February 22, 2006

• plenty of prefab comments here.
• yeah, but some of us aren't cool enough to go there, or just prefer the company of monkeys. Mefi's been off my reading list for many months now, and is staying there.
• if i wanted mefi comments, i'd post to mefi.
• I've had each of my wives sign something just like this. The ones that won't do so are beaten soundly by the others as a group, and then they all allow me Anal Sex. But since it's "expected", they don't get extra GBDs for doing so.
• I had a good behavior day once tenneho. It was one of your wife's GBDs. I believe you were asleep. Your wives were not so tired at the time. In response to an enquiry you made, one of your wives explained the noticed fluid, with the following: "It's nothing my dear, just a bum cold" I can assure it was not snot running down her leg that morning. Signed Kitfisto. The man with armored lemur.
• That's not the standard prenup?
• I've never actually visited MeFi, MoFi was my first and only. -looks at MeFi thread- ..yeah. I'll stick with MoFi.
• Oh, but you looked. I saw you looking. That's gonna cost you two good-monkey-days (GMD's).
• That would be one crazy trial. The defense attorney would spend the whole time cross examining the victim in such a way as to make her look like she likes that sort of thing. The attorney would be trying to get her to admit that she has willingly done or expressed a willingness to do things that will shock a jury. The prosecutor will object every time, and they will have a bench conference over every sexual act. I want to go.
• Some MeFites are actually stepping up for this guy...reading the posts (and there are a shitload) is almost as unsettling as the "contract" itself...
• OK, I'm trying to put myself in this woman's shoes. She's read this contract, but wouldn't sign it. Then, having read everything in the contract and ideally having a pretty good understanding after reading it as to what her husband-to-be was all about, she goes ahead and marries him. It's hard for me to believe that she wasn't in some way into the whole dominance and submission thing. Or else really stupid. Still not to say the guy's not a giant asshole.
• OK, on thinking on this more, the article doesn't say when he wrote up the contract. It could have been after they were married, and she may have been too scared to get out. Still creepy and still an asshole.
• It's hard for me to believe that she wasn't in some way into the whole dominance and submission thing. Or else really stupid. And you know, it doesn't matter if she's stupid, or if she's into the whole s&m thing, the question is did he commit a crime? A criminal act against a stupid person is still a criminal act.
• No arguments whatsoever on that score, Nickdanger. I hope my comments don't come off as "she was asking for it", because that's not what I think at all. Basically, I guess, I'm saying it's hard to put myself in her shoes. Mothra knows many women have stayed in scary and abusive situations out of fear. Especially when kids are involved.
• This guy wants his wife to be his sex slave, but he's NOT going to make her swallow or do her in the pooper? Lameass.
• Upon further reading, I retract my previous comment. However, he is still a lameass.
• I don't see the problem here. Now then Weezel, just sign here and we can begin...
• Questions of slavery aside, this guy's grammar totally sucks. And he keep contradicting himself. And he's got no taste in fonts. I would've done the body in Palatino Lintoype, with the headings in Plasma Drip. And there would have been some kind of stock photography included. Sick fuck.
• The guy has wifely expectations of kids... Did no one notice?
• Basically, I guess, I'm saying it's hard to put myself in her shoes. I hear you there. And I second tenneho's bewilderment at the MeFi thread as well.
• Make that tennenho.
• This is one of the finer examples I've seen of some people's inability to envision other people as people too. It is a more common disease than you might think. In this guy's world, there's just him, and the rest of us are either toys or set dressing in the Grande And Continuing Saga of Me. The prospective Mrs. Frey, I think, was slated for a prominent position amongst the Toys.
• Get a grip, man! This guy downloaded child porn just as allegedly! Child abuse is one thing, but, egad! My mind is soiled with the byprodut of frontal nausea.
• I thought this was funny until I finished reading the first couple of paragraphs. (Nice use of the Kama Sutra font, though) Now however, I think this human vermin is truly unstable in a criminal way to even conceive that he can treat anyone such. Fortunately our penal system (*snkk*) is designed only to punish and cause emotional harm and not rehabilitate, so we can rest assured he will never be a productive member of society. Equally fortunately he will still consume his share of the planet's resources and help us ruin it for all who follow. Who wants ginger snaps?!
• This is one of the finer examples I've seen of some people's inability to envision other people as people too. It is a more common disease than you might think. In this guy's world, there's just him, and the rest of us are either toys or set dressing in the Grande And Continuing Saga of Me. Fes with a very well-put summation of something that has bugged me for a long time, but that I haven't been able to summate nearly as expertitiously. There seem to be a lot of people with this particular POV. The idea that we're All in This Together seems to have been losing ground for a long time--or worse, that we're all even here. I envision a Cartesian Dystopia in which there is only Me and perhaps the Flies, making patterns of small interest across the ceiling tiles.
• Pete: Rehabilitation is a fine idea - but how would you actually *do* it? And the only way to determine if you are successful at rehabilitating him would be to turn him loose on an unsuspecting public and see if he decides to do whatever it is that he was purported rehabilitated for again. Speaking as a member of the unsuspecting public, that particular testing system is not hugely great.
• Clockwork Orange style?
• Shave his pubes from navel to anus?
• Fes: IANAPREBAL (I Am Not A Prison Rehabilitation Expert By A Longshot) but I think anything might be a nice gesture. I think they do things like have a dentist take care of their teeth, and probably show movies once in awhile, but the whole culture of incarceration is almost wholly against rehabilitation. That would have to change, and would be the hardest to change. You have to spend money on rehabilitation and no politician gets to run on a "prison reform" platform. It's a serious liability, even though it's truly needed. From a societal perspective at least.
• IANAPREBAL myself, but I think that there is quite a bit more non-punishmental activities going on in prison than you credit - education, counselling, skills/job training are three that I can't imagine don't take place. I will agree, that by and large prison is a stone university full of professors of criminal activity and professional victimizers, but I think that the a lot of the current prisoners who could conceivably be rehabilitated would benefit far more from alternatives to going to prison (I'm thinking specifically of people incarcerated for minor drug offenses, who's time in prison is undoubtedly hellish) than ham-handed experiments in airy notions of rehabilitation. Prison will always be punishment - for those prisoners for whom punishment is not necessarily warranted, we would be wise to not send to prison, would be my thought.
• Upon further reading, I retract my previous comment. Upon further reading, you will note that he stipulated anal "and/or" ingestion. Of everything listed here, that "and" stood out pretty big. Whatever. Even if it were signed, the contract is unenforceable. Product of duress, unconscionable terms, void for lack of consideration. Whatta sick fuck. "And".
• a lot of the current prisoners who could conceivably be rehabilitated Philosophically though, if there were no chance of rehabilitation shouldn't a convicted person then be sentenced to life (or death) instead of a limited time after which they return to crime? I would argue that rehabilitation is always conceivable except in the most extreme cases. Could Mr. Sign-here-and-blow-me be rehabilitated? Possibly, and sufficient testing and programs would do it, but I'll bet no such testing or programs are available to him.
• shouldn't a convicted person then be sentenced to life (or death) instead of a limited time after which they return to crime? Ah, see, no! That's why the punishment. Why don't children steal the cookies? Because they learn that doing so will get them in trouble. Why wouldn't a non-rehabilitated criminal recidivate? Fear of punishment coupled with a period of intense monitoring - basically, what we have now, the parole period. A child still wants those cookies, but stifles the urge to take them out of knowledge that the punishment wouldn't be worth the temporary graitification. Same with ex-cons. In, obviously, a perfect world. Mr. Shabm might be rehabilitated, but I'd be more likely to contend that he would not be, not without some significant pyschological work. This guy's psyche wasn't built in a day, you know - likely, he was someone else's toy before embarking on this particularly strange and noisome course. So, my thought would be that we have to instill in this man a fear of further punishment coupled with a sense of surety of detection - if, once released, he tried to do such things again, he would be caught and he would be punished. This fear is, I think, all that would keep him from attempting to acquire more toys.
• An addendum to that first part would be to allow the man a way to comfortably stay out of trouble. A lot of things we take for granted - jobs, credit, opportunity - are denied to ex-cons. How do you coerce someone into doing what you want? Back up your threat of punishment and contant surveillance with a way out. here comes the train! but over there ---> is the exit to the tunnel. A truly penitent (read: rehabilitated?) man will jump at the chance.
• truly penitent (read: rehabilitated?) just what i was thinking - what's the difference? I know that regarding . .. those . .type of penalty cases in which the convicted person . . is no longer allowed to live (/avoids_topic) that punishment alone doesn't reduce recidivism, but I don't know about in general. I'm talking about rehabilitation in terms of not returning to crime because the person doesn't want to do the wrong thing, not because they're afraid of the punishment for doing the wrong thing. Although no crime is obviously the ultimate goal. And sensible laws. But that's another derailment :)
• I'm talking about rehabilitation in terms of not returning to crime because the person doesn't want to do the wrong thing, not because they're afraid of the punishment for doing the wrong thing. Sadly, I think that by the time someone commits a prison-worthy crime, their sense of right and wrong is permanently skewed, and the likelihood of fundamental moral change is low. One exception may be those persons who become very religious during the course of punishment, which is not an insubstantial percentage but one that I think could not be fomented by authorities. By that time, I think that creating a fear of renewed punishment, coupled with a sense of inevitable detection, coupled with an opportunity to build a life outside of criminality, might be the simpest and best, if heavy-handed, tool. How do you appeal to someone's inner angel if that inner angel never really existed?
• Perhaps that's the true rehabilitation?
• Perhaps. But are we capable of creating it? I'm not sure that we are.
• *waves dismissively* People, people -- can we please focus on what's really important here, namely anal, and possibly the proper dimensions of shaved pubes?
• if you spell anal with a "b" it's just sort of boring.
• a 2" by 1" patch seems a little stingy to me, bushly speaking.
• ...possibly the proper dimensions of shaved pubes I presume you are referring to Subsection (1) of the "Shaving" section: "A rectangular patch...length no longer than 3/4"...no wider than 1", hereafter called a Hitler's moustache.
• did you all notice she's supposed to keep her chest shaved too?
• Did anyone else notice she could have other "designs" in her pubic hair?
• What designs could you put in that tiny patch? A Batman sign is right out.
• Maybe you could carve a picture of a little boy cuz the guy is a card holding NAMBLA member.
• If she gets to pick out the sex toy for his birthday, I think she should pick out a Nutseveromatic 5000® with extra grinding attachment. Then EVERY day would be a good behavior day. It worked for the cat.
• I once saw a girl...OK, a stripper...who had hers shaped like a Chevy logo. I asked her about it, and she said she was a big NASCAR fan. Then I gave her twenty bucks for a closer look.
• This is one of the finer examples I've seen of some people's inability to envision other people as people too. It is a more common disease than you might think. In this guy's world, there's just him, and the rest of us are either toys or set dressing in the Grande And Continuing Saga of Me. Fes with a very well-put summation of something that has bugged me for a long time, but that I haven't been able to summate nearly as expertitiously. There seem to be a lot of people with this particular POV. The idea that we're All in This Together seems to have been losing ground for a long time--or worse, that we're all even here. You guys sound like communists.
• Yes, but our pubes are to die for. *scratches*
• ...seriously, a pedophile...
• Eight year olds, Dude.
• Pedophelia seems, to me, the crystalization of the idea that other people are no more than toys.
• pAedophile!
• You crazy Aenglish with your colourfull language.
• "pAedophile!" You and your spelling -- you're so anal...
• And banal!
• I don't want to be exposed to banus.
• Not even shaved banus?
• bAenus!
• Bananus?
• Baenaenaephone?
• It pays to be anal with the spelling... think of all the GBD's!
• GBDA's!!!!
• GBLT!
• OK, going waaaaay back up towards the beginning of the thread... it seems like this was written when they were already married and had been for some time. Wifey Frey is referred to as _______ Frey in the document, and the kids are referred to as an existing factor, not an "if -> then" thing. He refers to her crying and sulking, which suggests to me that she's done so in the past. Also note, they were churchgoers. I posted this to LJ (yeah, yeah, I'm a dweeb) and several of my female friends commented, "Most guys would love to institute a contract like this, just maybe not quite as extreme. They just don't think they can get away with it." I'm personally kind of curious about the relationship prior to the contract. It doesn't sound like they were in a consensual BDSM situation beforehand, but like Frey introduced those elements over the course of the relationship. Good for her for getting away from him.
• (the churchgoers thing - not relevant, just additionally weird.)
• All these years I've wasted having banal sex! /weeps, installs spellchecker
• Giggity Giggity Giggity!
• dang, missed one MonkeyFilter: If I wanted mefi comments, I'd post to mefi.
• I think that may be in the Top Ten of Taglines.
• Hey Fes, I saw this movie the other day and thought about rehabilitation, and thought you'd appreciate it.
• Thank you, Lara. El Queso couln't be here tonight, so at that glorious Monkey's request I'm here to accept tonight's award. After all these years, and thousands of taglines, to win this award means so much to me--oh, yea, and to el Queso, too. *bows, blows kisses, backs away from podium*