The bill lowers the penalties for adults who have sex with ‘willing’ same-sex minors. A Judge could decide if the adult has to register as sex offender if the offender is within 10 years of age of the victim.
The bill does not apply to minors under the age of 14.
SB 145 was introduced by state senator Scott Wiener and passed the California legislature last week.
Since 1944, judges decided whether a man had to register as a sex offender if he had sex with a female minor 14 years of age or older when the age difference is not more than 10 years, so Wiener argued that since the law didn’t apply to young boys, the LBGTQ community was being ‘discriminated against.’
The law ends discrimination “by treating LGBTQ young people the exact same way that straight young people have been treated since 1944,” Wiener said in a statement last week, adding: “Today, California took yet another step toward an equitable society.”
#SB145 ends discrimination against #LGBTQ young people on CA’s sex offender registry. It treats LGBTQ people exactly how straight ppl are now treated.
The bill is the subject of a massive misinformation campaign by MAGA/QAnon.
In other words, Scott Wiener is arguing that a 14-year-old boy can actually consent to sex with a 24-year-old grown man (predator).
Last night the CA State Legislature passed #SB145 and it now goes to Gov. Newsom. It would lower the penalties for adults who have sex w/ willing same-sex minors. Judge could decide if adult has to register as sex offender if the offender is within 10 years of age of victim.
The bill passed the Democrat-led assembly, however it was even too much for some Democrat state lawmakers.
25 Assembly members voted against the bill. It passed with 41 votes, with 13 lawmakers not voting and then it cleared the senate with a 23-10 vote (7 senators did not vote).
“I cannot in my mind as a mother understand how sex between a 24-year-old and a 14-year-old could ever be consensual, how it could ever not be a registrable offense,” Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez, D-San Diego, said before the bill’s passage last week. “We should never give up on this idea that children should be in no way subject to a predator.”
Senator Ted Cruz blasted California Democrats.
“Today’s California Democrats believe we need more adults having sex with children, and when they do, they shouldn’t register as sex offenders,” Ted Cruz said. “This is extreme and very harmful to kids.”
Priorities. Today’s CA Dems believe we need more adults having sex with children, and when they do, they shouldn’t register as sex offenders.
September 9, 2020
(updated September 25, 2020)
Published by Lee Floyd
Leading up to its release, Netflix has been caught promoting a movie titled Cuties as a drama about an 11-year-old who “explores her femininity” through “twerking,” complete with a provocative poster.
This is the far-left streaming outlet’s third strike when it comes to sexualizing children.
This streaming site is home to Barack and Michelle Obama.
The movie — a Sundance darling, naturally — is a French title. Cuties is rated TV-MA, which means there is an 11-year-old character in a movie that is “usually not suitable for anyone under 17 years of age (18 in some cases). Content may contain strong coarse language, explicit (in some cases, pornographic) strong sexual content, nudity, or intense/graphic violence.”
According to the Daily Mail, the theatrical release earned an NC-17 rating, which means no children under 17 are allowed into the theater, even if accompanied by a parent.
NC-17 movies usually earn that rating for provocative sexual imagery.
The movie’s protagonist is 11-year-old Amy, a Senegalese Muslim girl who joins a dance group. She’s portrayed by Fathia Youssouf, who is 14 now and was likely 12 or 13 during filming.
The 11-year-old girls in Cuties—a French Netflix film that premiered at Sundance Film Festival on Thursday night—have a tentative grasp on the concept of sex. They theorize that oral sex involves a man’s penis filling up a woman’s entire body, and they know that condoms have something to do with AIDS, but they’re not quite sure what. But what they know with certainty is that sexuality is a girl’s key to attention and power. And they know that power is something they want.
It gets worse:
Amy [remember she’s only 11] impresses them with an audition. She has a secret weapon: A particularly risque dance move that involves humping the floor. Not even The Cuties have dared to be that sexual before.
[The] script perfectly captures that preteen desperation to fit in, which so many girls understand to mean to “be sexy.” With the daily barrage of hypersexualized women in media, how can you blame them? Amy’s goal is not to have sex with men—again, she barely understands the mechanics of sex—it’s to win the approval of her classmates.
The movie’s director, Maïmouna Doucouré, says the film is in fact a critique of the sexualization of children, specifically the Internet’s role in it. Not having seen the movie myself, I can’t comment either way. Cuties doesn’t stream on Netflix until next month.
Nevertheless, there is plenty of reason to ask whether Netflix’s intent was to sell this movie to the naked-under-the-raincoat crowd.
Netflix’s promotional poster features four prepubescent girls with bare midriffs in provocative poses wearing short shorts, which is something quite different from the original French poster.
Worse still, Netflix originally promoted the movie in the same way you would soft-core pornography. Get this: “Amy, 11, becomes fascinated with a twerking dance crew. Hoping to join them, she starts to explore her femininity, defying her family’s traditions.”
What type of animal wants to watch a movie about an 11-year-old — she’s eleven! — twerking and exploring her femininity?
Apparently, after an online uproar, Netflix changed the description to this — you’ll note how Netflix “owns” all us backwards “conservatives” who oppose child porn: “Eleven-year-old Amy starts to rebel against her conservative family’s traditions when she becomes fascinated with a free-spirited dance crew.”
You want to know what I believe in?
I believe in drawing lines.
I am not a scold. I am not a prude. I hate the cancel culture. The only strong feeling that bubbles up in me when it comes to what consenting adults do to one another at home or on the screen is indifference. But can we draw the line at children?
Can we draw the line at exploiting little girls — 11, 12, 13-year-old girls?
Can we draw the line at sexualizing children?
This didn’t sneak past someone at Netflix. Decisions were made. People with the power to decide decided to sell little girls, little prepubescent girls, like sex objects.
What are the rules, Hollywood? Objectification is wrong unless she’s eleven?
Oh, and this is not the first time Netflix has pimped little kids to the naked-under-the-raincoat crowd.
Remember Baby, the series that freakin’ glorified sex trafficking of 15-year-olds?
Then there was the movieDesire, which Netflix streamed even though it featured a scene where a pre-teen girl is depicted masturbating herself to orgasm.
“The camera even takes this scene into a close-up of the child’s face in slow motion, moving up and down and panting like a porn star. The scene is graphic and includes an orgasm,” PJ Media’s Megan Fox said describing the scene.
The director has defended himself by saying the actresses had no idea what they were doing was in a sexual context… but does that make it any better that he took footage of them doing something innocent and then made the viewer linger on that footage, made the viewer tie that footage to sex in the prologue of a movie that’s marketed as erotic and arousing? The suits at Netflix didn’t hesitate to license that?
Let me get this straight… The Woke Taliban force me to sit through a tutorial about what’s appropriate to laugh in Blazing Saddles, but soft core kiddie porn is a-okay with this crowd.
To be clear, I’m not commenting on the movie. Movies like Bully (2001), L.I.E. (2001), and others have successfully used teens and pre-teens to delve into mature themes. That might be true for Cuties. But don’t tell me the suits at Netflix aren’t playing it up with a cheap, exploitative strategy of LOOK AT THESE “CUTIES” TWERKING ON SEPTEMBER 9TH!!
August 5, 2020
(updated August 9, 2020)
Published by Lee Floyd
Hasbro announced this week it is pulling the DreamWorks Trolls World Tour character doll Giggle ‘n Sing Poppy after complaints about the doll having a button like sensor in its crotch that plays giggles, gasps and other sounds of pleasure when pressed or triggered. The placement and sounds of the crotch button sensor raised concerns by parents that children would be conditioned to believe that letting someone touch them in their privates was okay. Hasbro said the button sensor was placed to make noises when the doll was in a seated position and that the inappropriate perception of the button sensor was “not intentional”, but one wonders if the working title for the design was ‘Giggle ‘n Gasp’, not Giggle ‘n Sing”.
Viral video of an outraged parent demonstrating the crotch button:
This is disturbing. This is intentional grooming. Normalizing inappropriate behavior. Those saying that there is no sinister intent because it said so on the box and that its just a poor design FOH. #TrollsDollpic.twitter.com/ej6t8bGInO
A petition on Change.org calling for the doll to be removed from sale was rapidly closing in on its goal of 500,000 signers as of publication of this article Sunday.
“Our society is conditioning our children to think pedophilia is ok. This Trolls World Tour doll named Poppy has a button on her private area under her skirt. When you push this button on the doll’s private she gasps and giggles. This is not okay for a child’s toy! This toy needs to be removed from our stores. What will this toy make our innocent, impressionable children think? That it’s fun when someone touches your private area? That pedophilia and child molestation are ok? It’s not ok! It’s not fun! It’s damaging and has long term affects on a child’s mental/physical health! Sign this petition to get this toy removed from shelves and help #SaveTheChildren! Children are our future and WE are their voice!”
Hasbro’s product description fpr the Spring 2020 release of Giggle ‘n Sing Poppy makes no mention of a crotch button on the doll but notes “When you sit her down, she makes other funny sounds, too!”
DreamWorks Trolls World Tour Giggle ‘n Sing Poppy
(Ages 4 years & up/Approx. Retail Price: $29.99 /Available: Fall)
DreamWorks Trolls Poppy is more adorable than ever with the Giggle and Sing Poppy Toddler doll. This adorable singing doll stands over 12 inches tall from the tips of her toes to the top of her hair, giggles 3 different ways when she’s tickled, sings a fun version of the song “Trolls Just Want to Have Fun” from DreamWorks Animation’s feature film Trolls World Tour, and says 5 different phrases, too, like, “How about a hug?” and “Um, cupcake!” When you sit her down, she makes other funny sounds, too! The doll also features rainbow-colored hair with a comb so kids can style it. She also includes a matching rainbow dress that comes off, so kids can put it back on for dress-up fun. This musical toy is a great gift for girls 4 years old and up, or any fan of the DreamWorks Trolls movies. Available at Walmart.
Hasbro spokeswoman Julie Duffy emailed a statement on the removal of the doll from sale to the Providence Journal. Hasbro is based in Providence, Rhode Island.
“This feature was designed to react when the doll was seated, but we recognize the placement of the sensor may be perceived as inappropriate,” Hasbro spokeswoman Julie Duffy said Wednesday afternoon in an email to The Providence Journal. “This was not intentional and we are happy to provide consumers with a replacement Poppy doll of similar value through our consumer care team. We are in the process of removing the item for purchase.”
The USA Today fact checker believes Hasbro that the design of this doll to gasp and giggle when touched in the crotch was “not intentional”:
Our finding: Partly false
Our research shows that the doll does have a “giggle” button located in an area that could be referred as near its “private parts.” It would be misleading, however, to suggest the design was deliberately linked to “grooming” children for sex. Hasbro says the button’s placement was not intentional but recognizes that it may be perceived as inappropriate. We rate the claim that the doll was designed to groom children as PARTLY FALSE, based on our research.
How QAnon and Pizzagate Conspiracy Theorists Got a ‘Trolls’ Doll Pulled From Stores, A rumor about a doll from the ‘Trolls’ franchise is a master class in how conspiracy theories spread.
What Rolling Stone doesn’t understand is that most people will see this doll as extremely inappropriate regardless of intention. However, it doesn’t take much of an imagination in today’s culture to think that Hasbro designers knew what they were doing with the placement and sounds of the crotch button sensor on the doll.
Polish President Andrzej Duda has vowed to ban LGBT propaganda from being taught in schools as part of a broader pro-family agenda he hopes to implement if elected to a second term in office.
During a gathering with supporters ahead of the June 28th presidential eletion, Duda signed a “Family Card” containing a raft of promises and proposals, including blocking the legalization of homosexual marriage and barring gay couples from adopting children in the conservative, Catholic nation.
“Parents are responsible for the sexual education of their children,” Duda told supporters. “It is not possible for any institutions to interfere in the way parents raise their children.”
“It’s a foreign ideology. There is no consent for this phenomenon to happen in our country in any way.”
The Family Card also contains a promise to protect the Rodzina 500 Plus program, a government assistance initiative designed to encourage traditional nuclear families to have more children.
According to the latest polling data from Politico, Duda maintains a sizeable 17-point lead over his closest competitor, Warsaw Mayor Rafal Trzaskowski, who allowed LGBT education to be introduced into Warsaw schools.
In response to Duda’s pledge, activists staged a “Rainbow Disco at the Palace” event where attendees were urged to blast music and dance in front of the Presidential Palace in Warsaw, according to Do Rzeczy.
February 21, 2020
(updated May 28, 2020)
Published by Lee Floyd
For the past 11 months, Robert Hoogland, a father in Surrey, British Columbia, has been forced to watch as his 14 year-old daughter was “destroyed and sterilized” by court-ordered testosterone injections. After losing his legal appeal to stop the process in January, Rob (previously anonymized as “Clark” or “CD”) is making a desperate attempt to bring his case into the courts of public opinion, even though it breaks a court order demanding his silence about the case.
“I had a perfectly healthy child a year ago, and that perfectly healthy child has been altered and destroyed for absolutely no good reason,” Rob said in an exclusive interview. “She can never go back to being a girl in the healthy body that she should have had. She’s going to forever have a lower voice. She’ll forever have to shave because of facial hair. She won’t be able to have children…”
Rob felt that at the age of 14—when the courts judged his daughter competent to take testosterone without parental consent—she simply did not have the foresight necessary to understand such consequences. Over the course of the past year, Rob has heard his daughter’s voice deepen and crack and watched her begin to grow facial hair.
“Sometimes I just want to scream so that other parents and people will… jump in, understand what’s going on,” Rob said. “There’s a child—and not only mine, but in my case, my child out there having her life ruined,” and yet, Rob felt, “people don’t [even] know.”
Rob’s efforts to raise awareness of his daughter’s plight have come at a high cost. The last time he granted an interview to The Federalist, he was convicted of “family violence” by the BC Supreme Court for his “expressions of rejection of [his daughter’s] gender identity.” He was also placed under threat of immediate arrest if he was caught referring to his daughter as a girl again.
While a January ruling in the BC Court of Appeal vacated that threat, Rob remains under a strict gag order forbidding him from speaking about his daughter’s case in public and requiring that he “acknowledge and refer to [his daughter] as male” in private.
But Rob says he feels a moral responsibility to try to fight the laws and the court rulings which have “destroyed” his daughter. “People need to stand up and realize that [the courts are] sterilizing children, essentially, and mutilating them,” Rob said. “It’s… state-sponsored child abuse.”
Feeling that if he lacked the courage to speak out, he could scarcely expect others to stand up and help him, Rob granted two video interviews to Canadian YouTube commentators about his case. While the interviews garnered a sharp initial interest, the commentators who granted them quickly found themselves under threats of litigation. Rob’s first interview was immediately taken down. Rob’s second interviewer, Laura-Lynn Thompson, faced similar threats, but initially refused to take her video (not currently available in Canada) down.
Last Thursday, Justice Michael Tammen of the British Columbia Supreme Court ordered that Thompson’s interview and various social media posts be taken down. When Thompson stalled, trying to keep a rapidly sharing copy of her interview available to Canadians on Bitchute, the police were sent to her house to demand she take the video down.
Tammen also harshly reprimanded Rob for speaking about his case to the media, warning him that if he broke his silence again, he would likely be cited for contempt of court.
Nevertheless, Rob says he is unwilling to back down. “Whatever happens to me pales in comparison to what’s already happened to my daughter.” Rob feels there is no way for him to fight “this child abuse” of his daughter except to force his story out into the open.
The path forward is not likely to be easy, but Rob said he feels a responsibility to tell his story that goes much deeper than anything court costs or even jail time could deflect. “Let’s say in 5, 10 years my daughter is detransitioning, and she turns to me and says, you know, ‘Dad or Mom, why did none of you do anything to stop this?’…. When my daughter asks me that question, I’ll say, ‘I did everything that I possibly could. There was nothing more I could do, and then when there was nothing more I could do, I continued on because I didn’t want other parents to go through what I went through.”
Laura Lynn Thompson of http://lauralynn.tv joined The Alex Jones Show with guest host Matt Bracken to break down the heartbreaking story of government sponsored child mutilation and the government regulations that lock parents out of protecting their children or speaking out.