwhelming. The same people who complain about society’s sexploitation of women, are the first in line to defend two women who choose to exploit themselves for a quick buck. The women should not have to endure mentally unstable men exposing themselves, but at the same time, in situations like these, responsible women do not extend an austere statement to the baristas and other women explaining how the choices they make affect themselves and others such as:
Do you realize your choice of work put you in this situation?
Does this line of work help or harm your self-esteem?
What examples and sexual boundries are you advocating for younger girls?
If women really cared about the sexploitation of women, these comments should be included along with their disgust for the man that exposed himself.

— The mature, responsible men in society need to become more involved in mentoring the younger generations about the balance between sexual fantasies and sexual realities. While women are concerned about the sexploitation of women, I’m a firm believer that this same sexploitation seriously affects men as well. Sadly, sexual desire and sexual fantasies are used to sell everything these days. It invokes the wrong message to young men and young women.
I believe as a man, older men need to become more prominent in the processes of mentoring young men on the dark side of male sexual fantasies. Young men need to learn the beauty of their masculine sexual nature, but also need to understand the dangers of it, and how others will exploit it for their own benefit.
I feel that if beginning at a young age men were given insight into how to maintain a balanced emotional and mental male sexuality from more mature, responsible male figures, places like the “Java Girls” may not disappear, but they may have less of an allure in the eyes of men. This would benefit both men and women.
For the record, I am not a puritan who believes anything sexual is bad, and that places such as Java Girls shouldn’t exits. I just believe the level of mentoring and education for our young men and women should intensify at the same pace as the sexualized environment.

If there is one positive I can take away from this story it’s this: Given the number of enterprises in our society that cater to the dark side of men’s sexuality, and given the general public opinion that men are always thinking with their penises, according to statistics, the majority of men do not engage in this type of behavior. In other words, if men really are sex crazed machines as some believe, an incident like this would not be a “hot” news story making national news – it would be a common one buried in the back pages of the local newspaper.
Considering the sexualized society we live in, I feel it shows the majority of men handle themselves quite well given an environment which entices them to behave otherwise.


Photo Courtesy of: stockxchng.com

August 25, 2008

A Man’s World? Think Again.

I recently read that in Milwaukee, an edlerly man is in the process of losing his home over a fifty dollar parking ticket.
According to JS Online,

Peter Tubic ignored a $50 parking fine in 2004, and on Monday, it cost him his $245,000 house.
In what city officials believe is the first case of its kind, the city foreclosed on Tubic’s house on W. Verona Court after repeated attempts to collect the fine – which over the years had escalated to $2,600 – had failed.

The story goes on to say that Tubic admitted he neglected to pay the ticket, but explained it was not done out of spite or anger. Instead, Tubic said it was due to a series of tragedies in his life that led to his failure to pay the ticket.

At the time he received the violation, Tubic was living at his parents house where he was caring for both (The violation was for not having license plates on his van which was parked in the parents driveway). His father was suffering from dementia, and his mother was battling cancer.
At the same time, he was also battling his own health problems. According to JS Online,

[Tubic] has been diagnosed with psychological disorders that limit his “ability to understand, remember and carry out detailed instructions” according to documents from the [Social Security] administration.
In addition he suffers from chronic pain caused by degenerative diseases of the knees and spine, as well as chronic respiratory disease, diabetes and obesity, among other ailments.

Shortly after receiving a visit from a city official which explained he had thirty days to correct the problem, Tubic’s father died. He says he then became overwhelmed during the following months with the financial and emotional struggles of his situation and his mother’s. This, he said, led to him ignoring repeated notices about the accruing fines.
Now Tubic’s house will be put up for sale, and he and his mother will be forced from their home by September 11th – a home which Tubic says is paid for and has no other debts, .

It is the attitude of the authorities towards Tubic’s dilemma which disturbs me. According to JS Online,

Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Richard Sankovitz technically stayed the judgment to give Tubic one last chance to explain why he hasn’t paid or even responded, but Sankovitz ruled in favor of the city’s foreclosure.
“The city was entitled to a judgment,” Sankovitz told Public Investigator on Thursday. “There hadn’t been an answer to the complaint.”

Ronald Roberts, a code enforcement manager with the Department of Neighborhood Services says,

“If a violation exists, a violation exists,” Roberts said. “We’re going to enforce a violation.”

What’s interesting is how Judge Richard Sankovitz compared Tubic’s plight with the legal system compared to that of a common criminal. He says,

“If you were a criminal, we’d take care of the whole problem for you, get you an attorney,” he said. “But if you’re involved in civil litigation – in jeopardy of losing your house or your family . . . what we do is make you go out and find your own attorney.”

Yet Sankovitz still sides heavily with the city.

This made me think of another point that should be made. What if Tubic was a woman? Do you think the authorities would take such a “were so sorry, but too bad pal” attitude, or do you think they would scrabble to show compassion and understanding for his situation?

While I do not have a similar story of a woman to compare, I do have other stories in my files which I believe shows an apparent difference about how men and women are treated in our nation’s legal system. And I’ve also included stories from other legal systems similar to ours to show how this disparity is common in so-called “modern” countries that advocate equality between the sexes.

In Maryland, a young woman was released early from juvenile detention facility after a judge felt she was rehabilitated. The woman, then seventeen, gave birth to a child, strangled it, and then stuffed it in a garbage can. She was originally sentenced to stay at the facility until she was 21, but the judge showed her mercy and decided after eight months she was already rehabilitated.

A female teacher from Arizona was sent to jail after pleading guilty to three counts of sexual conduct for having a sexual relationship with one of her under aged students. She originally faced seventeen counts.
The judge sentenced her to only six months in prison.
And a 39 year-old woman from Louisville was sentenced for carry on a long term sexual relationship with a thirteen year-old boy which eventually resulted in the birth of two children. The judge decided prison time was not appropriate for the woman, and instead let her go free with a sentence of 20 years supervision.
In contrast, this past June, a male elementary school coach from Illinois was sentenced to life in prison after being convicted of multiple counts of sexual abuse upon his students.

In Phoenix, a mother pleaded guilty to starving her two year-old daughter until she eventually died. The girl weighed only 14lbs. at her death. Officers found no baby items to care for the child, but discovered the mother had taken out an insurance policy on the girl shortly before she died.
The judge decided not to put the mother in prison, and instead, let her go free with a sentence of lifetime probation.

In Illinois, a husband and wife who were been charged with arson had their bonds modified. The husband’s bond was reduced from $100,000 to $50,000. However, he remains in prison because he still cannot post bond. On the other hand, the judge decided to reduced the wife’s bond to a recognizance bond. She was freed from prison to take care of the couples children.

In England, a woman who concealed her pregnancy – which ultimately led to her baby’s death – was sentenced for her tragic actions by a court judge.
The woman admitted to being in a long term relationship with one man while having an affair with another. After becoming pregnant by her paramour, she began a series of lies to conceal the pregnancy in order to avoid be held accountable for her behavior. Some of the lies included claims of having a wheat intolerance, and having cancer to explain her weight gain.
After giving birth to the baby, the woman placed the child in a plastic bag and let it die. An autopsy was inconclusive as to whether the baby was alive at birth or not.
The judge scolded the woman for her irresponsible behavior, but said he felt mercy for her. The result was a suspended sentence – she left the court a free woman.
(I feel their is no argument that if this woman had handled the pregnancy responsibly, and showed more concern for the baby rather than herself, the baby would have been alive today.)

A seventeen year old girl from England who claimed she had been raped by a taxi driver, received her sentence after admitting she made up the story.
The false rape charge caused an enormous amount of emotional and financial damage to the driver, his wife, and their children.
According to police, the woman was put into the taxi by friends after becoming very intoxicated at a party. While driving her home, the taxi driver could not get a coherent response concerning directions from the young woman, and had to repeatedly stop as the woman became sick.
The taxi driver did everything he could to ensure she got home safely. After a lengthy and chaotic ride, he did manage to get her home safely.
At this point the woman became upset because of the long drive home. She claimed when she got inside her home she was experiencing pain in her vagina, so she assumed he must have sexually assaulted her. At that point she called police.
After sobering up, she realized she was not sexually assaulted. However, she decided not to call the police to explain he was innocent because she feared she would face charges for filing a false report. Instead she decided to let the investigation proceed and allow the taxi driver face the false charges.
Eventually the police determined that a sexual assault did not take place and the woman was charged with perverting the course of justice.
The judge sentenced her to only 60 days in jail.

The taxi driver stated upon her light sentence,

“She has destroyed my family life, my social life, and she has destroyed me economically. She destroyed my credibility.
“There is also the effect on my children.
“I believe they didn’t consider these things completely.

His wife, who believed him throughout the ordeal said,

“I thought she would have got more for what she put me and my family through.”

Getting back to the original story: If I was a gambling man, I would bet that if Tubic was an elderly female with mental and physical disabilities, and in the process of caring for ailing parents, one of which eventually passed away, he would have treated differently. He never would have been in the position of losing his home.
As I’ve shown, a woman can falsely accuse a man of rape, or even murder her own child, and the courts here and abroad find compassion for them, slap them on the wrist, and set them free.

Even if Peter Tubic is found to be spiteful, irresponsible, or ignorant, why is he treated worse than a woman who kills her children?

A male dominated world we live in? Please, that is so retro!

Update: The mayor of Milwaukee has said he will try his best to make sure Tubic does not lose his home over a $50 dollar violation. I hope he sticks to his word.


Photo Courtesy of: stockxchng.com

Blog at WordPress.com.