CNN cancels new Scott Ritter show

Registered ^ | 01.27.03 | Reg

[My2Cents]

LOL...

Hey, do you notice he looks a bit like Mort Kondracke in those pics?

[steveegg]

I'm surprised that CNN cancelled it.

[timestax]

bump!!

[bvw]

Paedophilia, eh?

Alli, Annie, Hannah and Berit, all 13, before the first big party of the seventh grade, Edina, Minnesota
Time: Girl Culture Photo Essay

[auboy]

SUPERB!

[lorrainer]

LOL! A true classic.

Thanks for NOT including the Shoe Mirrors bit on the pic. I don't know whether I could have stomached that....

[bvw]

Ritter's virtual romance date at Burger King was just a adult cop. Ritter's stupidity notwithstanding, that ain't paedophilia. And history has shown -- today's culture shows -- that seductresses can be young. Do not confuse innocence with youth.

A man of 44 should be expected to mind his own sexual manner -- but what manner is that? I say the worst thing Scott did was to risk his own marital fidelity, the respect as a father he needs to keep to his own children, and the duty he has as half of the parental team to raise his children in a two parent household.

The cries of "Paedophile!, Paedolphile" are false, they led down the wrong road, and miss the real problem (which is what I mentioned -- the risk of a broken home) above.

The "Girl Culture" exhibition showcased in Time and also on it's own site shows the as-old-as-creation fact that young girls can be quite the seductress.

Not all young girls are! Modesty is a great virtue! But the culture, the family, the mother, the aunt, etc, (even her own persona) can push a young girl out of that presumption of innocence into a very active role as an effective seductress. Our culture does it.

Consider the words of another young woman in the "Girl Culture" collection of photos, interviews and essays.

Lillian, 19 years old, NYC:

"I was just really innocent-looking my whole life. I always looked like a baby. When I was a fifteen-year-old girl, everyone was like, “Oh, my God, you’re like Lolita.” I’m like, “No, I’m a kid.” But this city definitely teaches you that youth and sexuality go hand in hand. It’s really kind of sick".

In that light, consider that Ritter was brought down by a trained team of virtual "seductresses". Don't cheapen marriage and fatherhood by focusing on the paedophilia -- which was NO real crime -- there was NO child, the "victim" was NO innocent. The failings are not that -- rather they are the reckless risk to marriage and fatherhood Ritter engaged in.

[amused]

Registered strikes again!

[auboy]

Oh, that's it… our culture made him do it. /sarcasm

This was not Scott's first venture into kiddieland. What do you think he was planning… to be a father-figure?

[TomServo]

Actually the most warped and demented get pulled!

Well since this is a "Pee-Wee" theme, the only question I have is, "Actually the most warped and demented what get pulled?

[SarahW]

You don't understand internet predator laws.
It's illegal to do what he did.

[bvw]

The first one was also a dalliance with a trained team of adult cops actig as seductresses -- passive mode, still seductresses.

[bvw]

Oh I understand them. I am ambivalent about them -- okay as a stopgap -- perhaps, otherwise they are a poison. The internet is new, the protective social framework hasn't developed yet, to protect innocents otherwise lousy stopgaps are needed for a time.

Yet the cries of "paedophilia" are false. Especially in regard to stings using adults playacting as innocents. The real crime -- in my view -- in such cases, to construct a stronger basis for these stopgaps -- is in the adultery aspect -- the attempted violation of the marriage contract.

[auboy]

Did Ritter willingly fall "victim" to two stings in a row, knowing that all would be okay because they were only trained cop "sexpots"? Not hardly. The man is preverted. The "trained team of adult seductresses" happened to expose the perversion Ritter himself chose to explore.

Rationize, if you want. Sane parents are unwilling to risk the chance of having Ritter or any other pervert, active mode, "baby-sit" their "seductresses". In the court of public opinion, Ritter's behavior is unacceptable. Scott Ritter is a fraud, publicly and privately.

[CheneyChick]

You RULE!

[auboy]

**The real crime -- in my view -- in such cases, to construct a stronger basis for these stopgaps -- is in the adultery aspect -- the attempted violation of the marriage contract.**

Then it's a good thing his wife's not from Texas… and driving a Mercedes;-)

[habs4ever]

Still pushing that crap, huh? And why post a pic of UNDERAGE girls? Are you attempting to portray them as seductresses and thus are fair game for sexual predators? A guy that chats up underage girls for trysts so he can masturbate in front of them is a predator, pal.It is also illegal.

You are a moron.

[bvw]

There's a difference between playacting and crime. Don't be so light to disregard it for the sake of walloping Scott Ritter. Ritter's full of himself in addition to being a nut and incompetent -- only a nut would get invloved with William Rivers Pitt and Ritter's incompetence in handling this bad news is absolutely "stellar".

Yet, a man's thought's are his own, bad or good, and only in presentment of action towards a crime is a crime commit. To become enthralled with rendevousing at Burger Kings with other internet play actors -- for any purpose up until that bad action is no crime,I say. Now if Scottie actually opened his codpiece to the actress -- there be the crime, or even if he in person said it to her -- a different crime. Misdemeanors, both. Why not a felony? Because the actress: an adult. Now this is in my opinion of what felony and misdeamnor be, and at odds with current intrusive, mis-founded laws.

[bvw]

A remedy that was! Not reccommended, but not less than that he deserved -- but she hazarded her motherhood, and took to what may well be a murder for the sake of that remedy.

A marrriage, that sacred contract between a man and a woman, is the better thing we should protect -- and that Ritter risked, and any man's or woman's risking puts all marriages at risk for lessening the singular regard marriages must be held in.

[bvw]

Not all children are innocents, and a grown man, sadly, may be the more innocent in the game of seduction.