The father of “Monica” is speaking out now, as yet another incident is uncovered.
“She’s a super kid,” he says. “She is a good kid that has made a couple of mistakes.”
So, let’s sum up these “couple of mistakes” for those just joining us:
“Monica,” 15, is (or was) a new student at one of the most prestigious prep schools in the country, which has a history as a “feeder” school for Harvard. And how did she try to fit in?
1) On Saturday, January 22, Monica met four boys in a dorm room. While a fifth stood watch, she serviced all four of them.
2) (latest revelation) On Sunday, January 23, she met three boys in the locker room and pleasured all three of them.
3) On Monday, January 24, in the incident that broke the story, she met five hockey players in the locker room and entertained all five of them within fifteen minutes, but were interrupted by two other students, who reported them.
4) At a “Sweet 16” birthday party at a Boston hotel, Monica and another girl were greeting guests at the door while topless. Later, she accomodated at least one boy in front of the other guests.
(I hope this is the last revelation. I’m running out of polite euphemisms for Lewinskys.)
And she’s fifteen years old. Fifteen. Years. Old. And attending a school that speaks of educating and training our country’s future leaders.
And her father, who’s just seen $32,500 go down the toilet, insists that she’s a “super girl” who “has made a couple of mistakes.”
God help our future.
J.
Update: Reader Mark A. points out that the father quoted in the Boston Globe story, and reprinted above, was NOT “Monica’s” father. Rather, he was the father of the girl in whose honor the “Sweet Sixteen” party was being held. I do recall Monica’s father being quoted when the story first broke, saying words to the effect of “she’ll be fine” and other such sentiments, but I can’t seem to find a precise citation. My apologies to the confusion I caused, and my thanks to Mark A. for pointing out my error.
Ok, we’re all morons!
RE-READ THE ARTICLE!!!
The only father quoted, is the father of the birthday girl! The 15-year-old’s (“Monica’s”) father is not quoted anywhere.
Read it. Read it again. Apply the normal rules of English. It does not appear that “Monica’s” father has spoken.
Mark A:
3. Yes, perfectly normal and compliant kids with spotless records–frequently from restrictive and overly zealous religious backgrounds–often temporarily “snap” once they fly the coop and leave for a boarding school or college. There often are no obvious warning signs.
If the father created and raised his daughter in an environment of religious repression or zealotry or however you want to describe it, then, once again, he is a clueless putz. Thank you for proving my point for me.
4. And yes, I’m confident the father who cared enough to spend $30+ grand per year for high school tuition to give his daugher every opportunity in life is feeling some concern and outrage.
I think it’s pretty naive to think that spending a ton of money on his kids is proof positive that he “cares”. For all we know, he might be just trying to get her out of his house so he doesn’t have to deal with her. I’ve known parents to shower their kids with money, new cars, European vacations, etc., more out of indifference and “ok, now scram” than anything else. For a horrifying glimpse of just how depraved some parents can be, you ought to read a book called “The Nanny Diaries”. It might sober you up.
This must be horrifying for him–it would be for me.
Again, you don’t know that. You’re assuming that the entire world is just like you, and that everyone reacts the same way you would react. I was disabused of that notion when I was in my teens. For all you know, ‘Monicas’ father’s reaction could have been not horror or outrage but “what, again?”
Then again, you might be right–he’s probably bragging about it down at the local corner where he buys his hookers and blow. Maybe he’s even passing out candid photos.
I want to thank you once again for making my points for me. What you fling out as absurd actually happened to me once: I was on the Victoria-British Columbia Ferry about 15 years ago with a friend and to pass the time I was wandering the deck alone. An elderly man approaches my friend and I see this from a distance, they strike up a conversation. Later on, my friend tells me that the guy told him that his daughter had just done a spread for Penthouse and whipped out some photos and showed him(!). Now, granted the daughter was not 15 years old like ‘Monica’ here, she was most likely in her early 20s, but even so, what kind of depraved father would carry around porn shots of his own daughter to show to random strangers?
My point is, what you think is outrageous and ridiculous and beyond belief is probably just another example of real life.
Also, there might be, as pointed out by other posters, some actual sexual abuse involved here. Many times, promiscuity has its roots there. I see you’re studiously ignoring that possibility as well.
Mark A: you’re looking at the other story (there’s a bunch)
Monica’s dad comments on page 2 of this story
Mark A is right. It was not Monica’s father who is quoted in the article. It was the father of the daughter whose hotel room the party took place in.
CSI guy:
kgowen, you sound very angry,
I don’t know why you would think that, I am just stating what I think about the situation based on the newspaper article.
DBub: No, the one and only “father” was introduced on page one. The father quoted on page two is that same father.
kgowen: Thanks for at least agreeing with me that the father has not spoken.
You make some good points, and the things you describe are real–they exist in our society. My only quarrel with you is that you seem so willing to make the leap and assume the silent father is guilty of all those mistakes–in a complete absence of evidence. You could be right, but there really is no reason to make those leaps here–at least not yet.
Do parents fuck up their kids? Yes. Do all of them? Probably yes, in varying degrees. Are sexual abuse, lack of parental affection, and lack of moral upbringing often linked to “turbo slut” behavior? Yes. Always? No. Are there other possibilities? Of course. Do we know anything about her problems? Nope.
Jay Tea: You ignited the outrage of several people who are condemning the father of “Monica” based on your misreading of the article. He has not spoken. I hope you will be responsible enough to re-read the article and set the record straight.
OK I got it on the 10th read. There was only one father. What a smart move on his part to comment on how “great” the other girl is. He didn’t have to try and defend his own daughter’s actions.
Ok, we’re all morons!
Speak for yourself! I made the distinction in my post, but the article was very difficult to decipher. Obviously, I wasn’t the only one to find it confusing and poorly written.
Jay Tea: You ignited the outrage of several people who are condemning the father of “Monica” based on your misreading of the article.
Oh, give me a break! His daughter didn’t get to be so fucked up on her own. The parents deserve to be condemned.
I hope you will be responsible enough to re-read the article and set the record straight He has not spoken.
And, I hope you will be responsible enough to retract your statement: He Has Spoken!
Oh Julie, it’s so nice too hear from you. Now please pay attention while I explain a little something for you.
There are more than fifty posts in this section. Most of them condemmed “Monica’s” father for making statements about his daughter that he did not, in fact, make. A debate ensued. In the article linked by Jay Tea, the contoversial statements were attributed to the father of another girl, NOT “Monica’s” father, but the article was not as clear as it could have been. All of us were irresponsible in debating the father’s parenting skills based on statements he did not even make. I am embarrassed to have joined in, but I would think the lynch mob should be even more embarrassed.
Thank you for linking to the article that DOES quote the father. I had not seen that article previously, nor was it the topic of discussion in this thread. I stand corrected: He has spoken.
Julie, perhaps I was not clear in my posts. When I said he had not spoken, I was referring to the article at the center of the debate. In fact, all along I assumed the man was not mute, and I made the leap of faith that he probably did articulate thoughts in an audible fashion. However, none of those thoughts were reported in the subject article, and none were relied upon to support any of the various views expressed by the commentors.
Now to address your sophisticated analysis of child development and behavioral psychology, which seems to boil down to this:
“If teenager fucks up, it is ALWAYS the parents’ fault. Not only is it their fault, but to such a degree that they should be condemned. In fact, this is so certain that condemnation should be automatic without bothering to learn a single shred of information about the girl’s genetics, upbringing, behavioral history, or neuro-psychiatric status.”
Applying your wonderful analysis, you would condemn the parents for her behavior even if it were linked to traumatic sexual abuse at the hands of a priest at church camp. Wow.
Julie, it must be nice to live in your black and white world where the dogmatic and ignorant see everything with the clearest precision. Until now, I thought morons like you only posted at the Democratic Underground and KOS.
Lets hope you do not have a position in life that enables you to make decisions that affect other people. That would be tragic.
There are more than fifty posts in this section. Most of them condemmed “Monica’s” father for making statements about his daughter that he did not, in fact, make.
So, he made other stupid statements when he shouldn’t be making statements at all. Don’t assume anyone but you would feel any different towards him.
A debate ensued. In the article linked by Jay Tea, the contoversial statements were attributed to the father of another girl, NOT “Monica’s” father, but the article was not as clear as it could have been.
Thank you for re-stating what I already indicated twice I knew.
All of us were irresponsible in debating the father’s parenting skills based on statements he did not even make. I am embarrassed to have joined in, but I would think the lynch mob should be even more embarrassed.
Not ALL of us. And even if he didn’t make that particular statement, his parenting skills are more than questionable and subject to legitimate debate.
Thank you for linking to the article that DOES quote the father. I had not seen that article previously, nor was it the topic of discussion in this thread.
You made it the topic. Jay, posted an update and referenced the article. Keep up and remember, you don’t control the discussions.
Julie, perhaps I was not clear in my posts. When I said he had not spoken, I was referring to the article at the center of the debate.
Oh, you were clear. Don’t try to back pedal, now. You were extremely emphatic about it: He has not spoken. And you stated it three times. You saw it as an opportunity to unnecessarily rag on Jay Tea. He was gracious about it. I don’t have to be.
[snip boring back pedaling part]
“If teenager fucks up, it is ALWAYS the parents’ fault. Not only is it their fault, but to such a degree that they should be condemned. In fact, this is so certain that condemnation should be automatic without bothering to learn a single shred of information about the girl’s genetics, upbringing, behavioral history, or neuro-psychiatric status.”
Did I say that? Where?
Applying your wonderful analysis,
Uh, that was YOUR analysis.
you would condemn the parents for her behavior even if it were linked to traumatic sexual abuse at the hands of a priest at church camp. Wow.
Did I say that? Where? I did say these parents should be condemned, as they should. There daughter is out of control. It didn’t happen over night. They are responsible for her well being legally. You are whining about other people pre-judging when you are doing exactly the same. The people who think something is wrong with this family have some basis to their arguement. You’re argument does not.
Julie, it must be nice to live in your black and white world where the dogmatic and ignorant see everything with the clearest precision. Until now, I thought morons like you only posted at the Democratic Underground and KOS.
Maybe, your problem is that you hang out to much at DU/Kos, where if you challenge a post, you are banned. No dissent is allowed. Apparently, no dissent is allowed in your little world, either.
Lets hope you do not have a position in life that enables you to make decisions that affect other people. That would be tragic.
Boy, you seem extremely and unusually touchy about the subject of parenting skills. Hmm.
Mark, please note that I posted the correction and gave you full credit and my thanks for spotting it as soon as I could. Further, I did so before Kevin forwarded your rather pissy note to me. Not that it would have made a difference — I made the error (apparently a lot of others did, too — the article was rather poorly written at that point), you caught it, and you deserved credit for it when I corrected myself.
Mark, sorry you don’t care for my postings here. You’re always welcome to shut up and ignore me. You wouldn’t be the first, and I’m sure you won’t be the last.
J.
“So, he made other stupid statements when he shouldn’t be making statements at all.”
What, when, where? As yet, nobody has cited any of his actual statements and challenged them as “stupid.”
“And even if he didn’t make that particular statement, his parenting skills are more than questionable and subject to legitimate debate.”
What information do you have about his parenting skills? You know about three or four incidents of behavior by his teenage daughter. What do you know about HIM? Not what you would like to speculate, but what do you KNOW? It appears you know absolutely nothing, but are willing to extrapolate across logically impermissible chasms of faith. Who the fuck do you think you are?
“It didn’t happen over night. . . . The people who think something is wrong with this family have some basis to their arguement.”
What are the bases? People have only cited personal speculation and falsely attributed quotes. But is there a FACTUAL basis? 60 posts have discussed three newspaper articles, but no one has cited a shred of factual information. Sure, we have plenty of conjecture and opinion, but no facts.
Julie, the reasoning abilities you’ve demonstrated here frighten me. I shudder to think you may actually have a job or, worse yet, a family.
Jay, unless you are “Julie,” I’m not sure where you’re coming from. I thanked you for posting the update, and I don’t have a quarrel with you. We all seem to have misread the sloppy article, and my blame toward you probably sounded harsher than I meant it. If so, I apologize.
If you would like to discuss the pissy comments I made in private to Kevin, I would prefer to do that in private–you have my email address.
Oh Christ, YOU ARE JULIE!!!
So, do you always troll the comments of your own posts? In my case were you intending to give me somebody to rant against, or do you actually mean the things you said?
Damn, I fell for it. Yup, I must be an idiot.
Oh, I make quite a good salary from my reasoning skills. And if Jay were me, he would have kicked your ass out of here because you are such an obnoxious pissant. And I never had DCS knocking on my door. Is that why you’re so defensive? Your kid caught servicing an entire sports team, too?
Yup, I must be an idiot.
On that we can all agree!
Well I think I learned a little something about the integrity of this blog today.
Nice try, Jay. Yes, I see you just changed your email address from the one you shared with “Julie” this morning. Kevin and Paul, are you in on this, too?
Well I think I learned a little something about the integrity of this blog today.
What???
(can’t believe I have to deny this…)
No, Mark, I am not Julie, and I’ve posted a comment exactly once under an assumed name. That one time was because the matter being discussed was something I know a little about, but regard as intensely personal and didn’t want to be known as an “expert” on the subject (a medical condition). Except for that one time, everything I post here goes under my name. It’s a matter of personal pride and integrity for me.
The reason I post so little during the day is that I have a full-time job. I’ve been “future publishing” pieces to show up during the day to keep the site fresh, but usually I’m lucky if I can spare 10 minutes during the day to do anything online. I certainly don’t have the time, interest, motivation, or lack of integrity it would take to publish all the comments Julie has contributed here.
As far as whether I should have sent that message to you privately, in e-mail, is another matter. In retrospect, I should have, and not posted it to a public forum. I don’t have access to my Wizbang e-mail at work, so I should have waited until I got home. I apologize to you for that, and I will try to avoid making such mistakes in the future.
J.
(private to Julie: another person’s figured out we’re one and the same. We gotta be more careful in the future. And while I have you, I want to complain about the underwear you’ve been choosing. It’s awful binding… and giving me some rather uncomfortable chafing. Be more considerate, huh?)
What can I say, Mark. When you’re right, your right. You found me, uh, us out.
That reminds me, Julie… wanna rent “Spartacus” tonight?
J.
As far as whether I should have sent that message to you privately, in e-mail, is another matter. In retrospect, I should have, and not posted it to a public forum.
Huh? Julie, would you please explain what you mean here? I certainly didn’t think your, uh, my post was offensive. In fact, I think you, uh, I was too nice.
(private to Julie: another person’s figured out we’re one and the same. We gotta be more careful in the future. And while I have you, I want to complain about the underwear you’ve been choosing. It’s awful binding… and giving me some rather uncomfortable chafing. Be more considerate, huh?)
STAY OUT OF MY UNDERWEAR DRAWER! And, what’s my PIN number, and where’s the card?
Girl is 15 – by law she can’t consent. This is cut and dried statutory rape which will probably plead out something a bit less but nonetheless a very serious crime for these “fine” young men and future leaders. Where’s the DA? I dare say the same acts in Boston public schools would have prosecutors all fired up. Enough of the touchy feely (no pun intended) analysis – let’s follow the law and let the judge and/or jury decide.
You know what you losers I go to milton and this is an atrocity how everyone is making a huge exageration about this. Milton Academy has been going for over two hundred years and it has one of the cleanest records of private schools. Where did you guys go to school? Iamnotgoingtoevergetlaid Prep?