MTV: Take Jenelle Evans off Teen Mom 2
  • Petitioned Melissa Barreto

This petition was delivered to:

Senior Manager MTV New York
Melissa Barreto
Vice President MTV New York
Janice Gatti
Publicist MTV New York
Tamika Young

MTV: Take Jenelle Evans off Teen Mom 2

    1. Petition by

      K. Marie

      Mangum, OK

Jenelle Evans is a perfect example of so many people hate this show. So much money is being thrown at this girl, for getting pregnant at 16. She does not have custody of her child. She has been in trouble with the law constantly over the years for various things like violence, drugs, and cyber-stalking.

She hops from one guy to the next. She has claimed that every one of her boyfriends have abused her, and then presses charges. Yet she takes them back once she breaks up with her guy of the minute. She has severe mental problems and addiction issues. She is a pathological liar. She puts people private information on twitter to get her followers to harass them. She has been involuntarily committed to a mental institution and she has been proven to be using heroin.

She recently got married to a man she barely knew or had a relationshiop with, and ended up "pregnant" again. Which was most likely faked in order to get drug money. Had she actually been pregnant, whether it ended with an actual miscarriage, or she chose to have an abortion, she has to be the most heartless women in the world. She has no attachment what-so-ever to the children she creates! One day after her supposed miscarriage she's partying, joking, and guy hopping once again.

This is just getting sad MTV. Jenelle is obviously way worse of a trainwreck than Amber of the original Teen Mom cast. She is going to end up dead from an overdose and its going to be the money from MTV that makes it happen. MTV is morally obligated to cut Jenelle off and show that they do not support her behavior.

To:
Melissa Barreto, Senior Manager MTV New York
Janice Gatti, Vice President MTV New York
Tamika Young, Publicist MTV New York
Take Jenelle Evans off Teen Mom 2. We will no longer sit by and watch as you fund this disaster waiting to happen. Her addiction issues, coupled with her mental problems are enough of a reason to take her off the show for good. This fake pregnancy/miscarriage fiasco was the last straw. Cut her off now before it is too late and you have another Amber situation, or much worse.

Sincerely,
[Your name]

Recent signatures

    News

    1. Reached 1,000 signatures

    Supporters

    Reasons for signing

    • Ashley Dalton MCDONOUGH, GA
      • 6 months ago

      This person is destroying her child's life and bringing another one into the world and is being rewarded for it. It has to stop.

      REPORT THIS COMMENT:
    • Tabitha Koutny LEMOORE, CA
      • 6 months ago

      Janelle Evans is not nor has ever been anything close to a mother, therefore having her on the show is ridiculous!

      REPORT THIS COMMENT:
    • Allyson McCullor PROSPER, TX
      • 6 months ago

      Jenelle is NOT a mother and the money and attention she is getting from MTV is only enabling her to hurt herself and others.

      REPORT THIS COMMENT:
    • Chelsea Wybieral PITTSBURGH, PA
      • 6 months ago

      Jenelle is a terrible person who should not be rewarded with more attention.

      REPORT THIS COMMENT:
    • Anita Kanitz STUTTGART, GERMANY
      • 7 months ago

      Stalking & Hate Crimes

      The Predatory Stalker

      For the predatory stalker, stalking is foreplay; the real goal is sexual assault. While they may gain satisfaction from the sense of control and power stalking gives them over the victim, it’s the violent and sexual fantasies that they engage in while researching, planning, and following the victim that really gets them off as they prepare for the ultimate thrill – the sexual assault itself.

      The stalking may have a sadistic quality to it. For example, some predatory stalkers mess with their victim’s minds by leaving subtle clues that they are being followed without revealing their identity. However, even when the victim is unaware that she is being stalked, the perpetrator can still take delight in the details – deciding how long to prolong the suspense, rehearsing the attack, fantasizing about the victim’s response.

      Is the Predatory Stalker Mentally Ill?

      Not in the way most people think. Predatory stalkers are not “love-sick” (i.e., due to unrequited love). Nor are predatory stalkers motivated by strong emotional attachment to their victims. Their stalking does not reflect efforts to establish or maintain close, positive relationships with victims; nor did it reflect separation protest or intense personal distress over the dissolution of a close relationship. Predatory stalkers are more likely to use stalking o gratify their need for dominance and control and, ultimately, to gratify sadistic sexual desires.

      Predatory stalkers have a different set of problems. In comparison to other types of stalkers, predatory stalkers are more likely to have a history of convictions for other sexual offense and to have a diagnosable paraphilia (pattern of deviant sexual arousal), particularly involving sexual sadism. Unlike stalkers who develop delusions that their victim is really in love with them or has committed some imaginary offense, these stalkers rarely have psychotic disorders. They do, however, often have personality disorders.

      Is the Predatory Stalker a Psychopath?

      While most stalkers (or sexual offenders, for that matter) are not psychopaths, it is interesting that those stalkers who do have psychopathic traits tend to exhibit pursuit behaviors that are similar to stalking predators. For instance, research suggests that psychopathy is associated with what could be summarized as “boldness and coldness” in stalkers.

      Predatory stalkers are also most likely to lead double lives, leaving their friends and family stunned and disbelieving when they are finally caught. Night stalker Delroy Grant, for example, who stalked, raped and terrorized retired pensioners for years, was viewed as a friendly, self-sacrificing neighbor who religiously cared for his wife who was paralyzed from the neck down from multiple sclerosis. Midwestern “Mall Rapist” James Perry stalked young girls in the malls and shopping center parking lots, was a popular member of his suburban community, where he lived with his wife and two young children.

      The Bottom Line

      All stalkers have the potential for violence although, fortunately, few actually commit it. Predatory stalkers, however, are a particularly dangerous breed. Cold and calculating, on the surface they are often able to maintain a façade as a devoted husband, caring professional or kind-hearted neighbor. Underneath, though, lurks an underbelly of twisted sexual desires and predatory violence.

      Gang stalking is surveillance and harassment of a designated target, by stalkers who are members of groups, which are networked.

      Gang stalking has three essential elements:

      The harassment is done by a substantial number of people, not by an obsessed single stalker, nor by helpers who are recruited by an obsessed single stalker.

      The group members are given the name of the target and/or have the target identified for them. They rarely know the target beforehand.

      Organized stalking community groups are tightly networked with stalking groups in other communities.

      You can think of gang stalking as mobbing which is extended to all aspects of your life, so that you can never escape some degree of harassment.

      The harassment is often carried out in a way to blame the victim for the harassment. This is called victim blaming.

      There are strong hints that the gang stalkers are a satanist cult. Currently we can’t prove that. But, clearly, there’s more that we don’t know yet.

      The procedure:

      They choose more or less randomly a person.

      They isolate him from the people that he knew by making him appear crazy.

      He gathers new suspect people around him.

      All these people are put under investigation.

      Wherever the suspect people go, the army recruits snitches. They form a large network that collects information. This can be stimulated by means of quota and bonuses for writing reports.

      Where it goes from here depends on the circumstances:

      Normally it goes on forever.

      If the suspect people cause a financial loss for the government, especially when there’s much drug related crime, then they are quickly arrested.

      If the suspect people appear to be an apolitical network then they are dismantled by monitoring and analyzing their cell phone use: the army knows where they are when they call each other. In this way they dismantled a gang stalking network in Louvain-la-Neuve (which counts 10,000 citizens) in Belgium. That’s to the southeast of Brussels. The members were all over the city. There was 50 m between them.

      If the victim becomes aware of the harassment then he will resist. Generally, this is the situation of people who out themselves as a targeted individual. Then the goal changes: the victim has to be removed as quickly as possible from society so he can’t spread what he knows:

      prison,

      bedlam,

      forced suicide,

      murder. In this case, they will first toy some time with the victim to make him fear for his life. Then they suddenly kill him.

      Within the realm of criminal justice and psychology, Dr. Sinclair primarily focuses on research within two topics: stalking and hate crimes. Both of these interests grew out of initial research interests in violence the primarily targets women (e.g., rape, battering). However, it is on these two topics that she presently focuses.

      Stalking Research

      Her stalking research focuses on three main questions:

      1) What are the predictors of stalking behavior?

      2) What are people’s perceptions – including those of legal agents – of stalking?

      3) How does our culture (e.g., media, social norms) contribute to both the perceptions and the behavior?

      For example, in a recent experiment, they found that rejection – in particular rejection that threatens one’s positive self-image (i.e., by blaming the rejected person for why the relationship is ending) – can trigger stalking behavior especially when one has been depleted of self-regulation resources (their ability to engage in self-control). In contrast, a rejection that aims to “let the person down easy” (e.g., “it’s not you, it’s me”) is less likely to trigger aggressive responses to a relationship breakup.

      Also notable, individual difference variables, such as being high in Likelihood to Stalk or Stalking Myth Endorsement (both scales we have developed), can exacerbate reactions to ego-threatening rejection.

      In other research, Dr. Sinclair and her team have been engaging in an extensive Media Coding project to examine how the media portrays unwanted relationship pursuits. They find that, generally, the media provides a script of persistence in the face of rejection. Further, persistence is often portrayed as positive, successful, amusing, and secretly what the love interest really wants (despite what s/he says) – especially when the pursuer is male. Our next step is to examine what impact these pervasive media messages have on actual stalking behaviors and perceptions of stalking cases.

      Publications of interest:

      Sinclair, H. C. (forthcoming). Courtship in the Courts: Stalking and the cultural construction of romance. Blackwell-Wiley.

      Sinclair, H. C., Collier, K. E., & Sheridan, L. E. (forthcoming). A tangled web: Social network involvement in stalking incidents.

      Sinclair, H. C. & MacArthur, J. R. (forthcoming). Scripting stalking: The romantic comedy of popular media portrayals of unwanted pursuits.

      Ladney, R. T., Sinclair, H. C., & Lyndon, A. (under review). Self regulation and rejection: Effects on Obsessive Relational Intrusion.

      Sinclair, H. C. & Lyndon, A. (under review). Stalking in the courts: An archival examination of legal outcomes in stalking cases.

      Sinclair, H. C. (2010). Stalking myth-attributions: Examining the role of individual and contextual variables on judgments of unwanted pursuit scenarios. Sex Roles.

      Williams, S, Frieze, I. H., & Sinclair, H. C. (2007). Stalking and intimate violence. In J. Hamel & T. Nicholls (Eds.), Family Therapy for Domestic Violence: A practitioner’s guide to gender-inclusive research and treatment (pp. 109-123). New York: Springer Publishing Company.

      Sinclair, H. C. & Frieze, I. H. (2005). When courtship persistence becomes intrusive pursuit: A comparison of rejecter and pursuer perspectives of unrequited attraction. Sex Roles, 52, 839-852.

      Sinclair, H. C. & Frieze, I. H. (2000). Initial courtship behavior and stalking: How should we draw the line? Violence and Victims, 15(1), 23-40.

      Hate Crime Research

      Dr. Sinclair’s hate crimes research has primarily focused on:

      1) What attitudes do people hold about hate crime policy?

      2) Why is there so much difficulty in applying the hate crime label to instances of gender-motivated bias crime?

      This domain of research is a newer avenue. Thus far, they have primarily focused on the difficulty people have with seeing any prejudicial motives as underlying crime against women. The goal of the research is to find what factors inhibit labeling of gender-motivated hate crimes. For example, the 2009 shooting of multiple women in Bridgeville, PA by George Sodini was not labeled a hate crime by many, and yet, Sodini was known for his hatred of women and had the attack targeted any other demographic (e.g., race, sexual orientation, religion), there wouldn’t have been any hesitation to applying the hate crime label. They apply the Prototype Model to potentially explain the lack of clarity surrounding gender-motivated bias crimes.

      REPORT THIS COMMENT:

    Develop your own tools to win.

    Use the Change.org API to develop your own organizing tools. Find out how to get started.