A 19-year-old who admitted to blackmail, revenge porn, and bullying

jkcerda

Site Champ
Posts
388
Reaction score
254
won his primary race for the Kansas House and is now running unopposed

  • Aaron Coleman, a 19-year-old who admitted to blackmail, revenge porn, and bullying, has won his primary race for the Kansas House of Representatives.
  • Coleman is currently running unopposed as a Democrat for the state's November election, according to KSHB Kansas City.
  • One woman told The Kansas City Star that when she and Coleman were both in middle school, he obtained a naked picture of her and sent it around when she denied to give him additional photos.
  • A spokesperson for Kansas' Democratic Governor Laura Kelly told the Associated Press that Coleman is "not fit to serve in the Legislature."

interesting times, guessing he is doing well since most people simply look at the R or the D and don't research who they are voting for.
 

Thomas Veil

Suspended
Posts
3,450
Reaction score
6,792
I know Kansas needs another Republican like the country needs more coronavirus, but I wouldn't mind seeing the little bastard lose.

Edit: I should've read that more thoroughly. There's no one running against him. šŸ˜’
 
Last edited:

Alli

Perfection
Staff Member
Vaccinated
Site Donor
Posts
4,563
Reaction score
9,290
Location
Alabackwards
I know Kansas needs another Republican like the country needs more coronavirus, but I wouldn't mind seeing the little bastard lose.

Edit: I should've read that more thoroughly. There's no one running against him. šŸ˜’

He needs to lose to a write-in.
 

thekev

Elite Member
Posts
1,063
Reaction score
1,603
when in doubt, vote yaxo.

(that's my slogan)


If a former ally turned opponent ever claims to know "where the bodies are buried", you should be ready to present the public with proof of ownership of a crematorium.
 

Thomas Veil

Suspended
Posts
3,450
Reaction score
6,792
How's this for an interesting turn of events??

...With no Republican opponent, Coleman seemed almost certain to ascend to office. However, Coleman announced on Sunday that he was withdrawing from the race. Officially, heā€™s quitting because his father is sick, and a severe illness in the family is one of few reasons a primary winner can be taken off the ballot in Kansas. Everyone knows Coleman is really quitting because of the backlash to his self-confessed sexual extortion of a 13-year-old girl when he was 14 years old, as well as his stalking and bullying of two other underage victims, one of whom says Coleman berated her about her weight and her teeth until she attempted suicide.
(My bold.)

On the one hand I'm glad this guy is going away. On the other...what happens in Kansas when you have a race for office and no one is running? I'm assuming the governor can appoint someone until a special election, but I don't know that for sure.
 

thekev

Elite Member
Posts
1,063
Reaction score
1,603
I'm assuming the governor can appoint someone until a special election, but I don't know that for sure.

It's probably established in the state's bylaws or state constitution, not sure which. Am I the only one that finds the phrase "underage victims" weird when the perpetrator was not an adult?
 

Scepticalscribe

Site Master
Vaccinated
Posts
6,153
Reaction score
8,846
It's probably established in the state's bylaws or state constitution, not sure which. Am I the only one that finds the phrase "underage victims" weird when the perpetrator was not an adult?

An underage victim is always an underage victim, irrespective of the age of the (alleged) perpetrator.
 
U

User.45

Guest
An underage victim is always an underage victim, irrespective of the age of the (alleged) perpetrator.
But it also matters that the perpetrator doesn't have a mature frontal lobe which is in exchange marinated in that lovely testosterony cocktail of puberty.

It might be easy for me to say because my kids are far from their teens, but well...It's a major parental issue.
 

Scepticalscribe

Site Master
Vaccinated
Posts
6,153
Reaction score
8,846
But it also matters that the perpetrator doesn't have a mature frontal lobe which is in exchange marinated in that lovely testosterony cocktail of puberty.

It might be easy for me to say because my kids are far from their teens, but well...It's a major parental issue.

A nineteen year old male can vote, drive a car, join the army and - in war - is allowed to legally kill people.

And, in the US, a 19 year old is probably allowed to legally buy and carry (and use) a gun.

And, in my country, enter a pub (though not now, due to Covid restrictions), and purchase and consume alcohol legally.

All adult stuff, stuff that they are allowed - as a right - to do, a right nobody questions, let alone by proffering the argument that one's frontal love is insufficiently developed which might serve to deny them access to the nice airport lounge full of comfortable sofas, of adult privileges.

And all of this while lacking "a mature frontal lobe...due to testosterony cocktail of puberty."

Yes, of course, people of both sexes (especially males) aren't probably fully mature until they are in their mid to late twenties.

However, to my mind, while the "immature" argument works with small children, whose transgressions can be excused and explained away, and who can be encouraged and persuaded, and/or bribed and taught to do things differently, with adults, things are a bit different.

But, you know, adult privileges (and rights) do come complete with adult responsibilities, and they include, "control yourself, your temper, your urges, your emotions", and "think of others", "think before you act", and "take responsibilities for your actions, i.e. own what you do".

But - as a woman - I do tire of men explaining away, or excusing, or somehow seeking to offer mitigating circumstances (his age, his social class, his possibly wrecked but promising future, his "upstanding character", his immature frontal lobe), while explaining away egregious or appalling or monstrously entitled male behaviour, focussing sympathetically on his future, the ghastly inconvenience that this - possible conviction - will be for him, while disregarding or dismissing, or shrugging away as not-quite-as-important (almost entirely) the effects this may have had (on the life chances, future career, confidence, self-belief, health) of the yes, underage victim.

I remember reading about (and following) the Brock Turner case with, yes, a real rage.
 
Last edited:
U

User.45

Guest
A nineteen year old male can vote, drive a car, join the army and - in war - is allowed to legally kill people.

And, in the US, a 19 year old is probably allowed to legally buy and carry (and use) a gun.

And, in my country, enter a pub (though not now, due to Covid restrictions), and purchase and consume alcohol legally.

All adult stuff, stuff that they are allowed - as a right - to do, a right nobody questions, let alone by proffering the argument that one's frontal love is insufficiently developed which might serve to deny them access to the nice airport lounge full of comfortable sofas, of adult privileges.

And all of this while lacking "a mature frontal lobe...due to testosterony cocktail of puberty."

Yes, of course, people of both sexes (especially males) aren't probably fully mature until they are in their mid to late twenties.

However, to my mind, while the "immature" argument works with small children, whose transgressions can be excused and explained away, and who can be encouraged and persuaded, and/or bribed and taught to do things differently, with adults, things are a bit different.

But, you know, adult privileges (and rights) do come complete with adult responsibilities, and they include, "control yourself, your temper, your urges, your emotions", and "think of others", "think before you act", and "take responsibilities for your actions, i.e. own what you do".

But - as a woman - I do tire of men explaining away, or excusing, or somehow seeking to offer mitigating circumstances (his age, his social class, his possibly wrecked but promising future, his "upstanding character", his immature frontal lobe), while explaining away egregious or appalling or monstrously entitled male behaviour, focussing sympathetically on his future, the ghastly inconvenience that this - possible conviction - will be for him, while disregarding or dismissing, or shrugging away as not-quite-as-important (almost entirely) the effects this may have had (on the life chances, future career, confidence, self-belief, health) of the yes, underage victim.

I remember reading about (and following) the Brock Turner case with, yes, a real rage.
I don't disagree with what you're saying but his transgressions took place at age 14.


...With no Republican opponent, Coleman seemed almost certain to ascend to office. However, Coleman announced on Sunday that he was withdrawing from the race. Officially, heā€™s quitting because his father is sick, and a severe illness in the family is one of few reasons a primary winner can be taken off the ballot in Kansas. Everyone knows Coleman is really quitting because of the backlash to his self-confessed sexual extortion of a 13-year-old girl when he was 14 years old, as well as his stalking and bullying of two other underage victims, one of whom says Coleman berated her about her weight and her teeth until she attempted suicide.
 
U

User.45

Guest
A nineteen year old male can vote, drive a car, join the army and - in war - is allowed to legally kill people.

And, in the US, a 19 year old is probably allowed to legally buy and carry (and use) a gun.

And, in my country, enter a pub (though not now, due to Covid restrictions), and purchase and consume alcohol legally.

All adult stuff, stuff that they are allowed - as a right - to do, a right nobody questions, let alone by proffering the argument that one's frontal love is insufficiently developed which might serve to deny them access to the nice airport lounge full of comfortable sofas, of adult privileges.

And all of this while lacking "a mature frontal lobe...due to testosterony cocktail of puberty."

Yes, of course, people of both sexes (especially males) aren't probably fully mature until they are in their mid to late twenties.

However, to my mind, while the "immature" argument works with small children, whose transgressions can be excused and explained away, and who can be encouraged and persuaded, and/or bribed and taught to do things differently, with adults, things are a bit different.

But, you know, adult privileges (and rights) do come complete with adult responsibilities, and they include, "control yourself, your temper, your urges, your emotions", and "think of others", "think before you act", and "take responsibilities for your actions, i.e. own what you do".

But - as a woman - I do tire of men explaining away, or excusing, or somehow seeking to offer mitigating circumstances (his age, his social class, his possibly wrecked but promising future, his "upstanding character", his immature frontal lobe), while explaining away egregious or appalling or monstrously entitled male behaviour, focussing sympathetically on his future, the ghastly inconvenience that this - possible conviction - will be for him, while disregarding or dismissing, or shrugging away as not-quite-as-important (almost entirely) the effects this may have had (on the life chances, future career, confidence, self-belief, health) of the yes, underage victim.

I remember reading about (and following) the Brock Turner case with, yes, a real rage.
It is very very very problematic for a 19-year-old to have anything to do with a 13-, 14- or even a 16-year-old. And I agree, age is a bad excuse when someone is 19 and is in college.

But (based on the posts here, didn't dive into it) he did it when he was 14, so the girl could have been his classmate. 14 is the worst, because boys get a lot of testosterone rage (and libido) and many just don't have an understanding of what's happening unless there's someone to guide them. So yes, I consider this a parenting deficit. Abhorrent behavior is abhorrent behavior but it is still correctable. The legal definition of a minor follows this notion and I agree with it.
 

Scepticalscribe

Site Master
Vaccinated
Posts
6,153
Reaction score
8,846
It is very very very problematic for a 19-year-old to have anything to do with a 13-, 14- or even a 16-year-old. And I agree, age is a bad excuse when someone is 19 and is in college.

But (based on the posts here, didn't dive into it) he did it when he was 14, so the girl could have been his classmate. 14 is the worst, because boys get a lot of testosterone rage (and libido) and many just don't have an understanding of what's happening unless there's someone to guide them. So yes, I consider this a parenting deficit. Abhorrent behavior is abhorrent behavior but it is still correctable. The legal definition of a minor follows this notion and I agree with it.

Look: Testosterone rage and libido be damned.

I am so sick of excuses made for male aggression and aggressive and vicious sexual assault.

Seriously, "14 is the worst" for girls, too: That is when your body changes, you get periods, you get judged on your appearance, and run the risk or the possibly of pregnancy in a not yet fully developed, or mature, body - which will have an impact on your own skeleton and muscle and bone development (not to mention the deranged attentions of the guardians of the uterus brigade).

What were you wearing? If you got pregnant, clearly your body din't consider it rape. Were you drunk? Did you lead him on? Did you resist enough? Did you stay out late? Walk home by yourself? Clearly, with any or all of the above, you were asking for it, and may even run the risk of ruining that upstanding, pillar-of-the-community, fine-future, young man's life.

Yes, the guy was 14, but there is a pattern pf pure aggressive and perfectly ghastly horrible entitlement here: Sexual extortion of one girl, blackmail, revenge porn - this is disgusting and despicable at ten, let alone fourteen - this is sexual assault with a side order of humiliation, plus stalking and bullying (presumably sexual bullying).

This is not two teenagers engaged in consensual exploratory stuff, snogging and sex, which is where I would be a lot more sympathetic; this is a guy who has decided that issues of consent don't apply to female sub-humans.

This guy/dude/chap is one nasty piece of work, one who clearly viewed girls as things, objects, aliens, not-humans who existed solely for his gratification.
 
Last edited:
U

User.45

Guest
Look: Testosterone rage and libido be damned. I am so sick of excuses made for male aggression and aggressive and vicious sexual assault. Seriously, "14 is the worst" for girls, too: That is when your body changes, you get periods, and the possibly of pregnancy in a not yet fully developed body - which will have an impact on your own skeleton and muscle and bone development (not to mention the deranged attentions of the guardians of the uterus brigade) now also exists. What were you wearing? If you got pregnant, clearly your body din't consider it rape. Were you drunk? Did you lead him on? Did you resist enough? Did you stay out late? Walk home by yourself? Clearly, with any or all of the above, you were asking for it, and may even run the risk of ruining that upstanding, pillar-of-the-community, fine-future, young man's life. Yes, the guy was 14, but there is a pattern pf pure aggressive and perfectly ghastly horrible entitlement here: Sexual extortion of one girl, blackmail, revenge porn - this is disgusting and despicable at ten, let alone fourteen - this is sexual assault with a side order of humiliation, plus stalking and bullying (presumably sexual bullying). This is not two teenagers engaged in consensual exploratory stuff, snogging and sex, which is where I would be a lot more sympathetic; this is a guy who has decided that issues of consent don't apply to femalel sub-humans. This guy/dude/chap is one nasty piece of work, one who clearly viewed girls as things, objects, aliens, not-humans who existed solely for his gratification.
Look: Testosterone rage and libido be damned. I am so sick of excuses made for male aggression and aggressive and vicious sexual assault. Seriously, "14 is the worst" for girls, too: That is when your body changes, you get periods, and the possibly of pregnancy in a not yet fully developed body - which will have an impact on your own skeleton and muscle and bone development (not to mention the deranged attentions of the guardians of the uterus brigade) now also exists. What were you wearing? If you got pregnant, clearly your body din't consider it rape. Were you drunk? Did you lead him on? Did you resist enough? Did you stay out late? Walk home by yourself? Clearly, with any or all of the above, you were asking for it, and may even run the risk of ruining that upstanding, pillar-of-the-community, fine-future, young man's life. Yes, the guy was 14, but there is a pattern pf pure aggressive and perfectly ghastly horrible entitlement here: Sexual extortion of one girl, blackmail, revenge porn - this is disgusting and despicable at ten, let alone fourteen - this is sexual assault with a side order of humiliation, plus stalking and bullying (presumably sexual bullying). This is not two teenagers engaged in consensual exploratory stuff, snogging and sex, which is where I would be a lot more sympathetic; this is a guy who has decided that issues of consent don't apply to femalel sub-humans. This guy/dude/chap is one nasty piece of work, one who clearly viewed girls as things, objects, aliens, not-humans who existed solely for his gratification.

I see that you're upset but we're not really disagreeing here on the basic notions that sexual assault and exploitation are what they are. I'm not going to defend any of those.
On the other hand I very very firmly disagree when you're equating something like this done by a 14 to something like this done by a 19 year old.
It's not the same at all. A 19-year-old is everything but a pubescent. The 14-year-old should have a parent to supervise them, which was my main point. Behavior like this develops in kids who don't get appropriate parental attention, or even worse, who learn it from the parents.
 

Scepticalscribe

Site Master
Vaccinated
Posts
6,153
Reaction score
8,846
I am simply sick of men explaining away sexual assault, and finding sympathetic explanations to excuse the perpetrator, which ensures that he receives sympathetic attention and is often the recipient of kindly attempts to find favourable interpretations for his actions; this is usually in stark contrast to the vicious treatment his unfortunate victim may be subjected to, who is often judged exceptionally harshly in an unforgiving - and unsympathetic - glare of publicity, which would have been exacerbated further if revenge porn formed part of the equation.

Okay: Let's view this through a somewhat different lens: Would you take the same understanding tone if the victim had been a thirteen year old male, a smaller but "hot" classmate, and the sexual attraction took the form of gay attraction, followed by gay sexual assault, gay revenge porn, gay blackmail, and gay stalking?

There are some men who don't "get" the concept of what comprises sexual assault until they watch "Deliverance".
 
Last edited:

Scepticalscribe

Site Master
Vaccinated
Posts
6,153
Reaction score
8,846
I see that you're upset but we're not really disagreeing here on the basic notions that sexual assault and exploitation are what they are. I'm not going to defend any of those.
On the other hand I very very firmly disagree when you're equating something like this done by a 14 to something like this done by a 19 year old.
It's not the same at all. A 19-year-old is everything but a pubescent. The 14-year-old should have a parent to supervise them, which was my main point. Behavior like this develops in kids who don't get appropriate parental attention, or even worse, who learn it from the parents.

Yes, a 14 year old is not a 19 year old, granted, and should not perhaps be held to the standards one might have reason to expect would bee appropriate for a 19 year old.

Nevertheless, his youth doesn't excuse - or explain - sexual assault and his subsequent behaviour (revenge porn, stalking, bullying); this is more than libido, and cannot be explained away by thwarted desire, instead, this is real nastiness and viciousness, and cruelty.

Actually, I'd be of the opinion that this is a kid who was probably a real creep at every age.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom