Killing dogs or killing wives, which is punished?

From MakeThemAccountable.com

PUMMELING MAMA
By David Podvin

The police officer put a gun to the driver's head and demanded that she orally copulate him. To avoid being murdered she complied, after which he provided the choice of victimized silence or fatal reprisal. The woman tempted fate by contacting the district attorney, who used DNA testing to contradict the officer's denial that any sexual contact had occurred. During the prosecution's case the accused was proven to have told one self-incriminating lie after another. The defense attorney then played a familiar trump card, labeling the victim a woman of easy virtue “with whom sex was always an implied option”. It took the jury of eleven males and a female less than two hours to acquit.

That scenario recently played out in California. Half a planet away, a young lady in Pakistan was being accused of premarital fornication. Her religiously conservative family reported the offense to the authorities, who decreed that she must be appropriately chastened. The terrified woman was dragged screaming into the village square, whereupon townspeople threw rocks until she could scream no more. The purification process included burning her battered corpse and scattering the ashes to the winds. Having cast out the evil in their midst, the people of the community – including the man with whom she had fornicated – could now resume leading their virtuous lives.

It is open season on females, the only hunting season that begins each January first and concludes six days after Christmas. This ancient blood sport is a global phenomenon that transcends ethnic and religious differences. Jamaican law does not prohibit marital rape, incest or sexual harassment. In Hungary and Nigeria, rape is ostensibly illegal but rarely prosecuted. Women of India who report being sexually assaulted are often killed for having scandalized society. In England, more than a thousand women are annually maimed or slain when they reject arranged marriages. Across the Islamic world, one hundred million females have been genitally mutilated. Throughout China, countless newborn girls are drowned so that the one child quota can be filled by boys.

And then there is the Land of the Free, where the Justice Department has documented that an American woman is raped every two minutes. Fewer than half of victims report the crime because they anticipate being raped again, this time figuratively (but no less painfully) by a legal system that assumes women must have been “asking for it”…

Click here to read more of this important essay.

Carolyn Kay
MakeThemAccountable.com

The excerpt above is posted with the full knowledge and permission, even encouragement, of the author, who wants his essays to be read by as many people as possible.

(Male) violence against women needs to be at the top of the list of issues for progressives/liberals - it is the mechanism by which half of the human population is controlled and subjugated by the other half, and until that slavery ends, there can be no peace, no justice, no equality, on this planet.

Off to the greatest page with you!

If we can, through simple hectoring, make smoking the sin of the century, we can certainly rain down some shit on people who abuse one half of our population.

but very much something I needed to read. Thanks.

Had he been arrested & charged with rape, the "innocent until proven guilty" banner would be hung while his accuser was dragged through the mud. As it is, he is nearly universally condemned. Where are the IUPGs now?

It's been this way since Fatty Arbuckle. Little has changed.

Rape seems to be the only crime where the victim is routinely accused of the crime.

And yet, people deny that sexism is a widespread problem, even among so-called progressives.

THAT's the salient point and what's sad...

Let's just kill them all based on the first words out of a woman's mouth, right?

Just look at how many people immediately rally around any guy who's accused.

Just look at how far so many people go to smear any woman who dares to make an accusation. In no other crime does the victim get grilled on what she was wearing, and about her past sex life. Nobody goes digging into HIS past sex life.

Rape is one of the most unreported crimes because women know they're going to get bashed and accused and harassed if they make an accusation. The vast majority of rapists never get any punishment at all.

Is that the way you like it? Should all rapists get away scott-free because you think women are liars?
x(

In a more conservative environment, like my home state or on a right-wing board, you'll find the alleged victim more immediately being blamed and scrutinized while the accused is more blindly supported.

In a more liberal state, like my former home state, or on a left-wing board, you'll find that the accused is more immediately being crucified and assumed guilty while the alleged victim is more blindly supported.

And yet I've known women who were trashed, smeared, and harassed. I'm known far more who never said anything because they were justifiably afraid of how they would be treated.

I don't know where these liberal places are where you claim that accused rapists are presumed guilty. I've seen accused rapists in college have parties thrown in their honor to show support.

Excellent posts. :hi:

:hi:

I believe that it depends on how far a community will go - offline and online - to value its male group/population. Like Gallagher the comedian had said when complaining about hair loss: shit, it was gray, but it was a hair.

Several years ago, I read that a neighborhood in my home town had worked to rid its community of drugs and crime. They were winning and no doubt empowered. Then they were notified that HIGH LEVEL SEX OFFENDERS were going to be housed in their neighborhood because the savages' families wanted nothing to do with them, duh. Yes, in a liberal state and community.

the truth?

That's fucking sick and blatent sexism, not to mention against everything our constitution and law is based on.

Fuckin sick...

But of course, you won't see it that way...

However, I do agree with the OP on how some are quick to excuse/acquit depending on the subject and circumstances - only I don't agree at all with your inherent BIASES...

Anyone who has known or worked with rape survivors knows that it's the rapists who lie. Women get bashed for daring to tell the truth.

Your attitude is what makes it impossible for women to speak up about rape, because you assume the women are guilty. Enabling rapists is sick shit.

sometimes accused rapists lie, because they're guilty. But sometimes alleged rape victims lie as well.

It's a tragic world we live in, but its not as simple as "woman get bashed for telling the truth." As heartbreaking as it is, it is absolutely true that there are cases where a person lies about being a victim.

And I have the case files to prove it. :(

When 1:3 women are being raped and sexually assaulted, and a miniscule number of rapists ever end up in jail, clearly it's not the women who are doing the vast majority of the lying.

It's the fox news idea of fair and balanced. Present 1 out of several thousand men who lies and says he didn't rape her. Present 1 woman who lied about getting raped. There, see, both sides lie. The problem must be equally bad on both sides.

It's shit like this that keeps women from reporting rapes and sexual assaults.

If you can see past your blind emotional response for a second... Regardless of the proportion, the fact that it does happen means that if I am to do my job fairly, and justly then I can't like my own personal biases affect my judgment. That means, I have to look at the evidence and keep an open mind to the reality that sometimes people in all situations lie.

You are talking about a very true principle that it is absolutely necessary not to treat an alleged victim like a liar. You don't want in and assume they are telling a lie until you can prove the truth. That *IS* a mistake, and goes totally against what we know to be statistically true.

But at the same time, you sound just as blind with your own rhetoric, where you come of sounding like an all or nothing thinker. I know you haven't said these words, but your posts are inflammatory because they give the impression that you are saying: the person accused is always guilt and always given a pass by the public and the accuser is always telling the truth and always persecuted by the public. That's just simply untrue. It is not "always" that way. That is a ridiculous oversimplification of a very complicated matter.

The best motto someone can have dealing with these kinds of cases is: trust but verify. So it is important that you create an atmosphere of trust and belief for a potential victim, while at the same time you do all of the clinical and investigatory work possibly to verify the legitimacy and accuracy of their story.

Trust but verify. And sometimes in that verification process, as sad as this is, it turns out that a person making an accusation isn't telling the truth. The fact that this is the case at all means we who are interested in fairness and justice MUST keep our minds open and free from immediately jumping to all or nothing conclusions like you have been doing throughout this thread.

Trust but verify. I treat a person claiming to be the victim of a crime like a victim of a crime, giving them all the help and support I can. At the same time, it is my job and duty to keep enough objectivity to verify the story and the facts, remembering that sometimes things are not as they appear.

It's that simple.

:shrug:

ALL women tell the truth and ALL men accused are automatically guilty. That's what that MANHATER says...

then you need to double check.

Nobody is saying that the men always lie. We're saying that you rape enablers are always accusing the women of lying as a first, knee-jerk reaction. More effort goes into accusing the victim than ever goes into investigating or preventing rape.

The attitude is, "Let's accept that rape occassionally happens, in theory, but in practice let's attack the women for claiming they were raped."

I've never seen you post anything on any rape thread that wasn't an attack on women. You're repeatedly accusing women of being liars who are out to get innocent men. What exactly is your deal?

I've never stated that all rapists lie - YOU are unsuccessfully trying to put YOUR bullshit biases into my mouth...

YOUR attitude is causing needless PERSECUTION OF INNOCENT MEN. PERIOD.

YOU prove my point.

I'm sick and tired of the MAN HATING WOMEN on this supposedly progressive board...

Absolutely sickening...

and accuse women of lying. :eyes:

I don't accuse all men of lying. So you're projecting again.

I simply say that the knee jerk effort to accuse the woman before bothering to investigate the guy shows that our society is sick and condones rape. There is always more effort to accuse the women, and effort to demand that the guy is innocent. That is far different than simply looking for the truth.

been at the receiving end of violence from the man in their life.

It cuts across every socio-economic and cultural demographic.

It's a tough time to be female, that's for sure.

MKJ

I was amazed how many women I knew approached me to talk about having been raped or sexually assaulted. I guess I became someone they could safely talk to, and a lot of them needed someone to talk to. It was a horrifying eye-opener.

I never, ever would have imagined how common rape and sexual assault was until so many women let me know. :cry:

:hug:

MKJ

:hug: :yourock:

and yet in some places, such as the US, it's better than it has ever been. A few short decades ago, a woman whose husband beat her was just SOL.

Why is domestic violence only considered a misdemeanor esp. since its the number one cause of violent death in women?
Every 15 seconds some woman is battered in this country and over 1500 a year average die from domestic violence a year, I believe. More women have been killed by domestic violence since the Iraq war started than Americans who have died from that war yet its rare to hear anything about this
in the media.
Thank you for posting.

It is one of the major mechanisms for enforcing society's prejudices. You can tell who society degrades and devalues by looking at who gets criminalized, and who goes free.
:(

As it is only a small part of the article - less than 2 sentences!

And all it seems to be decrying is that PeTA did its job well.

Obviously both crimes need to be addressed but the fact is that millions of animals are brutalized every day and very few people are held accountable, and the prosecution of those crimes does nothing to detract from prosecuting crimes against humans. In fact, raising outrage and awareness of any kind of violence helps us all.

For every Michael Vick and resulting brouhaha, there are untold other cases of animal cruelty that go unnoticed or unprosecuted because "it's just an animal". The links between cruelty to animals and violence towards humans are well known - ask at any battered women's shelter! So to drag this one case into some kind of argument about why violence against women is tolerated is ridiculous. The probem is not that PeTA did a good job on this one. The problem is that people and law enforcement aren't doing a good enough job for women.

I thought, "Oh Christ!, here we go again, another tiresome diatribe about people who can somehow have opinions on more than one issue at a time."

It was a relief to see your post. You made the case better than I could.

had been raped (1 every 2 minutes). Fucking pathetic country we live in. I shudder...absolutely shudder to think of what that number is around the world, as I know we don't have it the worst.

Too much of society revolves around some guy's dick and sense of power.

:(

She was a sex worker out west, and was stopped by a sheriff's deputy, who demanded oral sex. When he prepared for it, she bit him where it counted, then dared him to show it to his superior officer and tell him she wasn't coerced. She was let go. Brave lady is all I can say.

Doesn't Ron Goldman's name ring a bell? Didn't seem to make any difference in the verdict, though.

That was the impression I got, anyway.

My point is, the author is using OJ's case as some sort of example of courts being callous toward female victims. Yet OJ was also accused of killing a male, Ron Goldman. And OJ's jury consisted of 10 females, and only 2 males.

And the deaths of men considered to be effeminate are also not taken seriously enough.

As far as women being on the jury goes - women are also affected by our misogynist culture, sadly.

for being there when O.J. came to kill Nicole.

not specifically because she's a woman, although the killing did happen because she's a woman.

If a very stereotypically masculine man had been there, would things have been different? I honestly have no idea.

Anyway, I have no idea even how "effeminate" he was, I was just explaining the point of the previous post for the person who didn't understand why it was relevant.

... make the verdict even more of a travesty.

Carolyn Kay
MakeThemAccountable.com

society has very, very similar underpinnings to the islamic fundamentalist societies on this subject.

The number of males who have "woman issues" for who-knows-what psychobabble reasons is appalling. It is so large that that jury would acquit in under two hours!

I was on a jury in a rape case and dealt first-hand with two real hardcases and almost all borderline. The hardcases just plain refused to accept that the young woman had been assaulted. It just HAD to be her fault. I told all the borderlines that in that case we were going to live in that cheap hotel the rest of our natural lives. We ended up a hung jury.

After the jury was dismissed we were told by the DA that the scumbag had just been released after a 5-year prison term - for rape.

The DA, IMO opinion, presented an uninspired case, while the defense did all the usual crap, accusing her of being witchy woman or something. You'd think she dragged him into the apartment and assaulted him. How that gave HER back injuries that had her in a body cast, I don't know.

The judge instructed the jury in terms that seemed really intimidating AGAINST conviction - repeated several of times how "if you doubt... you must acquit." Nothing about having a responsibility to see justice done or anything like that. The message seemed like "we had to conduct this case because of the stupid laws, but now its time to make it go away."

I still feel guilty - 20 years later, that we let that woman down.

my jury was eight females; one of the "hardcases" was female. Yes, in my post I mentioned men with mommy issues, but there is no question it is societal. Many, many women are "enablers."

IMO, that comes from the male-dominance that has convinced them it SHOULD be that way. They are the Uncle Toms. But Uncle Tom was not beating slaves.

As to the OJ thing - there are indications that race played a much bigger role than any gender bias or lack thereof.

not caring about female victims played a role in OJ's case. As for women getting tougher sentences for killing their husbands compared to men who kill their wives-well, Scott Peterson got the death penalty, and pastor's wife who used the abuse defense should be getting out pretty soon, maybe after a couple of months.

This is the proof I needed that violence against women is no longer an issue.










:sarcasm: should probably be addended. MKJ

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence

"Anecdotal evidence is not necessarily typical; statistical evidence can more accurately determine how typical something is."

Pulling out a couple of anecdotes does not refute the more powerful evidence of what typically happens.

and you seem to have no problem with that. Do you think OJ's case is typical?

the job they were supposed to do, without any bias?

As for Scott Peterson and the pastor's wife (notice how she doesn't have a name, is defined only as "the pastor's wife"), there was no evidence Peterson's wife abused him. He had a mistress and evidently decided he wanted to get rid of his pregnant wife.

The attorneys for the pastor's wife were successful in proving she had been abused and that led her to kill her husband, in fear of being killed by him.

Killing for your convenience is a lot different from killing because you fear for your life, possibly the lives of your children.

You seem to be in denial that some men are rapists, abusers, and murderers. Not all men, but quite a few of them.

Men's War against Women is continuing

so men are still "winning."

Men cannot "win" unless women are free to be "winners" as well.

I'm a guy, and I don't feel like I'm a winner. I'm sorry, I should have put "winning" in quotes.

I just went back and corrected that.

I, as a man, also feel I am no "winner" in the current staus quo.

there are apparently no consequences :sarcasm:

:kick:

OF COURSE, HUMAN LIFE IS MORE PRECIOUS THAN THAT OF A DOG!!!! BUT why make this a choice??

I appreciate your posting this and bringing some much needed attention to such an insightful and moving article, but I do not like the title of your post.

There are those of us who have spoken out over and over against the ghastly treatment of women worldwide. These violent crimes should be punished to the fullest. And the rightwing attitudes of many cultures/subcultures should change regarding women.

The misogynists are every where and disrespect engenders the violence. (And disingenuousness of a few DU males on this subject has made me quite angry at times.)

Again, please don't make this about a choice. It's the equivalent of saying should we either stop the Iraq war or stop poverty.
BOTH are important. One more so than the other, but it is NOT about a choice.

Dick Cheney or a seeing eye dog; whose life contributes more of value to the world?

But aside from that, I very much agree with the rest of your post. I nearly passed by this thread because I thought it was another bit of "we shouldn't care about animal cruelty because people are more important" bullshit. Others may have done so, which is a shame because the issue of violence against women is very serious and needs to be addressed more by the left.

Has to do with a sick strain of sociopathy that encourages men (and yes, the majority of perps are men, though some women too) to value no life but their own and see the other people and beings around them as objects that they can abuse with impunity and kill when they're done with them.

Sure, insert platitude here about how OF COURSE a human life is more important than an animal's, blah blah blah, but frankly for me if it comes down to a life-or-death choice between a dog and a rapist, I'll pick the dog every time.

"Feminist groups do not function at all. Patrica Ireland is president of the National Organization For Women, a group that theoretically promotes the cause of women’s rights. The operative word is “theoretically”. Ireland is a multiculturalist, as opposed to being a feminist (the two are mutually exclusive). She would not condemn Mister Simpson for decapitating Nicole because multiculturalism subordinates ethics to ethnicity. The day after the criminal jury endorsed Simpson’s murder of his ex-wife, NOW’s Los Angeles chapter angrily declared the issue was “not about racism but about violence against women.” Ireland immediately condemned her subordinates for being “racially insensitive” and she forbid “any further public statements that clearly violate NOW’s commitment to stopping racism.” NOW’s commitment to “stopping racism” negated its commitment to stopping gynocide. As with virtually all self-styled women’s rights leaders, Ireland is a politically correct reprobate whose moral cowardice exacerbates female suffering."


I gave up on most of the professional feminists long ago but I still found this a bit surprising.