Monday, May 16, 2011

Things I Am Truely Sick Of

Women being held responsible for a man's sexual behavior and the underlying contempt and rage hidden behind this belief. Last week we had a New York ultra-Orthodox Jewish newspaper alter a White House photo showing President Obama and Secretary Of State Hilary Clinton during a briefing of the National Security Counsel on the raid at Osama bin Laden's compound in Pakistan. In the photo the paper published Clinton and another women there were removed. Seems the paper never publishes photos of women because it considers any photo of women to be immodest. Code for any photo of a woman is bound to be sexually dangerous.

Then this weekend Dominique Strauss-Kahn, head of the International Monetary Fund, was arrested for sexually assaulting a maid in a hotel in New York. While reading reports of the incident in the New York newspapers I found the comment below at the tabloid paper, The New York Post:
So much for his reputation as 'the great seducer' (he probably made that up himself and spread it around). I mean, he apparently sodomized a hotel maid - how low can you get. And his wife should step up and take some responsibility here - if she were doing her job, he wouldn't have a wandering eye. They're both trash.
Alan London- London, United Kingdom
So, according to Alan, wives are responsible when their husbands commit rape because if they were doing their job (which I assume means satisfying their husband sexually) married men wouldn't rape women at all.

What bull crap. Men are responsible for their own sexual behavior. Trying to shift the blame for a man's criminal sexual behavior onto women is absurd and an insult to the billions of men in the world who seem to be able to go though life without raping anyone and, as we all know, it is dangerous for women,too. Rape victims are usually judged as being responsible for their own rapes. "If she hadn't dressed that way." "If she hadn't gotten that drunk." "If she hadn't made me think she wanted it."

It is time to stop this. It is time to shift the blame back to were it belongs- on the criminal. Not the victim or the wife or the mother or any other woman. Shame on that paper in New York for trying to make women invisible because, in the paper's opinion, they are so sexually dangerous; shame on Alan for being a sexist pig; and shame on society for accepting this perverted view of women as the truth.


Kay Dennison said...

Rape, to put it bluntly, doesn't happen because a guy isn't getting any at home. Rape is about control and power.  I hope the maid files charges against him as well as a civil suit for every nickel he has. I further hope his wife sues him for divorce and gets evety nickel the maid doesn't get.    And yeah, maybe the newspaper should kick into the pots for both woman fpr their irresponsible journalism. 

la pergrina said...

I agree with you, Kay.

Blue Witch said...

I think that there is something very very strange about this case.

How, for instance, did the cops know where he was, and manage to get to him so quickly?  And why was he running naked down a hotel corridor to grab her? (or do they have eg CCTV of that?)

And whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty?  It could all be a fit-up.  Not sayiing it is, just that almost everyone assumes it's not and is baying for his blood.

I also think that, more generally, women 'in the street' (ie on a night out) have to take responsiblity for the 'encouragement' they give to men, and the amount of alcohol/drugs they consume.  A friend of mine who is a psychologist who works interviewing the 'victims' of rape often talks about how clients change their stories having reflected a bit (ie they can't remember what really happened, or change their minds about what happened having sobered up). 

I think there is a huge difference between rape where an unknown bloke jumps a woman in a public place and forces here to have sex at knife-point, and what is euphemistically known as 'date rape'.

la peregrina said...

I understand your view point, BW.  This is getting big play her because  a major part of news reporting here is focused on celebrities of all kind and scandal. Mr. Strauss-Kahn should be very grateful to Arnold Schwarzenegger for taking some of the press heat off of him.  As for the photos of Mr. Strauss-Kahn in handcuffs,  the police make people charged with high profile crimes do what is known as "a perp walk"  after notifying the press what time they are going to move the suspect from jail to court.  Bernie Madoff got the same treatment.  New York City police do it all the time.

How did the police find Strauss-Kahn so fast? Because he left his cell phone behind and then called the hotel about it.  The hotel people told him they would deliver the phone to him if he  would tell them were he was, he did, and the police went to airport to pick him up.

As for the maid he attacked,  I head Strauss-Kahn was scheduled to be out of the room the day before and the maid went into what she thought was an empty room to clean it.  Strauss-Kahn was supposedly hiding naked in the bathroom and rushed out and threw her on the bed and attempted to assault her.  She got away and started running down the hallway (inside the room) to the exit door  but he got in front of her, locked it, and then dragged her into the bathroom where he raped her.   The woman was taken to the hospital with non-life threatening injuries and evidence of sexual assault was collected.  I hear they found DNA evidence under her finger nails.  That would mean she scratched him when she tried to fight him off.

From what I've heard and read about this man, his being changed with rape is not a surprise.  He sounds like a scum bucket who finally got caught.

I am sure there are some women who cry rape when they have not been raped but I believe rape is rape whenever someone is forced to have sex against their will.  A stronger person does not need a weapon to overpower a weaker one.  Rape is rape,  and the perpetrator not having a weapon does not make it any less traumatic.

Blue Witch said...

It's strange, but he's dropped off the radar here - all I heard on the radio news today/TV news this evening was that people are calling for the IMF to sack him.  Makes much more sense now you've filled in the blanks.  Given that NY has lots of prostitutes, one can only wonder why he behaved in such a way when he could have paid for whatever he wanted (and probably have it delivered to his room).

You should meet my friend who works with 'rape' victims in the early stages.  She'd tell you lots of stories - the woman who went to an S&M 'do' and then claimed she'd been forced to have sex for instance.

I personally work on the principal that if you can't be absolutely sure you want sex, you shouldn't put yourself in a position where there can be any misunderstanding.  And that goes for 'rape' within marraige too.  These days, women do have a choice... (and yes, I speak from some experience as I have worked extensively, in the past, with women and children in battered women's refuges).

And I feel very sorry for many young men on charges of 'rape' when you look at what they're accused of 'raping'.  Particularly those of 16 and 17 (ie just over hte age of consent) who are accused of 'raping' (consenting) 14 and 15 year olds (ie just under the age of consent) who look 20+.

Mind you, Ken Clark, one of our cabinet ministers is in deep trouble tonight for saying similar things to what I'm saying...

Blue Witch said...  is a better summary.

Blue Witch said...

In the UK underage sex, where a man is above 16 (the age of consent) and a girl is below 16 (in theory generally 13 or 14, these days, althopugh it's not always been so) counts as rape.  Similarly, where the man is an adult male with severe learning difficulties, led on by a flirty young often inquisitive girl.

I think that perhaps Ken adn I know too much about the subject - him by being a lawyer, me by being involved in supporting victims and assessing fitness to plead in such cases (in  the past - and after lots of training), and by supervising two fellow professionals who work in this area extensively - and are not being understood by the majority (fuelled by the current interviews galore with the mad feminist brigade, who are spouting hte 'rape is a feminist issue' line, over here at least) who are over-emotional about the mind-fuck rape can cause if you let it.

Blue Witch said...

"<span>I cringe whenever I hear of a woman who cried rape when it turns out it wasn't because the next thing you hear is someone's warning that her lie is going to make it harder to believe the next woman who says she was raped. Really???  We don't feel the need to say this after someone lies about being the victim of any other crimes of violence. "</span>

Ahaha!  But, rape is often something that women *do* have control over (by how they act in a given situation, choose to go after dark, behave, dress etc etc) - except in  cases (which I think is what Ken Clark meant) where eg a nurse going home after a late shift is jumped from behind in a car park by a hooded man with a knife.  This is definitely a different degree of the crime known as 'rape', compared to two drunken teenagers where things get a bit out of hand (her having led the lad on all evening, wiggling her plastic boobs under his nose provacatively, and dressed in a near bikini top and knickers showing below her skirt), or so-called rape in marriage.

I know I've been in situations when I was (much!) younger that, if I'd handled them differently could have led to situations that were technically 'rape'.

la pergrina said...

<span>"Ahaha!  But, rape is often something that women *do* have control over (by how they act in a given situation, choose to go after dark, behave, dress etc etc)"</span>

Which brings us back to my point of women being held resposible for men's sexual behavior.  I don't like the way our children are being brought up in such a sexualized socity in which girls and boys are sent the message that a women's sexual attractiveness is the most important function in her life.  They are also sent the message that boys are boys and have no control over their sexual urges. That is a load of crap.  We teach our children to control their urges all the time, from waiting to use a toilet, to not hitting another person in anger, to not taking someones property just because you want it. 

There is one point I haven't' mentioned about rape.  Rape is not about sex at all, it is about abuse of power and using that power to get what you want because you feel are entitled to it.  Yes, girls do have to be careful how they act or dress because of society's view of girls who act or dress in what it considers inappropriate ways, but that does not make them responsible for being raped by some man or boy who buys into that view.  At the end of the day, no still means no.

Blue Witch said...

Ah, but, Dawkin's selfish gene applies here.

And, while the media adore celebs (sex) and people buy into it, this won't change,

la pergrina said...

(Sigh) I know. :(