Tag Archives: crime

Liberal = incontinent

Standard

(access to) pornography has changed the landscape of adolescence beyond all recognition

I don’t quite buy that. The (intellectual) stumbling block I’ve always found with critics – mainstream critics, that is – of porn is the notion that it depraves and corrupts. I’ve read/viewed enough porn over my (near) 42 years to realise that it fairly represents my sexuality. Nonetheless, I’ve never felt license to violate human bodies to the extent that the GP in the above article describes. And what is this thing with anal sex anyway…

‘…in-vaginal ejaculation is so novel it occupies its own, minority-interest ‘kink’ category (‘creampie‘, if you’re interested): the converse ubiquity of ejaculation on faces and/or breasts (as far as possible from the vagina, note) and anal sex‘.

Male sexuality is a very simple thing. We find an opening; we insert; we thrust unto orgasm. That’s pretty much the definition of male. Which is not to say we’re not capable of more, or different, simply that this underlies more and different: fires it, motivates it. We simply have to choose better: to choose ways of expressing our sexuality that are less damaging; or not damaging at all.We need to reject the – currently trending – mode of liberalism that promotes ‘anything goes’; that damages both our bodies and our partners’ bodies; our minds and theirs.

Please share this post, or the above article. When we’re hurting others, and diminishing ourselves just to feel/be ‘normal something’s gone badly awry.

We need to choose better, because we can…

Advertisements

Les Miserables

Standard

‘These are very unusual offences,’ Lord Bannatyne said during sentencing. ‘The case is clearly an exceptional one.

Well, sort of… sexual assaults committed by females are much the exception than the rule. But Bannatyne‘s judgement had little to to with her sex, and everything to do with her gender: her apprehension and his perception thereof…

The admission of Gender Identity Disorder by Bannatyne as a mitigating factor raises a question: does he mean to imply that because Wilson believed herself to be male her actions were more acceptable, by dint of being stereotypically ‘male’ actions? He said of her disorder, ‘I accept that this leads you to genuinely feel you are male rather than female. This significantly lowers your culpability.’ In other words, males are not culpable – or significantly less so – for their violent actions, in this case sexual assault and fraud.

The implications of such judgements are worrying, as much for what they appear to say about the victims as the perpetrators: that men (including Trans*men) should expect to be excused from the consequences of their actions by dint of being (or believing themselves) male; that females should expect to be victimized and bear those consequences.
Males are more typically violent, but male and violent are not synonyms, any more than female and victim are. The condition of men under patriarchy simply affords them access to a wider choice of victims; and such conditions conspire to protect them from the consequences to themselves of their actions. The consequences for their victims are not held to be terribly significant, if at all, and both theirs and the perpetrators’ debasements are equally feted as natural and desirable. When females do engage in violent abuse – which of course they do, as these cases show – they invariably victimize women or girls less enfranchised than themselves, children; or themselves. But they’re punished twice – think Myra Hindley, Rose West – both for their violence and for being ‘aberrant’ females. As atypical as these cases are, it’s striking how the words and decisions of the presiding judges are seen to reinforce gendered codes of behaviour rather than treat the protagonists as individuals. Wilson was convicted as a female, but punished as a male: i.e. barely (though she’ll no doubt continue to suffer psychological issues, possibly pose a risk to other girls) whilst Adie has been left – all too typically – high and dry.
Surely what matters here is the HUMAN trauma inflicted upon one HUMAN by another HUMAN. Physical assault hurts. Deception hurts. Both physically and psychologically such trauma has been shown throughout history to have repercussions for years afterward. That these girls suffered sexual violence at the hands of other women does little to diminish those repercussions, excepting the risk of pregnancy that might arise in instances of male rape. Adie was nonetheless hurt. That is the point. And the law, in its capacity as gender policeman, has seen fit to hurt her again.
The mutability of male and female behaviours is a matter for debate; though in the light of opportunities created for women by the actions of suffragettes and others since, it’s notable that ambitious females haven’t been shy of stepping up to the plate in the business and political worlds, albeit by co-opting ‘masculine’ values to an extent, and in spite of often violent backlash and having to carry the ‘second shift’ in the home. In different ways, women’s successes and failures within an andro-centric (and hetero-normative) system teach us lessons about the false norms – of both sex and gender – on which that system is founded.  If women have shown themselves able to adapt to the – frankly, often unreasonable – demands of the masculine world and still thrive, or at least survive….
Perhaps the bigger lesson here is that, far from trotting out ‘male’ (masculine) as a handy ‘get out clause’ for female bad behaviour; we might hold up ‘female’ as a standard to aspire to for – rather more often – badly-behaved males.
Maybe we should look for the strength inherent in our sex, rather than play to the weakness enforced by gender.

Integrity: the power of independent action

Standard

An article in today’s Independent newspaper by columnist Jasmin Alibhai-Brown reveals how an anonymous letter sent to her by one of TV presenter Stuart Hall‘s child victims was instrumental in securing his recent conviction for the sexual abuse of young girls. (This article contains upsetting details of sex abuse.)

Whilst recently re-watching TV footage of Mark Williams-Thomas‘ ITV ‘Exposed’ documentaries and the subsequent Panorama episode, I was once again struck by a certain pattern of behaviour: how many players in the Savile scandal – over the course of four decades – visibly squirmed whilst trying to explain how they managed to ignore both persistent rumours, first-hand witnesses and their gut instincts about Savile’s violent, predatory tendencies. To varying degrees they knew, but did nothing…

How refreshing then, to see someone with a moderate level of media clout actually take up the baton and, like Williams-Thomas, use her position for the greater good. Reporting the – anonymous – complaint may have come to naught, she may not have been believed; but she listened to her conscience and took the chance and as a result a dangerous criminal has been apprehended. Unlike Savile he is still alive to face punishment.

Some, including the Mirror‘s FleetStreetFox have argued against the publicising of investigations into public figures accused of historic offences, citing the old saw of damaged reputations. The conviction of serial offenders such as Hall firmly refutes this position. Hall initially feigned innocence and vowed to fight the allegations; but publicity surrounding his case encouraged fresh witnesses to come forward and in the face of overwhelming evidence he capitulated and pled guilty.

There’s a lesson here: honesty, integrity and co-operation bring results. The old boys network, built on career-insecurity and awe that protected the likes of Savile is not insurmountable. Two days ago it was announced that Yewtree detectives will fly to Sydney, Australia to interview a 43 year-old witness to improper conduct on the part of Rolf Harris back in the ’90s. Like so many witnesses to such crimes, her fear of not being believed was an overwhelming factor in her failure to come forward previously. This is what hierarchy, what patriarchy does: it creates artificial power structures where the word of one person is worth less than that of another; where concealment of wrongdoing, of criminality is a surer way of maintaining an illusion of personal, or career safety than is honesty.

The cost to our individual and collective conscience, integrity and health is high, however. I hope Savile‘s – on occasion, inadvertant or naive – colluders, as well as his victims can live with that. I suspect both will continue to be troubled.

Alibhai-Brown has shown herself to be a woman of integrity; and thru her example, several of Hall‘s victims are, one hopes, on the road to regaining theirs.

Late contender in the hate Olympics is a long shot

Standard

A few years ago I was dating a woman who had fled her hometown to escape a violent partner. When she mustered the courage to finally leave him following his years-long campaign of manipulation, harrassment and bullying he broke into her house and raped her at knifepoint whilst her kids slept in the next room.

Her story is far from uncommon: such crime is epidemic and endemic: and if it isn’t hate crime I don’t know what is.

So whilst I applaud the initiative on the part of Greater Manchester Police to extend their definition of hate crimes to ‘subcultures’ in a bid to raise awareness of violence targeting these groups, it seems extraordinary that crimes against women aren’t included in hate crime legislation.

Women have been and continue to be the #1 targets for bigotry. As a class they’re they’ve been perenially marginalized, undervalued and violated, worldwide and throughout human history. There are no ‘battered Blacks’ shelters’; no history of ‘Gay genital mutilation’. An incarcerated (for gynocide) biological non-female can sue for the ‘right’ to cosmetic surgery in a country that still denies born (XX) females reproductive autonomy as often as not.

They’re half the world population: more than half, actually, even though statistically, many more males are born year-on-year; mostly because our relative biological frailty and reckless behaviour proves reliably lethal, to us even more than them.

Being diagnosed XX can be a death sentence even whilst still in the womb; can connote second-class citizenship from the moment of birth; gives licence for authorities to mutilate genitals and pay less for more work. If you’re female and the victim of crime, good luck finding justice…

It’s not that Goths and Metallers don’t deserve their justice, of course they do. I was one of the latter and suffered for it during school. Sophie Lancaster paid the ultimate price in a sickening attack that shames us all; as did Steven Lawrence. But lets not forget that the Greater Manchester Police force (that) made its first ‘anti-Emo’ arrest within a fortnight of the new policy is the same force that failed for ten years to break a child sex ring for fear of being perceived racist; ten years in which dozens of girls suffered horrific, life-altering violence for the gratification of men. As I commented in a previous post ‘the integrity (and safety) of females is valued as subordinate to the integrity of ‘culture’’, cultures whose core meaning and values that are and always have been male-defined.

Detractors of ‘hate crime’ legislation and policy – usually members of privileged groups such as men and the middle-class – are right in the sense that singling out violence and discrimination against particular groups as especially serious is unproductive and fails to deal with root causes. Murder is murder; rape is rape; bullying is bullying; wage discrimination is wage discrimination. But their diagnosis of ‘political correctness gone mad’ is wrong.

Misogyny is the root predjudice; the foundation stone of hierarchy in a patriarchal system that is universal across cultures the world over. In this context, the failure to explicitly confront anti-female discrimination thru ‘hate’ legislation is disingenuous at best; scandalous at worst.

Aside

A post that women and men everywhere should take the time to read – the public response of Indians in the wake of a 23 year-old student’s rape and murder can be an inspiration to many across the world…

Olio talk by Suchitra Kaushiva

 

So then, what is it about this 23 year-old girl who raised the conscience of India on December 16, 2012?

Was it the barbaric way in which she met her end?

Was she the last straw that broke the back of an overladen camel?

Was it her young age, her thwarted ambitions and aspirations, or her
parents’ unfulfilled hopes, dreams and expectations?

Was it her last wish, to be able to survive and make it out of her nightmarish ordeal?

All the above perhaps, and maybe just something more.

View original post 869 more words

Aside

In response to the Huffington‘s latest attempt to obfuscate and trivialize sex-crime*, a survivor of teenage abuse shares her heartbreaking story

*See also

If you were abused by Jimmy Savile, maybe you should keep it to yourself, and

It is wrong to say ‘sex without consent is rape’

The Post’s traumatic sex disorder