My elementary school principle was arrested for trolling for dudes at a local state park a year or two ago. His method? Sit in car, wait for someone to pass by, start jerking off, hope they don't run off screaming. Apparently he chose poorly that last time.
Just to clarify: the reason I noted the client's race is because the lawyer was showing him websites specifically dedicated to interracial sex. Presumably, the client's race is why the lawyer was propositioning him in the first place.
I can't go in to much detail on this, but while doing doc review on a very large bankruptcy matter (let's call it "Smeeman Smothers") I learned that a very high level executive had severe gastro-intestinal problems. His wife would e-mail him about once a day, and always addressed him by some fart/poop joke, like "Little Deuce Poop" or "Mr. Poopy Pants."
If you are going to be a close minded moron, at least have the decency to explain to me why it matters that she likes BDSM and black cock. How does this effect her ability to preside over a family court case? A persons sexual preferences, no matter how "depraved" or odd they may seem have zero effect on how competent a person may be professionally.
*sigh* Technically, it doesn't matter. However, she is a judge in the FAMILY COURT, and like it or not it would matter very much there. She's already stepped down from ruling on active cases and is presently doing 'administrative work.' You can't be so stupid as to fail to recognize how a woman who likes to be bound and gagged and beaten (or whatever BDSM she's into), have sexual relations with men outside of her own marriage and then allow her husband to post images on the internet (or, at least marry someone who will do it without asking) would have a hard time being seen as the right person to rule over things like divorce and child custody. Especially if there is a question of sexual abuse involved with one of the parties. Is BDSM abuse? Nope. Does it look bad to the uninitiated? Sure does. There's an unspoken standard that a judge presiding over an emotionally charged case (as divorce and custody always is) should be restrained, experienced and to a certain extent conservative. If you've seen said judge with a black cock in her mouth as she's duct taped to the bed, it kind of takes that image away. Let's not pretend that we live in a world where people's perceptions of you don't impact your professional life.
So what you're saying is that since society as a whole is stupid and thinks that a person can't be into BDSM and at the same time be able to fairly preside over a family court case that she is wrong? Because that's what I got out of it. Yes, I agree that it isn't the best image, but that's more because the media will jump all over it and people will use it as an excuse to try to say she is unfit to make proper rulings. I think a fine line needs to be drawn that divides whether it is wrong or just that the general population of idiots think it's wrong and therefore it's something that would best be kept private just to avoid the problems. And where is this unspoken standard that the judge should be conservative? The judge should be professional and make a decision based on the facts presented, I know that's ideal but that is the only standard that I've ever heard of.
Imagine you get married, have two children and a life that you enjoy with your significant other. Then, one day while flipping through your computer you come across pictures of that person fucking someone else. The pictures are recent. This triggers a discussion and, obviously, a fight. After this immense betrayal, you decide to file for divorce and sole custody of your children. Now fast forward to the hearing, and the judge sitting your case is a woman who has at one point in her career been removed from the bench due to compromising pictures of her being posted on the internet. You know this woman enjoys extramarital sex (albeit with her husband's consent), and furthermore she is also okay with taking pictures of the acts. You wouldn't have a problem with her overseeing your case? You wouldn't see a conflict of interest? Because I don't know about you, but I was under the impression that the family court sees all kinds of cases dealing with extramarital affairs, abuse of trust and custody issues. Personally, I could understand it if some of the cases appeared to be a conflict of interest with this particular judge. I'm not saying BDSM is abnormal or wrong, I'm saying that she holds a sensitive position of employment and that discretion is called for in her case. Unfortunately, that discretion has been squandered and now that everyone knows she is open to their judgment. I don't think everyone would be as okay with it as you claim to be.
Imagine you catch your spouse cheating on you with a person of your same race and it's just plain old missionary. Then when you get to family court you find out that your judge had cheated on her husband two years prior. I agree with your point, but judges are people too and I am sure that many have been in some situation that the parties to a case would be able to argue compromises their judgment. I'm saying that I think if she is able to do her job and it doesn't appear to affect her decisions any more than any other judges life experiences do than it shouldn't matter. I know it does but it shouldn't. As an example, take Sasha Grey. She's done some extreme stuff during her porn career but she also seems to be a well spoken and intelligent person. If she were to graduate law school, practice law and do whatever else is required to be a judge I would see no reason why she would be less capable of making a decision than anyone else.
And I would agree with you...I just don't think many other people would. There's a great deal of hypocrisy in the world, and - particularly in emotionally charged professions, like those within the family courts - a judge with her past would have her career damaged and likely face some sort of professional reprimand. It wouldn't surprise me at all if a large percentage of the individuals she was presiding over objected to her involvement in their case. It isn't so much that she likes kinky, bi-racial sex...it's that her husband was indiscreet with that information, and has put her in a compromised position. If she's doing stuff like that in the privacy of her own home? Go nuts. If she chooses (or her husband chooses) to post pictures of the acts on public websites AND solicit his clients to sleep with her (which is unethical, and he had to pay a fine and resign for doing it), then it starts to be a problem for her career. I can't be the only one who sees the connection here. Edit: And c'mon. I can't be the only one who laughed out loud at the thought of Sasha Grey presiding over a divorce case. Her intellectual merits aside - wouldn't everyone just be waiting for her to strip naked and choke herself with her tie while she masturbated with the gavel?
So... the basis for objecting to this judge presiding over cases is that people are capable of objecting to her presiding over cases? So basically, even though you think a judge should be restrained and conservative, you think it's more important that the judge present an image of being restrained and conservative. How about a simple test: have there been any appeals of previous decisions that she's made on the basis of her private sexual habits? Your theory would gain some weight if lawyers at least tried to make those appeals, and even more so if some of her decisions were overturned and custody arrangements (etc) changed. I've known a few people - and Scootah will have something to say on this - who've gone to BDSM type events, and there are tons of high-achieving, high-earning type A personality professionals who go to those events. Let alone the drug use and mental health issues that plague professionals (particularly female professionals). If all of these undercover issues were suddenly discovered, the legal and medical decisions not to come under question would be in a minority. What if the judge in question had pictures released of her having man on top, lights off, missionary sex? Would we be reassured that her decisions were extra reliable? I'll be back in a few minutes.
This will be my last post on this matter. If some of you are convinced that photos that show a judge bound, gagged and engaging in extramarital sex published on the internet is not in some way detrimental to her career or her image, then we will just have to agree to disagree. Is it right? Certainly not. Does that mean it won't happen? Sadly, no.
To clarify with this - I think that most female judges would find their careers in the shitter about 5 minutes after it got out that they participated in interracial cuckoldry fantasies with BDSM overtones with partners so indiscrete that the pictures leaked. A) women in the legal industry with any discernable sexuality get shit on left and right. Add some serious atypical kinks - and they're going to get dragged through the fucking ringer. B) Family courts are supposed to be presided over by Santa Clause and the Fairy Godmother. You're adjudicating over incredibly emotional and distressed people and frequently arbitrating over the long term quality of life of children. Many cases include allegations of sexual abuse or non consensual cuckoldry. If you have a publicly disclosed alternate sexuality then you imply that your own views are tinged. While anyone with a brain knows that kinky consensual sex lives don't even remotely mean that you approve of kiddy fiddling, rape or nonconsensual adultery - anyone who knows lawyers, and the stupidity of morons in a family court - knows that it's still going to be a cluster fuck. C) As a judge, your judgement should be unimpeachable. It's fine if you made a decision that came out poorly because of factors that no-one could have predicated. It's inexcusable if you made a decision that ended fucking disastrously because you were such a poor judge of character that you engaged in career ending activities with wildly indiscrete parties. That said - If the details of what I'm into came out in the sense that the judges personal life was outed - I'd take a career hit. A big chunk of my work is done with conservative middle aged white guys, and many of them are under public scrutiny which makes me a risk if I'm indiscreet about my sex life. I'm a computer geek - but if I end up doing something crazy and kinky, it'd be great tabloid fodder 'S&M Killer 'repaired' minister's computers. Covering up his use of public resources for sexual deviancy?' - etc. All wildly unlikely - but the kind of shit politicians worry about constantly. I agree that lots of very conservative publicly 'respectable' types have 1950's public personas while cross dressing, swinging and going to orgies where people beat each other with rubber chickens in dungeon - and if everyone came out about all their kinks and shit - it'd be awesome because the 'norm' would shift far enough that career ending freakish stories would become irrelevant. But reality is that for lots of people - interracial relationships are still an icky taboo. Equality for homosexuals is still being debated like there's two potentially valid ethical positions. We barely even get upset at(and many people actively applaud) the ludicrous punative sanctions placed on adulterers in the divorce court (You got a blow job in vegas, so the person you were in a relationship with at the time is entitled to live off your income for the rest of their life, even though there are no kids and they're in perfect physical health? Really?), and there's still people involved in the Republican party and it's international cousins - who think that this 'fire' business is still a bit iffy and whippersnappers will make god angry if they keep insisting on pursuing it's development. We're still a long way from a mass normalization of non conventional sexualities and we're a long, long way from being socially enlightened enough that judges engaging in interracial BDSM tinted cuckoldry fantasies are able to continue to work in family court when they're outed. Obviously, I'd rather not discuss my kinks too openly at work. I don't care if people find out - because while it might limit my career, it wouldn't kill it. But I try not to be that guy who can't keep his sex life and his professional life separate - because that guy is creepy regardless of his kinks.
Agreed. And added to that is the insane amount of applications for her to recuse herself from any particular case would probably make her position on the bench impractical. Really, doesn't it just come down to the following?: Does the fact that someone likes to get beaten with a rubber chicken while tied up mean that they are incapable of making sound decisions in the public arena? No. Does the fact that someone likes to get beaten with a rubber chicken while tied up mean that the 'public' will probably think that they are incapable of making sound decisions in the public arena? Yes.
Discussions where one person explains reality and another person says "yeah but reality shouldn't be like that" are always embarrassing. Focus: I have a friend who resembles JFK in almost every way. Guy comes from old money, he's distinguished, clearly personable, and full of class, hell he even has the same accent. He's on his way to law school and will probably run for public office in the next 10 years. A few years ago he got very drunk and revealed to me that he was gay. That is fine by me but the guy went to great lengths to keep this hidden from his family and peers, including having "fake" girlfriends (i.e. dating casually to maintain appearances). I think it's pretty tragic (although he seems to be dealing with it a little more healthily these days) and at the time I kind of assumed that one day I'd see him on the news facing a ruined political career and apologizing to his wife and kids for blowing a truck driver in a bathroom somewhere. (I now await 2 pages of discussion in which people try to argue that homosexuality shouldn't affect a political career.)