View Full Version : Thanks Mom!
Mom Indicted for Hiring Stripper for Teen
NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) - A mother faces criminal charges after she hired a stripper to dance at her 16-year-old son's birthday party. Anette Pharris, 34, has been indicted by a grand jury on charges of contributing to the delinquency of a minor and involving a minor in obscene acts. The boy's father, the stripper and two others also face charges.
``I tried to do something special for my son,'' Pharris said. ``It didn't harm him.''
About 10 people under the age of 18 were at the birthday party in September, including minors who were not related to the family, authorities said.
Police spokesman Don Aaron said minors are not permitted in adult establishments.
``A person shouldn't be allowed to circumvent that law by hiring a stripper, a lady who took all her clothes off and spent a good amount of time dancing around minors,'' he said.
Anette Pharris took photos at the party and tried to have them developed at a nearby drug store. Drug store employees notified authorities, police said.
``Who are they to tell me what I can and can't show to my own children?'' the mother said.
This raises several issues, including whether the State or parents get to make decisions about what is right and wrong, and whether or not this woman is insane, stoopid, or just a heck of a lot of fun.
I purchased my first beer at age 12, and drank it with my dad on a beach in Mexico. I wrecked a truck at age 13 cause we'd all been drinking while hunting. I routinely placed wagers at the horse track for my dad and his friends (usually from the 7th race on, when they were intoxicated enough that the walk to the ticket window was too long). I got 'lucky' just after I turned 16, with a 23 year old. So maybe my perspective is a little skewed, I grew up in the old west when things were different'.
Well, what's the Backroom verdict on mom's graduation present?
ichi :bow:
Papewaio
05-31-2005, 05:59
Pretty weird.
I would not want to have my mum providing me with a stripper... that is just so Tasmanian...
Byzantine Prince
05-31-2005, 06:30
I wish someone would buy me a stripper or a housewife(way better). Some places everything is legal.
:bow: I say as long as it doesn't hurt anyone a secular state should allow anything. :bow:
No one else really worried about this?! If I was living in the US and this sort of intrusion into social / private lives was evident, I would not be happy at all. Whatever next the locking up of teens because they watch soft pornography?! Very disturbing that the government should feel obliged to get into peoples lives so much, dear, dear.
As to the mother, she must really love her son.
bmolsson
05-31-2005, 10:22
The prosecutor and investigating police must really be on something. This is just silly.....
Tribesman
05-31-2005, 10:23
... that is just so Tasmanian...
Don't be silly Pape , if it was Tasmanian the mum would be the stripper . ~:cheers:
bmolsson
05-31-2005, 10:54
... that is just so Tasmanian...
Don't be silly Pape , if it was Tasmanian the mum would be the stripper . ~:cheers:
You have been browsing MILFs again, huh...... ~;)
doc_bean
05-31-2005, 10:56
Where all minors over the age of consent ?
According to Griswold vs. Conneticut, the government has no say over the sexual practices of its citizens, since they are part of their private life. (Roe vs. Wade says the same)
However, considering there were other people, the 'private' part might be hard to argue. I just think it's rather stupid they're trying to prosecute her.
No one else really worried about this?! If I was living in the US and this sort of intrusion into social / private lives was evident, I would not be happy at all. Whatever next the locking up of teens because they watch soft pornography?! Very disturbing that the government should feel obliged to get into peoples lives so much, dear, dear.
Yeah, isn't it up to the mother what she thinks is right? She hired a stripper, so what? I really don't see the problem.
bmolsson
05-31-2005, 11:11
According to Griswold vs. Conneticut, the government has no say over the sexual practices of its citizens, since they are part of their private life. (Roe vs. Wade says the same)
They actually had to test that in court ??!!!
doc_bean
05-31-2005, 11:14
It was about the use of contraception.
Tribesman
05-31-2005, 11:15
Where all minors over the age of consent ?
No , and one of the minors taking pictures after the mother had left the room when the performing artist went the whole hog for $150 extra was only 14 .
bmolsson
05-31-2005, 11:16
It was about the use of contraception.
They actually had to test that in court ??!!! :help:
doc_bean
05-31-2005, 11:36
Dildo's are forbidden in Alabama, several sexual practices (sodomy for one) are forbidden in Texas, the Supreme Court could have a field day if some 'liberal' wanted to complain again.
Dildo's are forbidden in Alabama, several sexual practices (sodomy for one) are forbidden in Texas, the Supreme Court could have a field day if some 'liberal' wanted to complain again.
Heh, that'd be funny. National headlines along the lines of "US supreme court condones sodomy, dildo use".
I think arresting her is a bit much. Maybe social services should knock around there a bit though.
Ser Clegane
05-31-2005, 15:20
Yeah, isn't it up to the mother what she thinks is right? She hired a stripper, so what? I really don't see the problem.
If it was only about her son, I would fully agree.
However, does the mother have the right to interfere with what the parents of the other teenagers might consider appropriate?
Personally, at the age of 16 I would have very much appreciated if I had been invited to a birthday party with a live strip-show :jumping:
English assassin
05-31-2005, 15:27
Call me a liberal but I don't think the government should tell you what you can do with your own bottom, or any other consenting bottom for that matter. Its time to tell Big Government to get its hands off our bottoms, people.
Anyway, there is a major leap of (il)logic from saying minors are not allowed in strip clubs (ie on their own) to saying minors are not allowed to watch strippers if their parents are present and approve.
Is there not very much crime in Nashville so the police were bored?
Al Khalifah
05-31-2005, 15:37
What is the legal age of consent in this state?
mercian billman
05-31-2005, 16:08
What is the legal age of consent in this state?
I believe it's 18 across the US, in some states the legal marriage age is as young as 14, but I think statutory rape laws may still apply.
I think it's kind of creepy having parents hire strippers for your birthday party, but I'm not going to judge here. My only problem was that other children were present who's parents may or may not hold the same views.
Call me a liberal but I don't think the government should tell you what you can do with your own bottom, or any other consenting bottom for that matter. Its time to tell Big Government to get its hands off our bottoms, people.
Anyway, there is a major leap of (il)logic from saying minors are not allowed in strip clubs (ie on their own) to saying minors are not allowed to watch strippers if their parents are present and approve.
Is there not very much crime in Nashville so the police were bored?
hello, as far as I am concerned, the mother seems to have some issues if she's hiring a stripper...
But from the point of view she got consent from all the parents...and obviously the kids ~D then I guess it's not really wrong is it?
Well from a 14 year old's point of view...there's something very right with it but I really don't think mothers should exactly be doing that when there are 14 year olds present
I believe it's 18 across the US, in some states the legal marriage age is as young as 14, but I think statutory rape laws may still apply.
What the Monkey? so I can get married but can't have sex with my wife :dizzy2: ~D I am 14 btw if you don't get the joke
It seems to me to be in rather poor taste to hire a stripper for your own son. I could see it as a crime if one of the under-age kids complained, but that doesn't seem to be the case. It really shouldn't be any concern of the police in any case.
I've heard oral sex is also a crime in some US states - is that true? (and if it is - what a shame...)
And enough on the tasmanian jokes already - we have a tasmanian princess here in Denmark now, and we're very happy with her.
:furious3:
Byzantine Prince
05-31-2005, 20:28
What bs. If the kids didn't complain what's the big deal?
I'm pretty sure someone being nude doesn't scar anyone. Someone molesting the children is a whole other story, but viewing nudity is not hard for anyone to take whatever their age.
mercian billman
05-31-2005, 21:18
I've heard oral sex is also a crime in some US states - is that true? (and if it is - what a shame...)
Oral sex, is soddomy and soddomy is illegal in some US states.
Evil_Maniac From Mars
05-31-2005, 21:43
MY GOD! I'm glad I live in Canada.
mercian billman
05-31-2005, 21:58
I should add that some states may define soddomy differently than other states...
Oral sex, is soddomy and soddomy is illegal in some US states.
looool.....what a laugh.....
does the local cop come into your bedroom to check i wonder ? ~D
P.S.- Greatest birthday party EVER!!! :charge:
doc_bean
05-31-2005, 22:46
from http://www.theonionavclub.com/savagelove/index.php?issue=4122
(a sex advice column by a gay columnist)
I thought you would like to know a Wisconsin State lawmaker is trying to ban the University of Wisconsin's student health center from dispensing, advertising, or prescribing birth control, including emergency contraception for rape victims. Representative Daniel LeMahieu (R-Oostburg), who sponsored the bill, says birth control "encourages female promiscuity."
Just another battle in the religious right's war on sexuality.
Who's got the totalitarian government again ? ~D
does the local cop come into your bedroom to check i wonder ?
Only if you're into that sort of thing. ~;)
Only if you're into that sort of thing. ~;)
well if it´s a hot female cop i just might.... ~D
DemonArchangel
06-01-2005, 00:06
I should add that some states may define soddomy differently than other states...
Overturned by the Supreme Court.
mercian billman
06-01-2005, 00:26
Overturned by the Supreme Court.
I thought it was only the Texas law which prohibited sex between same-sex partners that was overturned.
AFAIK not all soddomy laws have been struck down.
PanzerJaeger
06-01-2005, 00:42
She shouldnt have envited other kids to the party with a stripper. That violates the parent's authority over what they want their children exposed to.
Byzantine Prince
06-01-2005, 00:46
Yes because seeing another woman's bussoms is sooooo inapropriate for their kid's virgin eyes. :rollseyes:
PanzerJaeger
06-01-2005, 00:52
Its not up to her to decide whats decent for children who are not hers.
Byzantine Prince
06-01-2005, 00:56
How do you know she didn't inform their parents about the 'entertainment' of the event?
Even if she didn't, there's nothing indecent about a woman's bussoms. Do you think breastfeeding is indecent as well?
mercian billman
06-01-2005, 01:02
How do you know she didn't inform their parents about the 'entertainment' of the event?
Even if she didn't, there's nothing indecent about a woman's bussoms. Do you think breastfeeding is indecent as well?
First of all theres a huge difference between breast feeding and getting a lapdance. And it's not upto her or you to decide what's decent for other people's children.
If she informed the parents of the other children she would use it as a defence. I highly doubt that she informed the other parents of what was going on, even informing them isn't enough. The other parents would probably deny they were informed, she would have to have permission in writing, otherwise any claims that she informed the other parents are null and void.
PanzerJaeger
06-01-2005, 01:02
How do you know she didn't inform their parents about the 'entertainment' of the event?
Does it say that in the article posted?
Even if she didn't, there's nothing indecent about a woman's bussoms. Do you think breastfeeding is indecent as well?
They arent your kids. Its not your place to say what they should allow their kids to see.
Steppe Merc
06-01-2005, 01:56
~:eek:
That's pretty cool, I must say.
I can't say the state should have any right at all in preventing this or punishing either the stripper, the kid or the parents.
Though I must say, PJ and Mercian have a point. The parent's probably ought to have legally known, though that sort of would suck, since everyone would want to go to Billy Bob's party, but can't cause Momma won't let them...
But I really don't see anything wrong with this at all. And that's not just because I'm a dirty minded 17 year old...
They actually had to test that in court ??!!!
In certaint parts of the countries, it only recently became legal for people to practice oral and anal sex... One married couple I believe got in legal trouble for doing one or the other, I think. And this wasn't in 1801, either.
Oh... Mercian already said that....
Laridus Konivaich
06-01-2005, 02:07
And it's not upto her or you to decide what's decent for other people's children.
But it is also not the place of the government to decide what is decent for other people's children, or anyone, to see. If the other parents have a problem with the 'entertainment,' they should be allowed to pursue private action against the mother.
Basically, this should not involve anyone besides the children who were at the party, and their parents.
Papewaio
06-01-2005, 02:10
But it is also not the place of the government to decide what is decent for other people's children, or anyone, to see. If the other parents have a problem with the 'entertainment,' they should be allowed to pursue private action against the mother.
Wrong both beastility, child porn and hate literature can and are outlawed by otherwise very free countries.
We have liberties in democracies not unlimited freedom.
bmolsson
06-01-2005, 03:00
Its not up to her to decide whats decent for children who are not hers.
Burn the witch ?? ~;)
Laridus Konivaich
06-01-2005, 03:14
Wrong both beastility, child porn and hate literature can and are outlawed by otherwise very free countries.
You even say yourself that they are 'otherwise free,' showing that they are not free. It could probably be argued that outlawing those would violate freedom of speech or freedom of press, but for child porn you have the age of consent problem to deal with. But that is all ot, since none of the three types of media that you mention are involved in the case.
Let's look at it this way: parents can take their children to see r rated movies which contain all sorts of nudity, violence, et cetera, but they can't take other people's children there. Same should apply to this. I have never seen any big fuss about people taking other kids to r movies without explicit parental consent, why should a live stripper be any different?
Papewaio
06-01-2005, 04:17
Australian Rating System:
G Suitable for all viewers. It is noted by the board that a "G" movie rating in Australia doesn't indicate the movie is intended for children, simply that nothing in the movie will be disturbing or harmful to children.
PG Parental Guidance recommended for children under 15 years of age.
M Mature, recommended for audiences 15 years and over. Note: this is not a legally restricted Australian movie rating, but movies in this category cannot be recommended for those under 15 years.
MA Mature Accompanied. This category is legally restricted in that children under 15 cannot see "MA" films or rent them on video unless accompanied by a parent or adult guardian.
R Restricted. This category is legally restricted to adults. No one under 18 may view these movies in a cinema or rent them on videocassette.
X Restricted. This rating.applies to sexually explicit material which is restricted to viewers 18 years of age and over.
National Classification Code
1. Classification decisions are to give effect, as far as possible, to the following
principles:
(a) adults should be able to read, hear and see what they want;
(b) minors should be protected from material likely to harm or disturb them;
(c) everyone should be protected from exposure to unsolicited material that
they find offensive;
(d) the need to take account of community concerns about:
(i) depictions that condone or incite violence, particularly sexual
violence; and
(ii) the portrayal of persons in a demeaning manner.
So no in Australia it is not legal for a minor to view R rated material...
PanzerJaeger
06-01-2005, 04:31
Let's look at it this way: parents can take their children to see r rated movies which contain all sorts of nudity, violence, et cetera, but they can't take other people's children there. Same should apply to this. I have never seen any big fuss about people taking other kids to r movies without explicit parental consent, why should a live stripper be any different?
I know of many parents that would object to other parents taking their children to R rated movies without telling them.
Laridus Konivaich
06-01-2005, 05:00
I know of many parents that would object to other parents taking their children to R rated movies without telling them.
Yes, so do I, but there wouldn't be crimnal charges over it, is all that I was trying to say. Sure, the parents would be angry, but most that I know would be more likely to just ground their child for going to it.
Papewaio
06-01-2005, 05:10
Anyone screening a banned film in Australia can be fined $11,000 and jailed for a year, with companies fined up to $250,000.
... essentially X-rated movies are banned from being shown to minors and can attract similar penalities.
mercian billman
06-01-2005, 05:39
But it is also not the place of the government to decide what is decent for other people's children, or anyone, to see. If the other parents have a problem with the 'entertainment,' they should be allowed to pursue private action against the mother.
Basically, this should not involve anyone besides the children who were at the party, and their parents.
I never stated it was the governments proper place to determine how children were raised. I actually agree wholeheartedly with what your saying :bow:
BTW Congrats on your 500th post ~:cheers:
Pap, in the US the rating system is a little bit different.
PanzerJaeger
06-01-2005, 05:45
Yes, so do I, but there wouldn't be crimnal charges over it, is all that I was trying to say.
Good point.. :bow:
Papewaio
06-01-2005, 05:59
Pap, in the US the rating system is a little bit different.
Wow I thought Australian Rating System included the USA... ~:cool:
mercian billman
06-01-2005, 07:04
Wow I thought Australian Rating System included the USA... ~:cool:
It's different, but works primarily in the same way.
http://www.movie-ratings.net/movieratings_us.shtml
some excerpts,
The MPAA President (currently Jack Valenti) chooses the Chairman of the Rating Board. Board members are chosen from U.S. society and must meet the qualifications of having a "parenthood experience" and possessing an "intelligent maturity"
No studio, distributor, theater, or video store is bound by any legislation to follow the ratings applied by the MPAA ratings board.
While the MPAA ratings appear on videocassettes released in the U.S., the board has no legislative authority to enforce restrictions on home video rentals or sales.
Papewaio
06-01-2005, 07:16
* Note to self sarcasm detector not working in Wisconsin. ~;)
In Aus it includes DVDs/Videos (which depending on extras may result in a different rating), books and video games... all done by the same Office of Film and Literature
Laridus Konivaich
06-01-2005, 07:34
BTW Congrats on your 500th post ~:cheers:
Thanks. :bow: (and some of those were even constructive posts :embarassed:)
Yes, the Australian and US systems will be different, but I assumed that we would focus on the US system, since that is where the incident is occurring.
So then it seems that we would need to know specifically what took place at the birthday party (how it is classified legally), to determine whether or not it was legal.
bmolsson
06-01-2005, 07:50
Wow I thought Australian Rating System included the USA... ~:cool:
Not really, only US rate Walt Disney cartoons.....
Ja'chyra
06-01-2005, 08:25
Oral sex, is soddomy and soddomy is illegal in some US states.
You sure about that? I always thought it was butt sex ~:confused:
Anyway, the parent should be allowed to hire a stripper for her 16 year old son if she wants, she should have informed all the other parents first though and not invited the 14 year old.
doc_bean
06-01-2005, 10:09
The movie rating wasn't enforced in Belgium in the good ol' days, a friend of mine rented several X rated movies when he was 13.
In the video store they weren't even placed in a separate section, IIRC they were on the other side of the cartoon rack ~D
But yes, consent from the other parents should be needed before you let their kids see a stripper, but it should also be those parents who press charges. (Couldn't they get money out of it ? I thought everyone sued if they smelled money in the US ?)
You sure about that? I always thought it was butt sex ~:confused:
Maybe just a combination of these two, for hygine's sake. Has anyone ever actually been convicted for having oral sex? Americans can be so weird ~:eek:
Ser Clegane
06-01-2005, 10:45
I think there are quite a lot of weird laws in the individual States if you look for them.
However, AFAIK these rather have the character of entertaining oddities than having an actual effect on real life.
I think most countries probably have some odd aold laws that nobody ever took the time to update/change (I remember some odd laws about bee colonies in our civil law...)
You sure about that? I always thought it was butt sex ~:confused:
Anyway, the parent should be allowed to hire a stripper for her 16 year old son if she wants, she should have informed all the other parents first though and not invited the 14 year old.
well......oral sex can be butt sex.... ~D ...under certain practices ~;)
bmolsson
06-01-2005, 11:01
Maybe just a combination of these two, for hygine's sake. Has anyone ever actually been convicted for having oral sex? Americans can be so weird ~:eek:
The evidence was that CSI found sperms in the used chewing gum.... :book:
She shouldnt have envited other kids to the party with a stripper. That violates the parent's authority over what they want their children exposed to.
I may be incorrect but according to the article that I read she asked the permission of the other parents to expose them to this ~;)
Child: "Mom, Bobby's having a birthday party and I'm invited. Only one thing, there's going to be stripper, and you have to give permission for me to go"
Mom: "Dear, little Timmy's been invited to Bobby's birthday party, but he says there will be a stripper. What do think?
Dad: "Well, I'd better go along just to make sure things don't get out of hand"
ichi :bow:
KafirChobee
06-03-2005, 04:35
Had "strippers" been around for housecalls for 16 yearold b-days in my time (1963), I fear my Mum woulda got me one. As it was, she had to find other means to embarrass me. God, i miss my stripper.
Is true though, I hope the Mom cleared it with the other parents. I know of only one of my friends that's parents would have been shocked - but, the others would have asked to be invited. ~:cool:
Seems making a big deal out of nothing is the thing we in America do best today. Allows us to ignore the real unethical crap being pulled by the "moral majority".
poor kid, got his cake and got to see it too.
~;)
Colorado Mom Sentenced to 30 Years
GOLDEN, Colo. (AP) - A woman who authorities said had sex with high school boys during alcohol- and drug-fueled parties has been sentenced to 30 years in prison, officials said.
Silvia Johnson, 41, of Arvada, described herself to investigators as a ``cool mom'' who ``was never popular with classmates in high school'' and who was beginning to feel like one of the group.
She pleaded guilty in July to two misdemeanor counts of sexual assault and nine felony counts of contributing to the delinquency of a minor.
She also was sentenced for additional charges of third-degree assault, violation of a restraining order and harassment for unrelated cases involving her husband and children, prosecution spokesman Carl Blesch said.
Authorities said Johnson held parties for the boys almost weekly between October 2003 and October 2004. They said Johnson provided drugs and alcohol to eight boys and had sex with five of them.
Johnson was to be sentenced on Sept. 26, but the hearing was postponed after she was injured the day before while riding in an SUV that veered off an interstate.
Finally, some closure
ichi~:cheers:
Alexanderofmacedon
11-17-2005, 00:05
If the mom wants to do it, I don't really think it's SO wrong...
Kaiser of Arabia
11-17-2005, 00:32
No one else really worried about this?! If I was living in the US and this sort of intrusion into social / private lives was evident, I would not be happy at all. Whatever next the locking up of teens because they watch soft pornography?! Very disturbing that the government should feel obliged to get into peoples lives so much, dear, dear.
And the Government created AIDS.
doc_bean
11-17-2005, 12:58
You do realize it's another person you're talking about now ?
Hiring a stripper and f*****g teenage boys yourself are quit different things.
Kralizec
11-17-2005, 14:03
I personally think the stripper case is blown out of proportions. The youngest were 14- don't try to sell me that crap that none of you hadn't seen any nudity by then :hide:
I could see why some of the parents would want to pursue civil action against this mom, but penal action is ridiculous IMO.
About the second case...I have no pity with that woman for being sent to jail. 30 years may be a bit much, though.
Juxtaposition, for comparative purposes only
PanzerJaeger
11-17-2005, 20:57
Trashy people make us all look bad.
Tachikaze
11-18-2005, 03:25
Many of you who know my opinions may think this is so unTachi. But, in spite of my liberal views of sex and, especially, nudity, I do not think that it is wrong to restrict minors from watching strip shows. Let me explain.
By prohibiting sexually-oriented entertainment for minors, we are only saying they must wait until they are 18 years old to be exposed to it. I don't consider that a tragedy. We are not taking away their freedoms permanently. I am a strong proponent of personal freedom for adults, but I don't think these liberties should all apply to minors. They are in an early development stage of life, and we should be giving them mature guidance.
Minors have plenty of freedoms and plenty of things to do for entertainment, far more than they need. There is no reason to rush them from infancy to adulthood.
I wholeheartedly agree that minors should not be restricted from seeing nudity. It's a non-issue for me. But stripping is entertainment for sexual arousal. And while I don't consider sex bad and in no way unhealthy for minors to be knowledgeable about, I don't see that we "owe" minors the freedom to indulge in sexual entertainment. We are not prohibiting them from seeing it, only telling them they have to wait. They have plenty of other things to do in the meantime.
The news about this party doesn't shock me, and I think it is amusing. I don't blame the mother; I think it's a funny present. But I don't think it's really a wise thing to do in the long run. And I can understand why some people want to prohibit it.
I don't agree that anything any parent approves of is OK. I think many parents make very bad judgements; many should not even be parents. In this particular case, it's not a big deal, but it could have been worse.
doc_bean
11-18-2005, 12:12
The problem with restricting access to anything makes it the 'forbidden fruit' and all the more attractive. Let's face, all the media (and even this message board sometimes) is saying all day long is 'sex is fantastic', then we're going to tell teenagers that they shouldn't have sex ?
Okay, limiting their access to sexual material might limit their desire to actually indulge in sex (we try to stop them from getting too aroused) seems like an understandable reasoning. However, the average age at which people start having sex in the US (a pretty puritan place) is lower than in most of Europe (pretty open to anything). Furthermore, studies have shown that certain 'deviant' behaviour (oral and anal sex) is more frequent in groups considered 'puritan' (those people who promise to be virgins until marriage, young muslim women in the west).
Yes, we don't owe teens sexual entertainment, but we shouldn't be telling them how fun it is and then say they can't play. It just doesn't work that way. :bow:
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.