TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

Babysitter Who Had Sex With Boys Avoids Jail

BeeblebroxZa

January 24, 2016
84 upvotes
/r/MensRights
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/27/loni-bouchard-babysitter-sex-with-boys_n_4003087.html
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Babysitter Who Had Sex With Boys Avoids Jail
Author

BeeblebroxZa

Upvotes 84
Comments 30
Date January 24, 2016 11:32 AM UTC
(10 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/42fkcd/babysitter_who_had_sex_with_boys_avoids_jail/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/babysitter-who-had-sex-with-boys-avoids-jail.957803
https://theredarchive.com/post/957803
Top posts by BeeblebroxZa

TIL a 15yo boy was sentenced for 10 years for stopping an intercourse with a woman only 5 seconds after she withdrew her consent

863 upvotes
September 25, 2015
/r/MensRights

We should stop putting women in jail. For anything.

77 upvotes
September 24, 2015
/r/MensRights

Why do good girls become feminists?

23 upvotes
September 30, 2015
/r/MensRights

Why Feminism Is Wrong About Patriarchy Theory

7 upvotes
July 11, 2015
/r/MensRights

Love, Peace and Gender - Dr Warren Farrell, GirlWritesWhat and Stefan Molyneux of Freedomain Radio

4 upvotes
September 24, 2015
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–]bertreapot 19 points20 points21 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Bouchard, who pleaded guilty to three counts of first-degree reckless endangerment...

Meaning, she won't have to register as a sex offender. Sounds fair /s

[–]HeForeverBleeds 12 points13 points14 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

So she already raped at least two kids on separate occasions, but the defense that works for her is immaturity and that is a crime of opportunity? In other words, if she has the opportunity to commit this kind if crime, then she will? Doesn't that describe every pedophile who's acted on his impulses? Could he not also use this defense?

And she's a fucking baby sitter; couldn't it be that like most predators she sought out a position where she would have easy access to children and more opportunities--which is apparently all she needs to rape a minor?

This woman is clearly a sexually predator and I honestly have very little doubt that if she hasn't already, the next chance she gets she will rape another boy. Clearly she sees now that she can get away with those crimes

[+]mwobuddy -13 points-12 points-11 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

raped

by statute. not real rape.

[–]bitchessuck 14 points15 points16 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Well, for some reason (i.e. laws) statutory rape is considered Very Real Rape if men are the perpetrators. There is no reason it should be different for women.

[+]mwobuddy -12 points-11 points-10 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

There is no reason it should be different for women.

Dragging others down to make things shit for everyone is a bad way to make things "fair".

[–]NAFI_S 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Off topic but why the hell do 14 year olds need a babysitter?

[–]garglemesh42 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

For the same reason younger kids need a babysitter: the parents don't trust them to not do something stupid like stick a fork in the electrical socket or burn the house down.

[–]SentientCactus 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

My God right off the bat, "She's really, really sorry and said it won't happen again." I CAN HERE THE WRIST SLAPPING FROM HERE!

[–]v573v 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Sec. 53a-63. Reckless endangerment in the first degree: Class A misdemeanor. (a) A person is guilty of reckless endangerment in the first degree when, with extreme indifference to human life, he recklessly engages in conduct which creates a risk of serious physical injury to another person.

Sex creates a serious risk of physical injury?

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

STDs?

[–]mwobuddy -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Its a placeholder.

[–]v573v 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

It's the US so it's probably the dope she supplied him them with.

[–]mwobuddy -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Actually, they do call it reckless endangerment because a "child" having sex is being endangered, and also exposed to "lewd lascivious acts", as if sex is degrading to the body and soul.

You should look at law regarding child rape sometime, it reads as how sex is inherently dirty. All rape is wrong, but the fundamental basis for sex laws revolves around it being a dirty, impurifying thing.

Im pretty sure sex laws even talk about "morally corrupting a minor" with sex.

Sex is moral corruption, and only adults are free to corrupt themselves like that.

[–]v573v 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This woman's mother was found guilty of the same crime and it was for giving drugs.

It looks like the sex charges were removed in favour of guilty for giving drugs to the teens.

[–]ozyri -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

thats 2013

[+]mwobuddy -7 points-6 points-5 points 10 years ago* (13 children) | Copy Link

noting that office of probation and one of the victim's families supported a no-jail sentence.

my god, you people.

Its rape by statute, but even people within the family can see that its a bullshit law. She's still a teen, had sex with another TEEN.

According to warrants obtained by The Hartford Courant, Bouchard had written in her journal that she was in love with the boy and that the law shouldn't tell her whom to date.

You have to learn the difference between actual rape and breaking a bullshit law. You're all perfectly fine allowing two 14 year olds to fuck each other silly, get STDs and pregnant, without criminal repercussions, but once someone is 18+, look out, its RAPE!

You're trying to be feminists, by mimicking the outrage and intentionally misrepresenting what actually happened. Stop it.

I'll downvote your respondents too. fuck off.

[–]Atheist101 7 points8 points9 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Connecticut consent is 16. Romeo and Juliet laws dont apply when theres a power relationship (teacher-student, babysitter-kid). This should have been a statutory rape case.

[+]mwobuddy -8 points-7 points-6 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

All relationships are power relationships.

[–]Atheist101 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

boyfriend girlfriend isnt a power relationship unless you are a misogynist

[+]mwobuddy -6 points-5 points-4 points 10 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

misogynist

Lol, oh yes. Right. Totally.

All relationships are based on power. If one person in a relationship is more attractive and desireable, they have more power. If one person has more options for suitors, they have more power. That is typically the female.

You think men would ever have put themselves over a barrel with regard to alimony and child support if this were the case?

You should read the book "Metaphors We Live By", and peruse some ASPD forums

http://www.psychforums.com/antisocial-personality/topic174823.html

People uncolored by emotions and psychological defenses for their "altruisic" and "selfish" acts, are the most likely to tell you how reality is.

George Lakoff's book describes how all relationships are power related.

He even has another book called https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women,_Fire,_and_Dangerous_Things

[–]Atheist101 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

If you think a man or woman should have more power and authority over the other in a BF-GF or Husband-wife relationship, you are fucked in the head.

[+]mwobuddy -8 points-7 points-6 points 10 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

If you think one or the other person doesn't have more power, you are fucked in the head. Its not about desire, its about reality.

We might desire that there is no person in the relationship with more power than the other, but that is completely untrue. Someone will always have more power.

Think about chad thundercock slaying attractive womens' pussy night after night, getting all he wants without having to invest in a relationship. They even moan about how he never calls them back, after he's done with them.

People always, always, ALWAYS have power, through their social value, whether you admit to that or not. People unconsciously exercise this all the time. Women do it as much as men. Men unconsciously exercise this power in the way I just described if they have a high paying or popular career, such as lawyer, artist, etc, or if they have extreme good looks. They can have their pick of women.

We call it "being in or out of his/her league", but the reality is that we're using that as a metaphor for who has more power in the relationship. Attractive females do NOT make friends with unattractive males. They have the social power to make friends with more attractive males. They do so in complete innocence because they are choosing the best, not realizing their power gets them the opportunity to do that.

Stop being a fucktard.

Again, go read "Metaphors We Live By", and stop being a giant cunt.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Are you serious with this bullshit? The point here is the disparity between treatment of women vs men in the same exact context. Once you reverse genders, women too often get a pussy pass. If it was a boy he would have been charged and placed on the sex-offender list for the rest of his life. I suppose you endorse that, though.

[+]mwobuddy -6 points-5 points-4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If it was a boy he would have been charged and placed on the sex-offender list for the rest of his life. I suppose you endorse that, though.

No. Fuck off.

[–]bitchessuck 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Sure, you can argue that statutory rape is bullshit in general in some cases (and I tend to support this), but the point here is the different treatment of men and women, which is unfuriating. Isn't that pretty obvious?

[–]mwobuddy -3 points-2 points-1 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I agree. However, in context, it is usually about pulling women down to be shit on just as badly as men, by making them out to be villainous child molesting rapists like men are, rather than fighting for neither side to be treated like shit.

[–]tothecatmobile 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Its rape by statute, but even people within the family can see that its a bullshit law. She's still a teen, had sex with another TEEN.

so if a 19 year old boy was banging a 14 year old girl, its a-ok?

[–]SmirkingRevenge 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If they say yes, then the argument holds. If they say no, well then... Personally, I think 14-18 poses a real legal dilemma. Four years apart is almost what I am to my wife, if we were 20 years younger, I'd be a sex offender. As to the babysitting bit, any position of power creates an unequal relationship like a teacher/student or boss/employee and is wrong. If it were only one boy, I'd be interested to see which came first, the sitting relationship or the romantic. Since it was more than one boy in similar situations this looks like the beginning of a pattern and she should be considered a predator. (/s I wonder if she wants to be a teacher...)

[–]mwobuddy -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Why not? Aren't genders equal? Furthermore, feminists love trotting out that horse of "oh girls mature sooner/are superior at interpersonal relationships". If anything, their adherence to this tripe would suggest women are more predatory in relationships.

Instead we have some crazy inversion where males just get shit on.

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Old article.

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter