Visitors to this website come from three general demographic categories: lawyers, social scientists and the general public. Social scientists and the public typically find this site from Google scholar or after reading one of my articles or hearing me discuss some topic of interest in the press. Lawyers, on the other hand, look me up after attending one of my seminars or after I am recommended to them to work as a trial analyst by one of their colleagues. Lawyers, of the three demographic visitors to this site, may find it odd that I would have written about Tiger Woods in 2003. The tumultuous events of the winter of 2009 were predicted six years ago. How did I know?
Tiger Woods current problems are not his problems, per se. They are problems that transcend one man in one difficult personal situation. When I included a chapter in my book AWAKENING BEAUTY entitled: Rich Man/Pretty Woman, I had no idea that it would win me both friends and enemies, alike. I included a sub-section in that chapter with the heading: SPORTS STARS. The wives of sports stars and other rich men praised my work while a lot of rich men, including sports stars, stopped talking to me or, as we say in the business, “acted funny” when they were around me.
I am going to include that sub-heading on sports stars here for your review after numerous requests to talk about it have come from people familiar with my book and the Tiger Woods incident.
One particular rich man/pretty woman match-up deserves special attention. This match-up occurs when the pretty woman becomes involved with a sports star. Go to the most expensive ski resorts, vacation destinations, rich neighborhoods, and especially sporting events, and you will see scores and scores of attractive women, many of whom look very much alike. Look in the “wife and girlfriend” section of bleachers or sidelines at a sporting event, and you’ll immediately see living proof of this mirror image phenomenon. (SEE RYDER CUP PHOTO)
This particular match-up, however, is not infrequently characterized by stressful relationships. Study after study of the incidence of rape, assault and abuse target high school, college and professional male athletes as high-risk dates and husbands. For example, on July 9, 1999, University of Minnesota investigators reported 40 incidents of alleged sexual assault and domestic abuse by student athletes. To make matters worse, the report cited several examples of an often-repeated pattern recognized by its “favoritism toward student athletes and insensitivity toward female victims, on the part of university officials.” That is just one university in one state. One interesting website, which was active as of the fall of 2000, is www.cracksmoker.com/MLB1.htm. This site chronicles various legal difficulties, not just those involving drugs, as reported in the press, involving major league baseball players. A cursory review of those reports from this website illustrates some of the reported problems these athletes have with their girlfriends and spouses.
Beautiful women seldom take these and similar affronts to their status in life lying down. A common response is to try and destroy the sport star’s public image. Contentious divorces and a plethora of tell-all books about how the sports hero is not really a hero after all are really nothing more than the heat given off from the deadly mix of beauty and sports star. Once again, beauty ends up unhappy.
Men who lust after beautiful women at the expense of others in their life virtually always justify their behavior by pointing out that it is “natural,” and “it is just the way men are.” What is often missed, however, is that the male contribution to this psychodrama can and often does have unbelievably lethal consequences. Machismo, dominance behaviors, symbolic sexual prowess and gender bias and oppression–all have their roots in the male’s obsession with how beautiful women enhance his ego.
Men often intertwine their professional identities with their obsession with beautiful women. The trophy wife or girlfriend is testimony to the rich man’s success in his chosen profession. Men are quite good at denying the fact that without material wealth, the would-be trophy wife or good-looking girlfriend would not give them the time of day. Trophy women deny the fact, that their husbands or boyfriends, may not like them, they may even hate them. They are, after all, when all is said and done, just another designer golf club in his golf bag that he shows off to his friends. Trophy women who seek out men are the material-by-product of a self-fulfilling prophecy that is secondary to a society created by men where materialism, power, dominance and wealth are made to be synonymous with “having” beautiful women.
The sexual realities associated with men who own trophy wives undermine the machismo myth: enter Viagra or other ED drugs. For years, trophy wives and girlfriends could allow their machismo-puffing partners to parade them around before their peers in public. But once behind closed doors, the relief afforded by reduced or absent sexual intercourse made the relationship at least tolerable. Viagra has changed all of that. Anecdotal evidence is beginning to appear that suggests that trophy wives and girlfriends are thinking twice about their role, in part because there is no longer a safe harbor back home.
Viagra is also beginning to affect men and their defenses. It is appreciably harder to deny what truly binds “his” beautiful young mate to him when she must work hard to pretend to enjoy intimacy. The stress on both partners has increased to the point where the myth is harder to maintain in the mind of the man and the role of trophy wife has become almost intolerable. The truth of what brings these two genres of people together bleeds through an ever-thinning set of defenses; defenses weakened by, of all things, a drug that promotes an erection.
As a former Judge of two regional Hawaiian Tropic Beauty Pageants, numerous regional pageants and the Miss California pageant, I can say with some personal experience that many of the contestants share Darcy’s intuitive sense of how their looks can be parlayed into material wealth. Male judges at these events are often chosen because of their relatively high-profile job, which often means they have money. I have judged these pageants with media personalities, sports stars and businessmen. Time and again we see the pattern where the very successful beauty pageant contestant trades her beauty pedigree for marriage. For example, the former Miss Universe, Cecilia Bolocco, married millionaire and past Argentinean President, Carlos Menem. When the two married in May of 2001, the former Miss Universe was 36 years old–and the former President was 70.
Beautiful women target sports stars, financial barons and sometimes even very smart men. This is because these socially desirable men validate her beauty. Beautiful women often feel they are entitled to a special man, a man who can buy them the material items, which are part of her birthright. Whomever society defines as “special men” becomes the group from which the beautiful woman selects her self-validating man.
When the beautiful woman truly falls in love, it is often with a man whom she feels can put her in her place; in other words, a man who is not overwhelmed by her beauty. This behavior begs the question: why are beautiful women attracted to this kind of man? Beautiful women are not masochistic by nature. Nonetheless, they yearn for a man who doesn’t value what ultimately defines her–her physical attractiveness. Men, who can put her in her place, by definition, do not fall under her beautiful spell. Knowing all too well the power of her beauty, she can only conclude that any man who can do without her beauty must be powerful indeed. Thus, the man who doesn’t fall under her spell, and who really doesn’t care one way or the other about having her, is the one man she can’t do without. He is the one more powerful than she. It may be the guitar teacher or the husband of another woman, but he is the man she is deeply attracted to.
Alas, the pattern of rich man/pretty woman repeats itself with often-tragic predictability. The childhood trauma for the unattractive millionaire boy repeats itself when beauty distances herself, the pretty girl is finally put in her place by the one she can’t live without, and all live unhappily ever after.
Our Troops Prove, Once Again,They Are The Best
My name is Will Simpson, I am a Marine stationed out of Camp Pendleton but deployed to Afghanistan in support of Operation Enduring Freedom right now. While here in Afghanistan, I have taken in a dog from the nearby city that would have ended up on the street and without a home and left to fend for herself. Her name is Farrah, she is a Sage Koochee breed, which means “dog of the nomad,” and we think she’s about 3 months old.
We found her scavenging outside of our small camp so we brought her in, fed her, washed her, gave her shots from a local vet and a lot of TLC. I think she knew what we were up to and from then on it has been friends for life.
She has taken on the role of being part of the family, everyone takes turns watching, feeding and taking her out. She is a constant companion to all of us and can frequently be found on the couch next to one of the guys, or out playing catch…well, learning anyway. She is extremely sweet and well tempered, and is always there to greet you with a kiss! So that is the background on her, now I am trying to get her back to San Diego and keep her with myself, my wife and family by any means necessary. Any help or guidance that you could give me to help rescue her would be greatly appreciated, not just by me, but all of the Marines here!
Have you ever wondered who Elliot Spitzer made angry? Â Have you ever asked yourself: Â “Why now?” Â Here are the answers.
When Elliot Spitzer was Attorney General of New York he was no friend of Wall Street. He went after those men on Wall Street whom we now know helped to create a financial meltdown that may rival the Great Depression. Â He pursued cases against companies involved in computer chipÂ price fixing,Â investment bank stock price inflation, and theÂ 2003 mutual fund scandal. He also suedÂ Richard Grasso, the former chairman of theÂ New York Stock Exchange, claiming he had failed to fully inform the board of directors of his deferred compensation package, which exceeded $140 million dollars.
Wall Street didn’t appreciate the fact that Attorney General Spitzer was on their back and was not shy about exposing their misdeeds. Â Those same misdeeds that have proven to cost the American taxpayer a trillion dollars or more.
Fast forward and we find that the same men targeted by the former Attorney General turned Governor of New York had been waiting their turn. Â The Governor was now his most vulnerable. Â He was married, liked pretty young girls and he paid them for their affection.
So, let’s see who really won: Â Wall Street Thugs 1; Elliot Spitzer 0; And the American Public -1Trillion.
Newsday interviewed Dr. Anthony after New York Governor Eliot Spitzer resigned his office due to a sex scandal. Dr. Anthony had dedicated a chapter on this very subject entitled: “Cult of the Beautiful Egg,” from his book AWAKENING BEAUTY. Here is an excerpt from that chapter on the phenomenon that brought down Eliot Spitzer. According to Dr. Anthony, look for former Governor Spitzer to make a comeback in the years to come.
Before you read this excerpt, take a look at Ms. Duprey, then take a look at Eliot Spitzer.Â Do you notice anything?Â A close look reveals that Ms. Duprey and Mr. Spitzer share the same facial geometry and landmark ratios.Â
Months before Judge Fidler struggled with his “sua sponte” obligation to instruct the jury on the lesser-included charge of manslaughter, Dr. Anthony anticipated the judge’s move and wrote about this exact dilemma on July 7, 2007, over two months before the September 18, 2007 event was shown on national television.
On September 1, 2007, before the Spector jury began deliberations, Dr. Anthony shared with us his “insider” predictions and insights, including how some jurors would find themselves at loggerheads with one another BECAUSE the lesser-included charge would not be given. Trying to force these facts into either second degree murder or an outright acquittal is not unlike trying to force a square peg into a round hole.
Click on the newsletters above, dated July 7, 2007 and September 1, 2007 to read the predictions and share some of Dr. Anthony’s “insider” secrets.
September 19, 2007
Hung Jury in Favor of Acquittal in Rod Coronado Free Speech Case
San Diego, Calif.-After more than two full days of deliberation, a 12-person jury informed Judge Jeffrey Miller they were hopelessly deadlocked and determined that further deliberation would not deliver unanimity. Outside the courtroom, attorneys were informed that the majority was voting for acquittal of the environmental and animal rights activist on trial for a speech he gave in San Diego in 2003. In order to convict under the obscure statute, (18 USC Â§ 842 (p)(2)(A)), which makes it a crime to demonstrate how to build a destructive device with the intent that it be used in furtherance of a crime of violence), the jury would have had to determine on three criteria: that his speech was instructive, that he had intent to incite those present to violent action, and that the incitement was to imminent action. Otherwise, such speech is protected under the First Amendment. A status conference was scheduled for September 28 in the same court to determine whether the case will continue. Rod Coronado is headed home to Tucson, Arizona with his wife to reunite with his children and return to his job.
Omar Figueroa, an attorney on the legal team said, â€œWe had a good jury and they upheld the Constitution. Itâ€™s a great day for Constitutional Rights.â€
U.S. Attorneys John Parmley and Michael Skerlos were tough, articulate and effective advocates for the governmentâ€™s case. Judge Jeffrey Miller held everyoneâ€™s feet to the fire, gave no quarter to either side and was fair. The government had a great support staff. Their investigators left no stones unturned. Their witnesses were beautifully prepared and withstood defense counselâ€™s attempts to undermine their testimony despite masterful cross-examinations by Tony Serra and Omar Figueroa. Opening statements by Gerald Singleton for the defense and Mr. Parmley for the government were textbook perfect.
It is our opinion that the jury composition found in this trial could be recreated if the case were retried, applying the same scientific principles used in the case just completed. We would anticipate that virtually any future jury would judge the behavior of Mr. Coronado in a remarkably similar way as the jury that hung in favor of his acquittal.
Perhaps most important, from my perspective, Mr. Coronado has renounced direct action and poses no threat to anyone moving forward. Justice was done in the matter of U.S. v. Coronado and the governmentâ€™s advocates have made a difference. The government’s efforts may now be better directed at any number of real and tangible threats facing the people of the United States at this point in our history.
By Greg Moran
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER
December 15, 2007
A well-known animal rights activist pleaded guilty yesterday to a charge of showing people at a speech in San Diego four years ago how to make a destructive device with the goal of having someone commit a violent crime.
The plea by activist Rodney Coronado ends a controversial case that involved free-speech rights and an unsolved arson case in University City in 2003.
Coronado’s case went to trial in September, but the jury could not reach a decision and a mistrial was declared. Some on the panel said afterward that the majority was leaning toward acquitting Coronado.
Coronado’s lawyer, Jerry Singleton, said that as part of the guilty plea, the government will not pursue two other cases against his client. One in Washington, D.C., involves the same charge stemming from a speech Coronado gave at American University there.
The second case is in Arizona, where Coronado was charged with illegally possessing feathers of eagles, a protected species. Coronado is of American Indian heritage.
Outside court, Singleton said Coronado accepted the deal to move on with his life and raise his family. Coronado already spent four years in federal prison for committing arson at animal research labs in Michigan.
â€œI needed to do what is best for my family,â€ Coronado, 41, said after he entered his guilty plea. He is free on bond until his sentencing in March.
The rarely used federal law Coronado pleaded guilty to carries a maximum of 20 years in prison. But Coronado and the government have agreed to ask Judge Jeffrey Miller to impose a sentence of a year plus one day in federal prison, Singleton said.
The charges stem from an Aug. 1, 2003, speech Coronado gave in Hillcrest. In response to a question from the audience, he showed how to start fires with a homemade device. Undercover federal agents were in the audience and heard the exchange.
The speech came hours after an apartment complex under construction in University City had been destroyed by arson and an extremist environmental organization had taken credit for it. The fire caused $50 million in damage and remains unsolved.
Based on his comments at the speech, Coronado was indicted two years after the blaze. Critics said the government was punishing Coronado for exercising his free-speech rights and was trying to intimidate activists.
Singleton tried to get the case thrown out by saying the law infringed on free speech, but Miller rejected that before trial.
Prosecutors said they were not trying to squelch speech or chill Coronado’s political activities, but were prosecuting him because they believed his intention was to incite others to commit crimes.
â€œThe law does not protect those who cross the line to advocate violence by providing the tools and the road map for others to commit arson in the name of radical environmental causes,â€ U.S. Attorney Karen Hewitt said.
phone cards (#1 most requested item; so they can phone their loved ones)
VISA and M/C gift cards (#2 most requested item; gives them maximum flexibility
personal hygiene items (American made for safety of course)
wet wipes, individually wrapped in foil packs (not gel bottles)
body wipes in plastic pull-out canisters
disposable razors â€“ men’s and women’s
foot powderÂ andÂ the like
magazines (clean content)
books (clean content)
fun posters and calendars for dressing the place up
movie DVD’s (clean content)
music CDs (clean content)
1 GB and 2 GB memory sticks (external hard drives) (blank)
beef jerky and sticks
peanuts and nuts in cans with lids
tins and packets of flavored coffee and cappuccino
Contact us for a free consultation to receive an quote estimate.
Call us at: 1-858-488-6561