Well, this is just pathetic.
Apparently 40 percent of female soldiers in hospitals report being sexually assaulted. And, of course, a military doctor subpoenaed in the case was ordered not to show up to a hearing. Yet the Army is claiming they take sexual assault claims seriously? Something doesn't add up there.
Showing posts with label violence against women. Show all posts
Showing posts with label violence against women. Show all posts
Thursday, July 31, 2008
One More Reason To Never Join The Military.
Friday, May 23, 2008
Go Whatever-Wash-U's-Mascot-Is
So when Washington University announced it was giving an honorary degree to anti-feminist, anti-woman, right-wing assface Phyllis Schlafly, students and faculty were (rightfully) horrified. There are several Facebook groups against the degree and there was lots of debate on how to go about opposing her.
About 75% of the 2800-person graduating class plus several faculty members stood up and turned their backs while she was being given her degree (got that little fact from Feministing). Ignore Wolf Blitzer's condescending douche-y "What's the controversy this time? [sigh]" comment and focus on the story.
("A bunch of losers"? Stay classy, Phyllis Schlafly)
Also, photos.
Isn't accepting an honorary degree (and having her own Bachelor's and law degrees) hypocritical of her? She thinks women should stay out of the workforce and be at home, why isn't she leading by example? She should have refused her degree on the grounds that she doesn't want to be treated like a man.
In case you missed it, this is a woman who said it's perfectly acceptable for a man to rape his wife.
Saturday, April 5, 2008
You Weren't Mugged, You Just Gave Away Your Belongings
A little something to make you want to stab something/one:
A court in Nebraska has denied an appeal against a woman who contested a judge's move to ban the word "rape" from a rape trial.
The initial ban happened last year when Pamir Safi was on trial for raping Tory Bowen. The judge banned the use of the words "rape," "sexual assault," "victim," or "sexual assault kit." The only words allowed in describing the incident are "sex" and "intercourse."
The judge's reason? That "rape" is not legally neutral, where "sex" or "intercourse" are. So, if you are ever robbed, don't say "I was robbed" say "I gave my wallet to that man." If at a murder trial, only say "he died" not "he was shot in the forehead." Get the point?
Bowen (the victim) immediately refused to abide by the ban, saying "I refuse to call it sex, or any other word that I'm supposed to say, encouraged to say on the stand, because to me that's committing perjury. What happened to me was rape, it was not sex."
The initial trial resulted in a hung jury, and the second was declared a mistrial before it even started, under the guise that jurors would be biased because of media coverage. Which is a huge disappointment, because this woman deserves to see justice for what happened to her.
And Dahlia Lithwick of Slate couldn't have said it better when she said
The fact that judges are not rushing to ban similarly conclusory legal language from trial testimony—presumably one can still say murder or embezzlement on the stand—reflects not just the fraught nature of language but also the fraught nature of rape prosecutions. We as a society still somehow think rape is different—either because we assume the victims are especially fragile or because we assume they are particularly deceitful. Is the word rape truly more inflammatory to a jury than the word robbery?
The victim's father has been speaking out as well, reminding everyone that his daughter's First Amendment rights have been violated.
Rape isn't really about sex, anyway. It's about power, violence, coercion, and hatred. It is manifested though an act that is sexual, but the actual crime isn't about sex.
Thursday, April 3, 2008
I Hate Florida, And It's Not Just Because The Gators Suck
In an attempt thinly veiled as "safe health care," Florida legislature has voted to require a woman to have an ultrasound before having an abortion. This is terrible on so many levels.
Uno, this implies that women don't think about what pregnancy and abortion mean and that we need to have a medical test to teach us about our own bodies.
B, any responsible doctor or clinic will perform an ultrasound before an abortion for several (legitimate) reasons. They need to confirm that the woman is, in fact, pregnant and that her pregnancy is not ectopic (occurring outside the uterus). I know that at PP-NYC they will perform an ultrasound and if your pregnancy is ectopic they will escort you to the emergency room right away.
Three, we know their reasoning behind this isn't really promoting quality medical care, it's encouraging doctors to show women the ultrasound and point out the embryo in an appeal to them not to terminate. Which as we all know is a disgusting invasion of a woman's agency over her own body.
Oh, and apparently this bill also adds that causing a miscarriage through violence against a pregnant woman will result in a murder charge, no matter how far along the pregnancy is. It defines life as beginning at conception for criminal proceedings.
Now, if a woman is pregnant and you commit a violent act against her, yes, there is something wrong with you. But the crime is against the woman, and that is where we should focus our energy.
Defining life at conception is a serious attack on our right to make decisions over our own bodies. This is a step in a slippery slope toward completely taking away our freedom of choice. They have disguised it as only taking place during a violent act, but all this bill does is get it into the law that life is at conception, which means the anti-choice woman-hating right wing can point at that in the future and say "see, it says here life is at conception, so we should take away abortions!" They are sneaky and crafty like that.
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
The "Things That Make Me Stabby" File Sure Is Thick Today
Apparently, marital rape is no reason for a restraining order. The court is saying Amy Castillo "continued to have sex with [her husband Mark]" even when she knew he was cuckoo and dangerous and that means she shouldn't get a restraining order against him.
Mark Castillo is the man that drowned his three children. Just FYI.
Shall we mention that she testified to the fact that she only continued sleeping with him so he wouldn't suspect anything was wrong? And that he had mentioned he knew the strongest way to hurt her would be to kill the kids and leave her alive so she would have to live with the loss? Does this not sound like a man scary enough that you would do whatever he asked so he wouldn't be suspicious?
*stab*
Friday, February 29, 2008
Jesus Tapdancing Christ
Could someone please explain to me when rape became funny?
It's things like this that make rape victims not tell anyone, not report the crime, and act like nothing happened. We live in a culture that blames victims for crimes committed against them. Shirts like this just perpetuate that tragedy.
If you would like to complain, go here.
Saturday, February 16, 2008
Jane Fonda Chastized For Really Stupid Reason
On Thursday, Jane Fonda was on the Today Show with Eve Ensler talking about V-Day and The Vagina Monologues. In the interview, she used the word "cunt" in passing. And the world flipped out. It's Janet Jackson's nipple all over again. Meridith Viera came on the air and apologized for Fonda. I kind of wonder if Jane Fonda even wants to apologize, or if the network just put it up to avoid getting fined by the fascist FCC.
Here's the deal. Certain words, when used in a derogatory manner, are incredibly insulting and demeaning toward women. Even violent. When this oh-so-scary word is used in that context, yes, that's a problem. But in that case the issue is the intent and not necessarily the individual word. You could replace it with any other word and if the message is the same it would still be offensive and hateful.
However, when we're referring to the title of a monologue, as Fonda was, or a part of our own anatomy, I don't get why we're so up in arms about it.
If this was reversed, and someone had used a slang for male anatomy, there wouldn't be a problem. How many times do words like "dick" make it on TV? How many apologies have been issued over it? Exactly. So why is female slang offensive?
Apparently, because we're icky.
It's annoying that every news article I could find about this referred to "cunt" as "vulgar slang." I hate the word vulgar, it's judgmental. Yet it's used in news articles.
I think this calls for another vagina emoticon. ({})
Thursday, February 14, 2008
({}) Yes, that's a vagina emoticon
OK, let's all face it. Valentine's Day is stupid. I'm not just being bitter and single. If you think about it, really, it's a ridiculous holiday. There's really nothing behind it except jewelry and Russel Stover. I mean, I loves me some chocolate and things that sparkle, but I have never understood why we have to dictate a single day to give them as gifts.
Anyhoo, I adore how Eve Ensler and her Vagina Monologues cohorts have made today V-Day, which is a day of awareness to end violence against women.
Sounds great, right? It is. But it probably doesn't com as a surprise to anyone that anti-feminist groups oppose the idea, saying it "kills romance." This includes *cough* lovely people like Lori Gottlieb, who recently wrote an article about how women over 30 should settle and marry any man who will take them. Seriously. I couldn't make that up. There's even this sickening, anti-feminist poster at the Independent Women's Forum website (The name makes them sound like a feminist group, no? yeah, they're clearly not):
Try not to gag.
Awesome blogger Ann at Feministing has created a pretty fantastic parody of it:
Much better. :) Plus, anything using an image from The Simpsons can't be ALL bad, right?
Sorry, I know those pictures are too wide for this page...I'm not all that spectacular with HTML so I don't know how to shrink them, or if it's even possible. Putting in pictures and links with the occasional boldface or italic is as far as I can go.
Friday, February 1, 2008
Because Serial Rapists Are Excellent Members Of Society
I know this article is a little older, but I'm pretty sure it's still relevant. In 1999, Mike Huckabee released a serial rapist from prison 25 years before his sentence was up. When I first read this I was speechless for what may very well be the first time ever.
Look, if someone is actually willing to rape another individual, that is an indicator of a deep-seated problem.
Let me sum up the case.
Wayne Dumond raped 17-year-old Ashley Stevens in 1984 (who, by the way, is Bill Clinton's cousin). He was sentenced to life + 20 years. But the governor who followed Clinton, Jim Guy Tucker, reduced his sentence to 39.5 years (as a side note, I have a hard time taking anyone seriously when their name is "Jim Guy"). When Huckabee took office in 1996, he almost immediately sought to release Dumond. Obviously, Stevens and the many other women Dumond had raped were outraged. They wrote to Huckabee demanding he change his plans, but they were ignored and information about their letters was never revealed. Dumond was released in 1999, when he moved to Missouri and proceeded to rape and suffocate 39-year-old Carol Sue Shields, then rape and murder 23-year-old Sara Andrasek. He died in prison in 2005.
So, if Huckabee is willing to let someone get away with rape and murder, what else is he capable of? And remember, this is a man running under the guise of religion. 'Cause, you know, rape is a Godly thing to do.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
