Tuesday, October 8, 2013


 adjective \prə-ˈmis-kyə-wəs\
: having or involving many sexual partners

I think I've talked about this before, but alas, such a topic warrants yet another look.

With the recent freebie of my book on Kindle, I should have known to expect a few new reviews of the book on Amazon, and of course, Amazon readers do not fail to come through.  I hadn't even noticed the new reviews until a friend of mine emailed me alerting me to one in particular, saying, "Regular folks -- rather than those affected by RSO laws -- found a [FREE] book they could sink their teeth into and rip apart."

Of course, I just had to go and take a looksee for myself.  Sure enough, there is just one negative review and then somone else commented on that review.  I can't say as I'm surprised all that much that these two individuals are hung up on the fact that I say that my hubby's young victim was "promiscuous."  The reviewer by the name The Book Lover "Lou" says, "How can you dare call a 14 year-old girl promiscuous? If men weren't doing things to her, she couldn't be promiscuous."

(Click here to read the review.)

Seriously?  NO fourteen (or fifteen) year old girl would ever be interested in sex and want to have it?  The reader goes on to say that I "can't see the forest" because I was molested by a family member at a young age myself and therefore Lou seems to think I am incapable of making a smart choice for a husband some twenty-five years later.  As if I was molested one week and married to my hubby the next; that the span of 25 years of life experiences did not teach me anything at all about sex and healthy relationships.

Sounds like Dr. Drew all over again.

According to any one of the statistics out there that you can find on the net, anywhere from 20% to 38% of 14 and 15 year old girls are sexually active.  Does "sexually active" equate "promiscuity"?  If the number of partners is greater than two, I would say yes.  Cass Lisane, the commenter who responded to Lou's review accuses me of "slut-shaming" the victim.  Let's be clear:  I said she was promiscuous, I didn't call her a slut.  Just to be sure, I just ran a Search of the word "slut" in my 256 page PDF of the book, and, nope! "Slut" could not be found.

I am sorry if they disagree, but I do not think that "promiscious" and "slut" mean the same thing.  To me, "slut" is derogatory, whereas "promiscuous" is simply a description of a type of sexual behavior.

Anyway, back to the girl.  Here are the facts:

  • Raised and lived in an extremely remote Hippie community where attitudes about sex were open and free. (Information provided by community members.)
  • Nudity among community members were common place. (Information provided by community members.)
  • Was seen walking with friends down a dirt road and through the woods topless on a few different occasions, as young as 12 years old. (Information provided by community members.)
  • Sexually active beginning about 12 years of age. (Information provided by community members.)
  • Had multiple partners (more than 2) by the time the incident with my husband took place. (Information provided by community members.)
  • Says she has NEVER been sexually abused in any way by anyone including my husband. (Information provided to me by victim herself.)
  • Was sexually involved with another man, 24 years old, at the time of the incident. (Information provided to me by community members and confirmed by victim herself.)
  • Was attracted to and had a crush on my husband for a period of time prior to and during the incident. (Information provided to me by victim herself.)
  • Initiated sexual contact with my husband. (Information provided to me by both the victim and my husband.)

You decide if she was promiscuous or not.  Even if you believe she wasn't, you cannot deny she was sexually active.

Now, regarding my dear hubby.  Here are the facts:

  • Was 34 years old at the time of the incident.
  • Was not involved with anyone at the time of the incident, had been celebate for nearly two years.
  • Was not aware of the girl's age, nor did he care to know.
  • Was left alone with the girl by her friends, brother and her parents.
  • Was in a state of depression.
  • Knew better, but did it anyway.
  • Was drunk.
  • Was stupid.

Both Lou and Cass Lisane felt that such facts were no excuse for what he did.  On that note, I agree completely.  At no time throughout the book do I attempt to excuse his actions, I am merely stating the facts as I knew them to be.  Stating the facts does not equate excusal; just merely explains how the incident could have taken place.  If any one of those factors had not been present, the incident might not have happened.

Lou stated, "I don't truly think you can objectively see what your book sounds like."

When I wrote the book, I definitely worried about that and that was why I chose two different editors with different backgrounds than me to edit the book.  One of the editors had suffered tremendous and extreme child sexual and emotional abuse and the other had never been touched by any form of child sexual abuse whatsoever and grew up in a healthy normal environment.  I felt, with their views based on their own experiences, they could help me keep the book balanced and focused.  Believe me, the book underwent some serious editing at the hands of these two remarkable women.  The book would not get published until it met their approval and they were comfortable with the final version.  I didn't just willy-nilly write the book and send in the manuscript unedited without any serious thought.  I knew that the book might strike a nerve or two here and there, and wanted to be sensitive to that end.  I still believe I accomplished that goal and my editors still back me up.

A few little facts about me:

  • I was exposed to sexual topics at a very young age by both my parents.
  • I was taught that sex was a good thing and was not dirty.
  • I *was* a victim to child sexual abuse, I am NOT a victim now.
  • I could have ended the abuse at any time but since I liked the attention, I chose not to, for two years.
  • I received two years of counseling after I finally ended the abuse.
  • I was a sexually active promiscuous teenage girl beginning when I was 15, (after the abuse ended.)
  • I was horny and I liked older boys and men.  One of the men I sought out was 25 years older than me.
  • I do not consider myself to be a victim of any form of sexual abuse by anyone else beside the family member who abused me.
  • I went 25 years between the abuse and meeting my current husband, living a very normal American life.  As a teen, I never got involved with drugs, (just smoked pot a few times.)  I graduated high school.  I graduated art school.  I got married to a very normal college-educated man and we shared a very normal sexual lifestyle.  No weird stuff.  We had two daughters together.  We worked hard.  We bought houses and cars and lived the American Dream.  Then, finally, at 39, my life simply changed.

A few more little facts:

  • My hubby was not a "Registered Sex Offender" when I met him.  At the time of his conviction, he was only asked to sign a paper at the court house.  There was no annual or semi-annual registration of any sort required, and therefore when I began a relationship with him, I was not worried about that stuff.
  • After we married, and after our daughter was born, the laws changed and he was then made to register every six months.  Still not a big deal.
  • Eleven years after the incident, when our daughter was five years old, the state raised his classification to a Level 2 and online and community notification was required.  This is when our hell begain.

People often say to me, "How could you marry a sex offender?" or "How could you have children with him?"

These things were NOT an issue at the time of our marriage or at the time of our child's birth.  I ask them in response, "What would you have me do?  Get a divorce and wish my daughter didn't exist?"

So, in closing, to Lou and Cass Lisane, I would like to say to them to walk a mile in my shoes and their eyes may then be opened.  I think I see the forest just fine, thank you, and I think maybe they could learn a thing or two if only they looked.  As for promiscuous teenage girls, they do exist, yet it is clear to me that neither Lou or Cass has ever been one.  You know what they say, "It takes one to know one", and well, I believe I definitely and completely qualify as one who knows one.


  1. The difficulties we will always face as reformists are the same tired and contrary stereotypes that our society propagates.

    On one hand, we put "wild teen girls" on shows like Maury, where teens as young as age 10 have come on the show bragging about how much sex they've had/ how much dope they've smoked/ how many people they've punched, etc. We jeer and boo them, but the show is all about them taking responsibility for their actions. Lets not forget that teens as young as age 10 are on America's sex offender registries. So we see them as responsible for sexual behavior.

    However, there's the contrary position that if a teen pursues someone over the age of 18 they are "innocent" and the adult "always" takes advantage of youth and inexperience. We saw that mentality in the Kaitlyn Hunt controversy. What made Kaitlyn a "predator" in the eyes of so man people? Having an 18th birthday. Before then, having a girlfriend 40 months younger than her wasn't an issue. But once she became a legal adult, her relationship was a crime.

    This is a case of society having its cake and eating it too.

  2. While working as a medical secretary in a family medical clinic in Washington State, I was approached one afternoon by a young girl who wanted birth control. She explained quite candidly that she was 12 years old, sexually active, liked it and intended to continue, and did not want to become pregnant. By the state law in effect the doctor was required to see her, give her a prescription for birth control pills, and was not allowed to contact her parents. It turned out he did not give her the desired prescription because this young girl had not experienced menarche (onset of menses).
    As a teenager, I knew many girls who were sexually active by the time they were 14 years old and were quite happy about it. And it is quite common for teenage girls to be attracted to older men. They drool over them at the movies and concerts, etc.
    Our society is totally hypocritical about sexuality. It is thrown at the public, including children, by all forms of media, but when the natural consequence occurs, they are angry and vengeful.