Internets WTF

Wife Of Accused Man Will Explain Why Child Porn Isn’t So Bad

Meet Mrs. Handbasket. Back in January she announced to the internets that her husband is “under investigation for possession of child pornography”.

Child pornography carries a special stigma in our society. Those who look at child porn are equated with those who sexually abuse children and record that abuse.

While the rest of us all say “No duh, Dick Tracy” Mrs. Handbasket has spent the last few months explaining why what her husband did is simply no big deal:

The standard explanation, when it comes to child porn, is that possessing images of children enduring sexual abuse is like abusing the children all over again…But let’s look at the photo of a murder scene. Who would claim that looking at the images of the murdered person is like murdering that person all over again? If I look at images of a child who has been beaten, is that like me beating the child myself? I can’t think that anyone would argue that.

She uses this bizarre rationale again and again while repeatedly reminding us that sex fantasies are not a crime and continually claiming that it’s not fair that “Both society and the justice system treat child porn users the same as child molesters”. She just wishes society would understand!

It is hard to expose my husband to the risk of whatever nasty judgments people might make about him, especially when I have seen so clearly his courage, his determination, and his love for the kids and me.

Yes, let’s focus on his feelings. He has apparently since been charged with receipt of child pornography, and Mrs. Handbasket is standing by her man – even gloating that her marriage “is better than ever”.  Her husband, the real victim here, might be off to prison soon, so won’t you take some time to offer some support? After all, it’s not like he did anything to deserve it.




  1. avatar Sizzle

    In the words of Megghhhyy Anderson:

    Know!
    Know!
    Know!
    KNOW!

    THIS! (0)NOPE! (0)


  2. avatar Virginia Apple

    Jesus H Christ. I can't even snark on this, it's so sad and disturbing. What kind of mother would allow her children around a father like that?

    THIS! (17)NOPE! (0)


    • avatar Kels

      Ditto'd.

      THIS! (1)NOPE! (0)


      • avatar diggity

        I third this. I don't understand.

        THIS! (1)NOPE! (0)


    • avatar endall

      Agreed. I don't know this person or her blog, but this is just sad and disturbing. Hasn't it even crossed her mind that she would feel differently if her neighbor were jacking off to tapes/images of HER children being sexually abused? I just can't. I do hope CPS gets involved; that is a very unhealthy family.

      THIS! (3)NOPE! (0)


      • avatar breeb714

        its sick. This woman is "excusing" his offense. So Sick, So Sad.

        THIS! (1)NOPE! (0)


  3. avatar Lolo

    This literally makes me sick to my stomach. I'm interested to hear how this woman has (or eventually will) rationalize her husband's horrific offenses to her children. Disgusting.

    THIS! (3)NOPE! (0)


  4. avatar PeterPeterPumpkinEater

    This woman has a serious problem. She is blinded and it is very sad. What a pathetic soul she is. Sorry woman, I understand you want to stand by your husband (who is a filthy louse), but I don't recall vows being "in sickness (in the head) and health, till death do us part". And I don't understand what type of validity she is expecting to get out of posting something like this. She sounds like an attention grabbing doofus and will use anything to spark a discussion. I feel for her kids.

    THIS! (0)NOPE! (0)


  5. avatar Samson

    Mrs Sandusky??

    THIS! (1)NOPE! (0)


  6. avatar BeepBeepBoopBeepBeep. I Am A Robot.

    Her "murder" photo rationale is only valid if said person is furiously jacking off to the images in the upstairs attic office. Something tells me she drank the "child cornographer's wife's" Kool-Aid.

    THIS! (0)NOPE! (0)


    • avatar Melanie

      I think the main problem with that rationale is that the reason it is illegal to own this stuff is that the people abusing and taking photographs of these kids are doing it because people like her husband are paying for it. People like him are fostering a market for these poor kids to be abused. That's the difference in the murder scene comparison. It's not just "viewing images". It's really sad how delusional she is. After this was posted he she posted a response to the GOMI readers and she said something like, "we want to deal with our demons privately" Um, then don't post it on the internet, lady!

      THIS! (3)NOPE! (0)


  7. avatar HipsterCupcake

    Whoa. I can't even. She even says we would be so lucky to be married to someone as strong as her husband. What in the actual fuck??

    Also, she is so determined for him to be a good father, etc. But, in a situation like this wouldn't CPS be involved if she is so determined to keep her family together??

    THIS! (0)NOPE! (0)


    • avatar Virginia Apple

      That's a good point about CPS, I hope that man isn't allowed near his children.

      THIS! (0)NOPE! (0)


    • avatar featherbrained

      The police would immediately involve CPS. Actually, it's not all adding up to me but I've not read her blog. Normally, he would not remain in the same residence with the children until there was a full trial etc.

      THIS! (0)NOPE! (0)


      • avatar ramonarickettes

        Depends on the state, especially considering he didn't abuse his own children.

        THIS! (0)NOPE! (0)


        • avatar whatshername

          But from scanning through the blog, there's no indication that the kids were even temporarily removed -- he's been charged with a federal crime of child corn and the kids weren't placed with other family members temporarily in order to undergo CPS investigation?

          Regardless of where this happened, I find there being NO investigation of the children's well-being highly questionable. It's possible the blogger just didn't address that part...but given her victim mentality, I find it hard to believe she wouldn't spin her kids' temporary removal into some other way that they are "victims of the system's brutality."

          I think this blog is kinda bullshit.

          THIS! (0)NOPE! (0)


          • avatar InvisibleO

            I got a major bullshit hit. In fact, the writing sounds like a man to me. One way or another, gross.

            THIS! (1)NOPE! (0)


          • avatar So Belle

            No, I have a friend whose husband continued to live with his wife and children. The wife is the most feisty person you would ever want to meet. They are now divorced and he is serving a sentence but she is still convinced that he did nothing to their children. She hates his guts now-apparently he was lying about having a job and their large house foreclosed etc.

            When he gets out-he took the plea-he will have at the very least supervised visitation and eventually unsupervised visitation.

            THIS! (0)NOPE! (0)


    • avatar Melanie

      I'm not sure about in instances of child corn but I have heard of children being allowed to stay with a step parent after the step parent was arrested for sexually abusing said children. The only condition was that they weren't allowed to be home alone with them. It could be that he's allowed to stay in the house so long as an adult is always present.

      THIS! (0)NOPE! (0)


  8. avatar MrsBlues

    I think that the point Mrs. Handbasket is missing is that those who enjoy child corn are creating a market for it. That does mean that her husband is guilty, at least indirectly, of contributing to the abuse of the children. Her argument about viewing murder victims is specious and not at ALL the same as child corn. As far as I know, people are not going around murdering people in order to sell pictures of the victims on the Internet. But people DO intentionally abuse children for the purpose of taking cornographic pictures that they can trade or sell in order to satisfy their fantasies.

    THIS! (1)NOPE! (0)


    • avatar PizzaPie!

      This!

      THIS! (0)NOPE! (0)


    • This is EXACTLY what I was trying to type out but kept getting flustered and off track. I can't stand it when people try to argue that looking at a child cornography photo is not harming the child again and it is completely irrational. You would be surprised at how often that argument is used. Drives me absolutely mental.

      THIS! (0)NOPE! (0)


    • avatar The fattest fat who ever fatted

      This is what I was coming here to say, as well. Well said.

      THIS! (0)NOPE! (0)


    • avatar Ham Dawber

      Perfectly said. And really, I think that any person who is aroused by the notion of sex with children is about one opportunity away from harming and scarring a kid for life. Fucked. Up.

      THIS! (1)NOPE! (0)


    • avatar HarlowC

      Amen.

      THIS! (0)NOPE! (0)


    • avatar drhoctor2

      Absolutely what you said. Glad i read down before i left the exact same comment. Creating a demand for child corn creates a supply of abused children. The women is involved with the aquistion of the child corn also. she wouldn't defend him if she had no prior first hand knowledge. Not being charged w/ abusing his own kids YET means nothing..they certainly have no one trustworthy to tell if they are old enough to say anything.

      THIS! (0)NOPE! (0)


    • avatar TurkeyVulture

      The supply-demand/actual people abusing actual children connection is so obvious, I can't believe it even needs to be mentioned. While I agree that sexual fantasies are not the same as criminal acts, UH HELLO if you are actually acquiring child corn then you are paying a person to abuse children. You are the crucial link in this daisy chain, bub.

      THIS! (1)NOPE! (0)


    • avatar It's Always Shitty in Donkadelphia

      Good words,. MrsBlues.

      Here in my neck of the woods, we just had a similar story break two days ago. The creep charged? None other than a 17-year veteran of a neighboring police dep't (a sergeant, to be exact, until he was placed on leave) AND single father (sole custody of a 4-year-old boy, I think). The young child has been removed from the home by CPS.

      This g-d creep was caught after the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children alerted that a company was distributing child corn; the company was subsequently raided & their customer database seized, which the cop turned up on due to having bought child corn of three young boys... also disturbing is that the investigation prior to his arrest has been going on for two years & his purchases (the ones known about, anyway) happened in January 2010 & who knows what else he's bought &/or done in the 35 months following that.

      So, police-perv dude made bail & has been remanded to custody of the Postal Inspection Service, whatever the eff that means (which I'd really like to know, because he doesn't live far from me & kids are over the place here, due to proximity to the city park & ball field, so I hope like hell that it means he's wearing an ankle bracelet & that his every move is accounted for.

      Anyway, yeah, Mrs. Handbasket would be wise to realize that the market for child corn perpetuated by the likes of her creeper husband husband is built on the backs of young, sometimes tiny, victims, often ones who've also been abducted & whose life & childhood as they knew it is forever gone, stolen from them.

      I hope these fuckers all rot in hell.

      THIS! (0)NOPE! (0)


      • avatar not a gator

        Postal Inspection Service means that he's under investigation for receiving CP through the US mails. If they find proof of this he is in big time trouble. So be glad that you heard that part.

        THIS! (0)NOPE! (0)


    • avatar aimless

      Viewing it is a crime for that and several other reasons and defending him is nuts.

      But I have to sort of agree witht the crazypants blogger that it's NOT the same as taking the pictures or molesting a child. Looking is disgusting and I'm glad it's a criminal offense - but it's not anywhere NEAR as disgusting and destructive and as the person who is in the room wiith the child molesting/raping/photographing.

      Because downloading child corn is a federal crime and child rape is (usually) prosecuted according to state laws, the person looking at the pictures is in far worse trouble than the person taking them, which kind of minimizing the actual molestation.

      I'm not defending the guy, but I think the laws are pretty fucked up.

      THIS! (0)NOPE! (0)


      • avatar Mrs. Odie

        If he turned up in a data base, he wasn't just a casual viewer. I'm torn in this issue. Prison for looking at pictures? Seems wrong. Looking at pictures of child rape? Seeking them out? Masturbating? Monster.

        THIS! (1)NOPE! (0)


      • avatar not a gator

        How is the person taking the picture prosecuted less? Please back up this assertion.

        The only scenario in which they are prosecuted less is when they do not get caught.

        THIS! (0)NOPE! (0)


  9. avatar Nikky

    Yipes.

    When I was a baby, my father had gotten back into using all kinds of illegal substances (my mom had no idea). When I was 2 months old he got insanely high on a mix of cocaine and heroin and raped a neighbor (not a child). He spent 22 years in prison for it.

    If it had been one of my sisters I'd probably want him dead, but I love my father, I think he's a good man who did a terrible, despicable thing. He missed all 3 of his kids growing up, lost his wife, couldn't be there when my brothers' mom died, and was just starting to talk to one of my older brothers for the first time in years when he (my brother) was killed in a car accident. He didn't get to go to the funeral. None of his kids will ever see him as a true father figure, despite how hard I know he tries.

    I would never, ever try to tell someone that he didn't deserve all he's suffered or that it wasn't a "big deal". Loving someone does not mean excusing or trying to talk it down when they've done something horrible.

    THIS! (2)NOPE! (0)


    • avatar Tegan

      I am so sorry for your terrible situation. But I applaud you for having such a sane view of it all, and sharing it.

      THIS! (0)NOPE! (0)


    • avatar not a gator

      This is very surprising because most rapists only serve 18 months at best. Must have been aggravated assault as well. Many murderers do not serve as long. Did he have priors or do something to mess up his parole, or was it drug hysteria, or was there a racial/ethnic element?

      And it's true that poor folks tend to get more time, period. I'm sorry for what your family has had to go through.

      THIS! (0)NOPE! (0)


  10. avatar LaDeeDa

    You know what, I actually think looking at crime scenes of murder IS violating a victim all over again in many of today's scenarios (obviously not during a trial, but for entertainment news purposes). If I'm ever (god-forbid) slaughtered in my home, I DO NOT want pics of my underwear-clad, blood-soaked body used in one of those dumbass murder mystery programs that are on ALL THE TIME for the purpose of entertaining thousands of fat Americans who have nothing better to do on a Friday night. Those shows are voyeuristic and SICK. In this sense, for mere rubbernecking curiosity, looking at shots of crimes scenes DOES INDEED violate the victim all over again, so her stupid argument is DOA.

    Looking at murder scenes is sick and vile, as is looking at child corn. "Oh gee, I'm not actually going to violate the child myself, but I'm going to get off watching someone else violate her." Holy hell.

    I wonder if these people have children of their own. I sure as hell am not clicking over to her blog to find out.

    THIS! (0)NOPE! (0)


    • avatar TurkeyVulture

      For what it's worth, I agree with you. I have serious ethical issues with using death (or even sometimes just peril) as entertainment...though it depends on the nature of the peril. I find it really disturbing that our society has made it okay for us to be entertained to the point of desensitization by murder, violence, and the threat of serious violence, but seeing a nipple will send us all into apoplectic fits of WON'T SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!

      I'm a writer by profession and I will not consider writing or even reviewing murder mysteries, murder/kidnapping/other violent thrillers, or bloody horror stories. I don't want to participate in the culture of making violence and death and other forms of victimization all right as entertainment.

      That being said, my favorite book ever is Lolita, so maybe I'm a big fucking hypocrite here. I don't know.

      THIS! (0)NOPE! (1)


      • avatar LaDeeDa

        Ha! I will overlook the Lolita love as I feel church ladyish about it, though I'm still perplexed and skeeved at the same time by the Humbert play by plays.

        But yes and thank you regarding the murder subject matter. It blows my mind to flip through the channels sometimes and see all of the gore based on reality.

        THIS! (0)NOPE! (0)


      • avatar AQNR

        Lolita is hardly a pro-child-abuse book! I love it (as someone who experienced child sexual abuse herself) because it show what corrupt and venal losers pedophiles really are, and how little attention they pay to the actual children they exploit.

        THIS! (2)NOPE! (0)


      • avatar SleazeFrieze

        The two best books I've read recently are Devil in the White City and Lolita, so I'm even worse by those standards. But there's a big difference between being interested in the mind of a serial killer/pedophile and wanting to see or hear grisly details about their victims, or so I tell myself.

        AQNR: Definitely. I also believe if Nabokov wrote about Hot Pockets it'd be poetic and captivating.

        THIS! (0)NOPE! (0)


        • avatar ba

          Devil in the White City was FANTASTIC.

          THIS! (0)NOPE! (0)


        • avatar loreleilee

          Thank you for this. I hate hearing people on about Lolita - if they'd just read it, they'd see what a disgusting wretch HH is. The beauty is in how Nabokov writes so wonderfully about this hideous man and his horrible acts.

          THIS! (0)NOPE! (0)


    • avatar Guest

      I agree. My rape report was linked to a news article about the rapist, and I certainly felt violated knowing random people were reading about my experience six years later (even though my name was excluded, anyone who knew the name of my rapist knew it was my report). I honestly might not have reported it had I known that could happen. It undid years of therapy.

      THIS! (0)NOPE! (0)


  11. avatar Your mom

    What vile people. I really hate the world.

    THIS! (0)NOPE! (0)


    • avatar LaDeeDa

      Seriously, I started my day reading about Lance Armstrong, now I'm reading this. Why is the whole world so batshit crazy?

      THIS! (0)NOPE! (0)


  12. avatar granola scam

    I don't even have words to properly express how deeply disturbed this makes me feel.

    THIS! (0)NOPE! (0)


  13. avatar GetMePizzaYouOldTroll

    the children need to be taken from both of these sick fucks
    23vnrl1.gif

    THIS! (0)NOPE! (0)


    • This made me sad.

      THIS! (0)NOPE! (0)


      • avatar eeee

        Me too. Near tears. And it's not even PMS week. I hope someone hugged this child to pieces after whatever it was that scared him so. Poor baby.

        THIS! (0)NOPE! (0)


    • avatar The fattest fat who ever fatted

      What is the story with this gif? Poor little guy. :(

      THIS! (0)NOPE! (0)




↑ Back to Top ↑