Reality Check: Adolescent Males

 

When the Kavanaugh story broke I made the comment that, whether or not the account is believable, it isn’t a sufficiently big deal to warrant preventing his confirmation. Since then I’ve read and heard several comments, including in conservative media, to the effect that these are “serious allegations” that, if true, would certainly disqualify Kavanaugh.

I disagree. I think we are witnessing a preening, unrealistic outrage rooted in a fantasy of how humans are supposed to behave. Life isn’t a fairy tale, never less so than when it involves intoxicated, scantily clad teens cavorting without adult supervision.

Since the sexual revolution, the process of seduction has grown ever more perfunctory and abbreviated. Young men are, at their best, clumsy, sex-obsessed creatures. Add alcohol and they become even less gracious, if that’s possible: the lines between flirtatious, boorish, and aggressively physical become increasingly blurred.

I’m not saying that what is alleged to have occurred is a good or appropriate thing. I have a daughter of my own, after all. I’m merely saying that it is to be expected: there is nothing good and appropriate about a bunch of kids being left alone to drink and carry on, and the consequences of allowing that kind of situation are going to tend to be bad regardless of the character of the kids involved. Kids lack judgment. They’re also wired differently from adults, with brains that are far more sensitive to pleasure and dismissive of risk: of course they’re going to make poor choices and misbehave, if given the opportunity.

That’s why we try not to give them the opportunity. That’s why we have always cautioned young women to be careful where they find themselves, and why we should continue to caution them. That’s why fathers are suspicious of their daughters’ boyfriends, and boyfriends are wary of their girlfriends’ fathers. That’s why sensible parents try to prevent their children from having unsupervised drinking parties.

Anyone who thinks that the behavior Mrs. Ford describes – of an intoxicated teenage male at an unsupervised party featuring intoxicated teenage females – is indicative of something unusual, unexpected, or alarming has an unrealistic view of young men, and probably of a lot of other things as well.

Published in Culture
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 78 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Richard Fulmer Inactive
    Richard Fulmer
    @RichardFulmer

    If it really happened, I believe that attempted rape, even at age 17, would disqualify Kavanaugh. Rape is wrong. Period. Raging hormones do not excuse an unprovoked act of violence against a helpless girl. Further, if it happened, then Kavanaugh has lied about it under oath – not as a teenager with raging hormones, but as an adult and as a federal judge.

    • #31
  2. Cato Rand Inactive
    Cato Rand
    @CatoRand

    Richard Fulmer (View Comment):

    If it really happened, I believe that attempted rape, even at age 17, would disqualify Kavanaugh. Rape is wrong. Period. Raging hormones do not excuse an unprovoked act of violence against a helpless girl. Further, if it happened, then Kavanaugh has lied about it under oath – not as a teenager with raging hormones, but as an adult and as a federal judge.

    I think I agree that the lying under oath would be disqualifying.  As a lawyer I was always taught that the ethics committee could forgive an assault, but not a misappropriation of funds.  Both are serious but the latter just goes to the heart of the professional qualification in a way that the former doesn’t.  Similarly for a judge, honesty and integrity are just critical.  You can’t have respect for the legal process if those presiding over it aren’t known to have those things.  They are, literally, minimum qualifications for the job.

    • #32
  3. Cato Rand Inactive
    Cato Rand
    @CatoRand

    Another news flash, Michael Avenatti claims to have a third accuser.  Question:  doesn’t hiring Michael Avenatti per se damage your credibility?  Even Slate is skeptical of this sleazeball with the CNN fetish.

    • #33
  4. Goldwaterwoman Thatcher
    Goldwaterwoman
    @goldwaterwoman

    Cato Rand (View Comment):

    Another news flash, Michael Avenatti claims to have a third accuser. Question: doesn’t hiring Michael Avenatti per se damage your credibility? Even Slate is skeptical of this sleazeball with the CNN fetish.

    Avenatti is tired of Gloria Allred getting all the female victim business. 

    • #34
  5. Goldwaterwoman Thatcher
    Goldwaterwoman
    @goldwaterwoman

    Arahant (View Comment):
    The law has since been changed. But imagine an eighth-grade boy being seduced by a high-school senior young woman, and he’s the one committing the crime.

    The likelihood of that happening is/was slim and none. There is no way a high school senior girl would be caught dead in a social situation with an eight-grade boy unless it was her brother. 

    • #35
  6. Cato Rand Inactive
    Cato Rand
    @CatoRand

    Goldwaterwoman (View Comment):

    Arahant (View Comment):
    The law has since been changed. But imagine an eighth-grade boy being seduced by a high-school senior young woman, and he’s the one committing the crime.

    The likelihood of that happening is/was slim and none. There is no way a high school senior girl would be caught dead in a social situation with an eight-grade boy unless it was her brother.

    Um, isn’t it worse if it’s her brother?

    • #36
  7. Goldwaterwoman Thatcher
    Goldwaterwoman
    @goldwaterwoman

    Cato Rand (View Comment):
    Um, isn’t it worse if it’s her brother?

    Um, I said social situation, not sexual situation. One assumes if she’s banging an eight-grade boy they would have first been acquainted through a social situation.

    • #37
  8. Randy Webster Inactive
    Randy Webster
    @RandyWebster

    Jon1979 (View Comment):
    But as hyperbolic as the media and other Democrats have been in this whole thing, it’s hard to believe they could keep an actual corroborating witness hidden this long without trumpeting him or her to the world).

    Timing is everything.

    • #38
  9. Dorrk Inactive
    Dorrk
    @Dorrk

    Can I just say something in defense of teenage drinking parties? They are getting a bad rap in all of these Kavanaugh threads. While not ideal social occasions for every teen, I went to quite a few and nothing terribly bad happened at any of them. Some kids get more drunk than others, others kids get stoned, there’s probably some hanky panky… I suppose that in my situation it was almost always the same group of kids from the same school activities, so we all knew and liked each other. There’s maybe a great deal of luck involved in nothing bad coming out of these occasions, but nothing bad comes out of a majority of these kinds of occasions across the country. Let’s not impugn all of America’s drunk kids just because a handful don’t know how to party

    • #39
  10. Mim526 Inactive
    Mim526
    @Mim526

    Cato Rand (View Comment):

    Richard Fulmer (View Comment):

    If it really happened, I believe that attempted rape, even at age 17, would disqualify Kavanaugh. Rape is wrong. Period. Raging hormones do not excuse an unprovoked act of violence against a helpless girl. Further, if it happened, then Kavanaugh has lied about it under oath – not as a teenager with raging hormones, but as an adult and as a federal judge.

    I think I agree that the lying under oath would be disqualifying. As a lawyer I was always taught that the ethics committee could forgive an assault, but not a misappropriation of funds. Both are serious but the latter just goes to the heart of the professional qualification in a way that the former doesn’t. Similarly for a judge, honesty and integrity are just critical. You can’t have respect for the legal process if those presiding over it aren’t known to have those things. They are, literally, minimum qualifications for the job.

    I think you’ve hit on part of what I saw in Kavanaugh’s interview.  His honesty and integrity being not just questioned, but slaughtered, is very offensive to him.  

    You mentioned his not giving a good interview.  Did you believe him?

     

    • #40
  11. Cato Rand Inactive
    Cato Rand
    @CatoRand

    Mim526 (View Comment):

    Cato Rand (View Comment):

    Richard Fulmer (View Comment):

    If it really happened, I believe that attempted rape, even at age 17, would disqualify Kavanaugh. Rape is wrong. Period. Raging hormones do not excuse an unprovoked act of violence against a helpless girl. Further, if it happened, then Kavanaugh has lied about it under oath – not as a teenager with raging hormones, but as an adult and as a federal judge.

    I think I agree that the lying under oath would be disqualifying. As a lawyer I was always taught that the ethics committee could forgive an assault, but not a misappropriation of funds. Both are serious but the latter just goes to the heart of the professional qualification in a way that the former doesn’t. Similarly for a judge, honesty and integrity are just critical. You can’t have respect for the legal process if those presiding over it aren’t known to have those things. They are, literally, minimum qualifications for the job.

    I think you’ve hit on part of what I saw in Kavanaugh’s interview. His honesty and integrity being not just questioned, but slaughtered, is very offensive to him.

    You mentioned his not giving a good interview. Did you believe him?

     

    I thought he kept repeating the same lines in a way that seemed canned and scripted.  I don’t think that helped.  His body language and his wife’s certainty helped though.  I could certainly see him as a guy who was just so shocked and hurt and taken off guard by all this that he didn’t know what to say.  That’s one option.  And it makes some sense in light of the inherent unfairness of being hit with basically unfalsifiable accusations from 35 years ago.  The guy who’s story is basically “I didn’t do it” always has a trouble being compelling up against a fleshed out narrative of an event.  I noticed that in trial work long ago and I think it’s just a general feature of our preference for stories.

    I could also, though, imagine someone focusing on the scriptedness and thinking it looked like a crafted lie he felt the need to stick to in order to avoid straying into subjects that wouldn’t help him.  Bottom line, I’m not confident he’s going to make a great witness Thursday.  Of course he doesn’t have to be perfect, just better than she is.  And I have no idea – she may be a train wreck too.

    • #41
  12. barbara lydick Inactive
    barbara lydick
    @barbaralydick

    I heard today that she is now saying – in addition to the rest of her blather – that he exposed himself to her.  My first thought was that a car full of adolescent males drove past her one evening and one of them mooned her.  Hmmm.   Could one of them have been Kavanaugh?  She really couldn’t remember.

    • #42
  13. Mim526 Inactive
    Mim526
    @Mim526

    Cato Rand (View Comment):

    Mim526 (View Comment):

    Cato Rand (View Comment):

    Richard Fulmer (View Comment):

    If it really happened, I believe that attempted rape, even at age 17, would disqualify Kavanaugh. Rape is wrong. Period. Raging hormones do not excuse an unprovoked act of violence against a helpless girl. Further, if it happened, then Kavanaugh has lied about it under oath – not as a teenager with raging hormones, but as an adult and as a federal judge.

    I think I agree that the lying under oath would be disqualifying. As a lawyer I was always taught that the ethics committee could forgive an assault, but not a misappropriation of funds. Both are serious but the latter just goes to the heart of the professional qualification in a way that the former doesn’t. Similarly for a judge, honesty and integrity are just critical. You can’t have respect for the legal process if those presiding over it aren’t known to have those things. They are, literally, minimum qualifications for the job.

    I think you’ve hit on part of what I saw in Kavanaugh’s interview. His honesty and integrity being not just questioned, but slaughtered, is very offensive to him.

    You mentioned his not giving a good interview. Did you believe him?

     

    I thought he kept repeating the same lines in a way that seemed canned and scripted. I don’t think that helped. His body language and his wife’s certainty helped though. I could certainly see him as a guy who was just so shocked and hurt and taken off guard by all this that he didn’t know what to say. That’s one option. And it makes some sense in light of the inherent unfairness of being hit with basically unfalsifiable accusations from 35 years ago. The guy who’s story is basically “I didn’t do it” always has a trouble being compelling up against a fleshed out narrative of an event. I noticed that in trial work long ago and I think it’s just a general feature of our preference for stories.

    I could also, though, imagine someone focusing on the scriptedness and thinking it looked like a crafted lie he felt the need to stick to in order to avoid straying into subjects that wouldn’t help him. Bottom line, I’m not confident he’s going to make a great witness Thursday. Of course he doesn’t have to be perfect, just better than she is. And I have no idea – she may be a train wreck too.

    You’re an expert, I can tell :-)   With all the political undercurrents, this is worse than a regular trial in some ways.  I thought he acted like himself.  If there is a hearing Thursday (Ford and attorneys sounding wobbly), I hope he’s able to relax more because I believe the man.  Like you said, though, there are only so many ways a person can say “I did not do this”.

    • #43
  14. Cato Rand Inactive
    Cato Rand
    @CatoRand

    Mim526 (View Comment):

    Cato Rand (View Comment):

    Mim526 (View Comment):

    Cato Rand (View Comment):

    Richard Fulmer (View Comment):

    If it really happened, I believe that attempted rape, even at age 17, would disqualify Kavanaugh. Rape is wrong. Period. Raging hormones do not excuse an unprovoked act of violence against a helpless girl. Further, if it happened, then Kavanaugh has lied about it under oath – not as a teenager with raging hormones, but as an adult and as a federal judge.

    I think I agree that the lying under oath would be disqualifying. As a lawyer I was always taught that the ethics committee could forgive an assault, but not a misappropriation of funds. Both are serious but the latter just goes to the heart of the professional qualification in a way that the former doesn’t. Similarly for a judge, honesty and integrity are just critical. You can’t have respect for the legal process if those presiding over it aren’t known to have those things. They are, literally, minimum qualifications for the job.

    I think you’ve hit on part of what I saw in Kavanaugh’s interview. His honesty and integrity being not just questioned, but slaughtered, is very offensive to him.

    You mentioned his not giving a good interview. Did you believe him?

     

    I thought he kept repeating the same lines in a way that seemed canned and scripted. I don’t think that helped. His body language and his wife’s certainty helped though. I could certainly see him as a guy who was just so shocked and hurt and taken off guard by all this that he didn’t know what to say. That’s one option. And it makes some sense in light of the inherent unfairness of being hit with basically unfalsifiable accusations from 35 years ago. The guy who’s story is basically “I didn’t do it” always has a trouble being compelling up against a fleshed out narrative of an event. I noticed that in trial work long ago and I think it’s just a general feature of our preference for stories.

    I could also, though, imagine someone focusing on the scriptedness and thinking it looked like a crafted lie he felt the need to stick to in order to avoid straying into subjects that wouldn’t help him. Bottom line, I’m not confident he’s going to make a great witness Thursday. Of course he doesn’t have to be perfect, just better than she is. And I have no idea – she may be a train wreck too.

    You’re an expert, I can tell :-) With all the political undercurrents, this is worse than a regular trial in some ways. I thought he acted like himself. If there is a hearing Thursday (Ford and attorneys sounding wobbly), I hope he’s able to relax more because I believe the man. Like you said, though, there are only so many ways a person can say “I did not do this”.

    I do think the easiest route to confirmation is Ford bailing, which might happen.  She’s got a legal team at this point and no matter how political you think those lawyers have been (and I agree, they’ve behaved like they worked for the DNC), I find it hard to imagine they’re going to knowingly send Ford up to perjure herself.  That’s malpractice and disbarment in one neat package.  If she does bail, even the wavering republicans have to call BS.  Everybody who’s sentient knows that regardless of whether these stories are true or false, at this point they’re just being used by democrats as a reason for delay to try to get past the mid-terms.  From what I’ve been reading even the Collinses, Murkowskis and Flakes of the world are pissed off about being played.  If Ford doesn’t show, they have to say to themselves “look, the rule can’t be that we delay for any leftist activist of Kavanaugh’s generation who’s willing to tell a lie to the Washington Post.”

    • #44
  15. Arahant Member
    Arahant
    @Arahant

    Goldwaterwoman (View Comment):
    The likelihood of that happening is/was slim and none. There is no way a high school senior girl would be caught dead in a social situation with an eight-grade boy unless it was her brother. 

    Those were the extremes on the age thing. But things like that did happen. Had a guy I worked with who had moved to the area from Kentucky. His son just had “the cutest little accent”…according to the girls that were chasing him for a bit of lovin’. There was a two or three year difference in their ages. The kid didn’t care, of course.

    • #45
  16. Mikescapes Inactive
    Mikescapes
    @Mikescapes

    Once those hormones start coursing through your body all kinds of bizarre behavior can be expected. Anyone whose ever been a teenager knows this. Now, people like Diane Feinstein never were teenagers. She was born at 32 years old. So she and her ilk judge teen conduct by the standards of adult behavior. In her case, old age conduct.

    The left wing mob mentality would deny that the mistakes of adolescence be forgiven. Of course they are hypocrites, and their deranged behavior during, and long after adolescence, is not subject to review.

    The above is based on an assumption that Kavanaugh were actually guilty of all or some of the allegations. He is not, having lived an exemplary life. The guy never got l..d until well after college, possibly Law School. All his energy went into studying and being first in his class. We are talking serious dedication here. 

     

    • #46
  17. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    Dorrk (View Comment):

    Can I just say something in defense of teenage drinking parties? They are getting a bad rap in all of these Kavanaugh threads. While not ideal social occasions for every teen, I went to quite a few and nothing terribly bad happened at any of them. Some kids get more drunk than others, others kids get stoned, there’s probably some hanky panky… I suppose that in my situation it was almost always the same group of kids from the same school activities, so we all knew and liked each other. There’s maybe a great deal of luck involved in nothing bad coming out of these occasions, but nothing bad comes out of a majority of these kinds of occasions across the country. Let’s not impugn all of America’s drunk kids just because a handful don’t know how to party

    I understand your point, but can’t get worked up in its defense. The same argument could be made of driving under the influence of alcohol. I often think back to the way things were when I was a kid, to how routine it was for people to drive after drinking, seemingly without consequence. (I know it’s still routine; I know there often were consequences.)

    I have nothing good to say about unsupervised teenage drinking parties, and I’d caution all young ladies to avoid them. In general, though I do drink, I think alcohol facilitates a lot of poor judgment, and think women in particular would often be happier if they exercised more caution when drinking.

    • #47
  18. KentForrester Inactive
    KentForrester
    @KentForrester

    GrannyDude (View Comment):

    I’ve been thinking the same thing, Henry.

    I don’t actually believe the allegations, but I also don’t believe them to be disqualifying in the absence of some evidence (some? any?) that Brett Kavanaugh is …you know…like Ted Kennedy. Or Bill Clinton. Or even The Donald.

    Heck, I can’t even see any evidence that he behaved worse than I did as a teenager, and I’m not even male.

     

    Mrs. Dude, you mean you got drunk and pawed at boys?  Why I never. . . !

    • #48
  19. KentForrester Inactive
    KentForrester
    @KentForrester

    Duplicate.

    • #49
  20. KentForrester Inactive
    KentForrester
    @KentForrester

    I would have pawed at girls, but they never let me.  And most of them seemed a bit feisty.  One of them threatened to punch my lights out if I layed a hand on her.

    The first girl who let me paw her was Marie.  So I married her. 

    • #50
  21. Goldwaterwoman Thatcher
    Goldwaterwoman
    @goldwaterwoman

    KentForrester (View Comment):
    The first girl who let me paw her was Marie. So I married her. 

    Uh, I hope Marie isn’t reading this. If she is, you’re likely to spend tonight on the couch with Bob.

    • #51
  22. Ralphie Inactive
    Ralphie
    @Ralphie

    Leigh (View Comment):
    If the allegation were proven even in part it would be absolutely disqualifying if only because of his absolute denials. Blatant lying to the Senate is a disqualification. (Which, incidentally, makes me more inclined to believe him — he had no need or reason for such sweeping denials unless he is pretty confident).

    You and my husband think alike.

    • #52
  23. Podkayne of Israel Inactive
    Podkayne of Israel
    @PodkayneofIsrael

    Goldwaterwoman (View Comment):

    KentForrester (View Comment):
    The first girl who let me paw her was Marie. So I married her.

    Uh, I hope Marie isn’t reading this. If she is, you’re likely to spend tonight on the couch with Bob.

    I dunno. I’m sensing more than a dollop of gratitude here.

    • #53
  24. Goldwaterwoman Thatcher
    Goldwaterwoman
    @goldwaterwoman

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    Based on the description of the event as reported by Mrs. Ford, and in particular her claimed fear that the young man might kill her, I think she’s probably a bit of a drama queen

    Speaking as a woman who was once a teenager with several female friends, may I just say this woman is a major drama queen. We all knew who they were. 

    • #54
  25. Cato Rand Inactive
    Cato Rand
    @CatoRand

    Goldwaterwoman (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    Based on the description of the event as reported by Mrs. Ford, and in particular her claimed fear that the young man might kill her, I think she’s probably a bit of a drama queen

    Speaking as a woman who was once a teenager with several female friends, may I just say this woman is a major drama queen. We all knew who they were.

    I think it’s her lawyers – playing for the cameras.

    • #55
  26. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    Goldwaterwoman (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    Based on the description of the event as reported by Mrs. Ford, and in particular her claimed fear that the young man might kill her, I think she’s probably a bit of a drama queen

    Speaking as a woman who was once a teenager with several female friends, may I just say this woman is a major drama queen. We all knew who they were.

    Thank you. I know we’re all accustomed by now to prominent Democrats getting all teary about policy matters, but the emotional vulnerability does grow tiresome. I’d say “man up,” but then these sad people — Ford, Schumer, Booker — aren’t really men. 

    • #56
  27. JosePluma Coolidge
    JosePluma
    @JosePluma

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):

    I was a dork in high school (early 1970’s).

    I did not drink or smoke, and was baffled by those who did. I was horrified to smell alcohol in the punch being distributed in the marching band (in which I played), and passed on it (the following Monday I was hauled into the school office as a witness for the growing disciplinary proceedings arising from the spiked punch). I did not get invited to many parties, and few if any of them had any alcohol present.

    Therefore I can say with absolute certainty that there are no skeletons in my closet that I don’t recall because I was inebriated.

    One time on a date with one of the few girlfriends I had, my hand went where it shouldn’t have. She pushed me away and immediately terminated the date, and put me in what I would today call “time out” for a week – She wouldn’t talk to me. That was more than enough punishment to teach me not to try something like that again!

     

    #MeToo

    You sound exactly like me in high school.  (Except for the band part; I couldn’t carry a tune in a waterproof bag.)  Of course, so does Brett Kavanaugh.

    • #57
  28. Joseph Stanko Coolidge
    Joseph Stanko
    @JosephStanko

    PHenry (View Comment):
    Which is it? That random sexual encounters are empowering, healthy, natural and should never be judged? or that any offhand sexual remark is equivalent to rape, that any drunken sexual advance is proof of such low character that the person committing it should be banned from any position of trust for life?

    Well according to modern progressives, random sexual encounters are empowering, so long as both parties consent.

    A few fuzzy areas remain however:

    1. Is it even possible to give consent when intoxicated?
    2. Must consent be given verbally before any physical contact occurs?

    Regarding the latter, a professional dating consultant admitted on a podcast that a man asking “may I kiss you?” totally turns her off, he should wait until the moment is right and then just go for it.

     

    • #58
  29. PHenry Inactive
    PHenry
    @PHenry

    Joseph Stanko (View Comment):
    Well according to modern progressives, random sexual encounters are empowering, so long as both parties consent.

    Unless, of course, the next day she regrets it. Then consent can be retroactively withdrawn! 

    • #59
  30. Joseph Stanko Coolidge
    Joseph Stanko
    @JosephStanko

    PHenry (View Comment):

    Joseph Stanko (View Comment):
    Well according to modern progressives, random sexual encounters are empowering, so long as both parties consent.

    Unless, of course, the next day she regrets it. Then consent can be retroactively withdrawn!

    Does anyone actually defend that position?  Or is that just a straw-man that conservatives have set up?

    • #60
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.