United Conservative States of America
Chapter 1: The Beginning

Copyright© 2007 by Kjm

Erotica Sex Story: Chapter 1: The Beginning - This story is written with no knowledge at all of American Justice system. It's written with a tongue-in-cheek spirit and is not designed to get real feminists in uproar. No real women were spanked, hurt or otherwise damaged in this story. I do not advocate any changes in real relationship between sexes. The story really is set in a parallel Universe. Imaginary women will get spanked and imaginary feminists will get a lot of headache. The codes will change chapter by chapter.

Caution: This Erotica Sex Story contains strong sexual content, including Ma/Fa   NonConsensual   MaleDom   Spanking   Humiliation   Enema   Caution  

Supreme Court

At the beginning of Mr. Bush second mandate, by coincidence the remaining less conservative members of the Supreme Court were up for retirement. The new members appointed by the president and blessed by the mostly Republican Congress were even more conservative than the remaining members, if it's at all possible. At the same time the only woman Justice fairly conservative herself retired transforming once again the Supreme in a boys' club.

The case of Mr. John Smith against the State of Utah

Mr. John Smith, a member of the First United Christian Church sued the State of Utah for his right to marry as many wives as he could provide for. Besides being a Minister, he was a learned lawyer, a judge and a world renowned Constitutional Scholar. His case was extremely well researched and couldn't be dismissed as somebody's mad dream.

After a lengthy debate the State Supreme Court sent the matter to the Federal Supreme. The Justices submitted it to a long and exhaustive study and issued a surprising far-reaching and much debated historical decision. Mr. Smith was right. There was nothing in the whole civil edifice of law that really precluded polygamy. It was a tradition and really only a Catholic tradition. Several evangelical churches, the Muslims and other religions accepted it. The Bible accepted it. The Orthodox Jews accepted it.

The Supreme Court granted Mr. Smith his right to marry a 2nd wife, but established a set of rules that required that all involved parties had to agree to the marriage and to the rights to propriety, children and succession. Equal rights were not given to women. Polygamy was a one way street: one male and how many females he could maintain. The reasoning was the imbalance of male and female population (at that time the females represented almost 55% of the population and the rate was growing) and the need to increase the nativity rate in accelerated decline for almost a decade.

The case of Mr. Ronald Tompkins against the State of New York

This was the turning case in Sexual Harassment craze. Everybody remembers when the middle aged Mr. Tompkins was arrested under accusation of forcing sexual favors from no less than seven female members of his staff. His pleas of not guilty and being a victim of conspiracy were ridiculed and he was condemned by the liberal press and by the vociferous feminist brigade well before his case was brought to court. He spent almost one year in prison before being judged and sentenced by a female judge and a mostly female jury to a cumulative 21 years in jail, to the applause of the feminists.

This would be the end of the case if not by Mr. Tompkins' boss, Mr. Stewart Little. Mr. Tompkins worked for Mr. Little for the best part of two decades. The sexual harassment bit was simply not in his character. In Mr. Little's view, his employee was a martinet, a strict and demanding manager, sometimes a 'straight-collar'—in his wording—but extremely fair. Mr. Little couldn't remember a single biased word from Mr. Tompkins and he was a perfect gentleman when treating women. He was shy and single, loved theatre and concerts and very seldom if ever looked for female companionship. This behavior was explored by the accusation as "weird, depraved, psychotic and misogynic."

A short time after Mr. Tompkins' sentence, Mr. Little overheard by chance a dialog between two of Mr. Tompkins accusers. The dialog made him very suspicious and he decided to engage one of the best detective agencies in the city to investigate the matter. After only 15 days of thorough inquire the agency discovered and was able to prove that the seven females effectively conspired against Mr. Tompkins because he was too strict, "a pain in the ass" and probably gay. The deciding factor was his rejection of sexual advances from two of them as a bribe for letting them off from formal warning for false expense report, the very crime for which the seven women swore that he asked them for sexual favors. To complicate the matter, the detectives showed that taped evidence was in the hands of Ms. Amanda Jones, the female prosecutor and active member of "Women of America, Unite!" (WAU) They could prove also that at least one of the accusers and possibly two wanted to recant when the harsh sentence was pronounced, but were physically threatened by the remaining members of the gang and the prosecutor.

The findings were explosive. The trial was annulled be state Supreme Court, Mr. Tompkins was released and the real culprits were arrested and started to sing the true story. Under legal advice Mr. Tompkins sued the State of New York, Ms. Jones and WAU. As the result of the trial, Ms. Jones was disbarred and she and the seven female accusers were jailed, NY State was condemned to pay a nice sum to Mr. Tompkins and the secretary of Justice started an investigation into WAU activities.

More important than redressing Mr. Tompkins' wounds, the huge resonance of his case combined with hundreds of others that suddenly appeared out from the woodwork, made the Congress promote several laws that restricted and regulated the "sexual harassment" accusations. The burden of proof was reversed and witnesses had to include at least one member of opposite gender of the accuser. In practice, short of violent rape it became almost impossible to accuse somebody of sexual harassment.

The case of Miss Rebecca O'Malley against Miller's Bakery

Eighteen years old Rebecca worked on the cookie line in the 200-year old Miller's Bakery Lakeville branch, Ohio. She was responsible for the maintenance of the oven. Due to gross negligence she caused the loss of a day production of the bakery. Her boss decided to fire her, this being one more in a series of similar events. Miss O'Malley fearing the loss of quite substantial payment invoked a clause in the centennial Bakery labor contract that allowed the female employee to choose between sack and "moderate corporal punishment applied on the employee's backside covered with one thin layer of clothes to protect the modesty". This obscure clause was not even known to Miss O'Malley's boss. Rebecca knew it because she had to do a high school research on the oldest industry in their town. After consulting the company direction and receiving written disclaimers from the culprit and from her widowed mother who also worked at the bakery, her boss—Mr. Arnold Kox—used a strap 12 times to beat Rebecca's well stretched buttocks modestly covered by a pair of cotton panties—the one layer of clothes. Mr. Kox had his secretary Miss Jane White and Rebecca's mother witnessing the session. The beating was painful but not excessive. Rebecca was excused for the rest of the day and she promised that she learned her lesson. This would be the end of this affair if not for the fact that Mr. Kox's secretary was an active member of the local chapter of WAU.

The case was a small sensation in the town, mostly applauded by the residents. Not so by the local chapter of WAU. Under their orientation, encouragement and with legal assistance of WAU lawyers both O'Malley women decided to press charges for indecent assault and battery against Mr. Kox and Miller's Bakery, co-defendants.

This was a gross misjudgment from WAU. At the same time when they were being subpoenaed for the Tompkins case, somebody up in the organization decided to take the lights from that case and tried to play on the hearts of the public by transforming a simple mild spanking of a brat into the drama of a poor widow and her daughter abused at work under the threat of loosing their jobs.

Mr. Miller, the heir of the original founder of the bakery and the sole owner was not amused. He was furious. He decided two things. He would commit all his considerable resources to fight WAU and he would close the Lakeville bakery and transfer it to another city. As the employer of half of the city population he felt betrayed by the people who lived from his family enterprise for generations.

Threatened with massive unemployment the whole city population turned against the alleged victims. The district judge whose wife, daughter and son-in-law worked for the bakery dismissed the case forthright saying that if it was him he would spank both mother and daughter "and without the benefit of the protective layer".

When the two WAU female lawyers tried to protest he judged them in contempt of court and had them marched to jail handcuffed like common criminals, under the applause of whole city population. In the mean time somebody put fire to local WAU chapter headquarters that happened to be located at Miss White's home. This judgment placed another nail in WAU's coffin, although the organization direction seemed blissfully unaware of any danger.

Even more important that the undermining of WAU's moral authority was a direct action placed with the Supreme Court by Mr. Miller questioning if he had the right to punish his female employees corporally as long as it would be consented and would not cause permanent damage.

After a mere three months of debating, the Supreme Court ruled that yes, it would be absolutely legal to use moderate corporal punishment as an alternative to other more drastic methods like payment cuts or job termination. There were some issues about what "moderate" meant and the general consensus was that it meant "no permanent marks". The other issue was about "clothes" but the Supreme ruled that humiliation was an important part—possibly the most important part—of corporal punishment and clothes could be dispensed with completely, as long as it was clearly stated in the labor contract.

The day following the Supreme ruling, there was a public assembly at Miller's Bakery and after informing the citizens of Lakeville that he was reversing his decision—the Bakery would remain open—Mr. Miller himself took his belt to three bare stretched bottoms—strapped side by side over a pastry rack—of both O'Malley women and Mr. Kox's secretary. Oh yes, their punishment could be considered far from moderate and it certainly wasn't consented, but there would be no complaints. For weeks the main conversation subject in the town was which female squealed louder and whose buttocks were better blistered. But the novelty was short-lived. Mr. Miller loved the therapeutic effect of a thrashed bottom—the three women were a model behavior after the thrashing—and a sight of bare-bottomed wailing female receiving a public correction become commonplace in Lakeville.

The source of this story is Storiesonline

To read the complete story you need to be logged in:
Log In or
Register for a Free account (Why register?)

Get No-Registration Temporary Access*

* Allows you 3 stories to read in 24 hours.

Close
 

WARNING! ADULT CONTENT...

Storiesonline is for adult entertainment only. By accessing this site you declare that you are of legal age and that you agree with our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.