Category Archives: Violence

I am Not Going to Talk About Charlie Sheen

Because it’s too dull.  And the man obviously has too many issues to even know where to begin.

But he makes this old piece by Johann Hari seem as relevant as ever.


Rape Culture

Great post from kittywampus about the attack on journalist Lara Logan.

Woman gets sexually assaulted and beaten.

It’s her fault.

She should’ve stayed in the kitchen.

(Where at least she’d have known her attacker personally.)

I’ll also add this article.  Beware, though, it’s CiF.  Under no circumstances read the comments; if you really feel the need, read this instead.


We Want The Birth We Want

An article on Parent Central talks about traumatic birth experiences and quotes a review conducted by the Nursing and Midwifery at the University of Western Sydney in Australia.

One of the key findings of the review, appearently, was that ‘being denied the opportunity to make informed decisions about birth traumatizes women‘.  Well, duh!  This is a well-known sub-category of ‘Being treated like an idiot because you have a uterus really pisses you off.

The article – as so many other recently as we become more aware of the issue – describes the horrendous experiences some mothers have had giving birth and let’s not make a mistake – all this shit is battery, pure and simple.  Having hands shoved up your vagina and your membranes deliberately ruptured making a C-section necessary is battery.  And frankly, women should start sueing for it.

I had a different experience.  Being birth phobic and finding myself pregnant made a planned C-section my only acceptable option.  Make no mistake, I had to fight tooth and nail to get it the first time around, but being reasonably intelligent, a native-English speaker and a lawyer – which helps when it comes to making it clear that if they force a natural birth on you, and the teensiest thing goes wrong, you’ll start process before the baby’s got its foot out the door (so to speak), and all without ever needing to be so crude as to mention the word ‘sue’ – I got one.  And was I happy with my birth experience?  You bet.  Despite being roundly villified by staring looks and rolled eyes and lectures about the importance of a ‘natural’ birth by every midwife I met (far too many), I was perfectly happy.  And even despite the subsequent constant denigration by certain other mothers for choosing a C-section (but that’s another topic entirely), I’m still happy.  Simply because I’d assessed my options, researched the risks of C-sections for both myself and my baby and was satisified that, given the baby had to come out somehow, it was the right choice for me.  And I got what I wanted.  Medical intervention that ceased to bear any relation to battery because I fully consented to it.  Make no mistake, fighting for my birth choice, whilst hard, was actually easy-peasy because all the hard stuff took place before I was actually giving birth.  I’ve no doubt that had I been in the full throws of birthing, the midwife could’ve said to me ‘The moon is rising in Venus today, so we’ll have to use forceps’, I would have accepted it entirely, especially if it was my first time doing it.  Giving birth, however prepared and calm you are, is pretty scary when you’re actually doing it. Or so I’m told.

That’s why articles like this are so valuable.  Knowledge is power.  And the more first time mothers who understand that they still get to have body autonomy even whilst shoving a baby out, the better.


Feminists Love You More Than You Know

And just in case you didn’t believe my last post about the Comment Is Free crap, try reading the comments on this piece (thankfully already closed).  All business as usual.

Domestic Violence Happens to Men, Too

What struck me about this particular piece, was that whilst this alleged level of domestic violence by women against men was definitely deemed to be the fault of feminists, it was never actually alleged that the women doing the hitting were feminists.  Which seems a bit of an obvious missed opportunity for the MRAs present, so yah boo sucks.  Where feminists were actually at fault it seemed was that we had caused DV against men not to be taken seriously and further, that we had convinced ‘the world’  that all men were violent, uncontrollable animals.  Hmm.

Many men related their own experiences of being attacked by the women in their lives and complained that such attacks were treated as a joke, especially, it seemed, by the police.  Even worse, many men related that their attacker was able, with little or no effort, to convince the police that she was in fact the victim.   Both of these things were down to the pernicious influence of the Feminist Menace.  So, if I have this right, police forces across the country are actively working to a feminist agenda, which is news to me (and, I confess, a somewhat heartening piece of information).  Not only do they dismiss male DV victims, they then actively promote the women to ‘victim’ status (wow, thanks guys!) and this utter slavery to the gender norms we’re fed every day – and against which feminists the world over are fighting – is the fault of feminists?

Ooh, I’m missing something, let me just look down the back of the sofa…ah, yes!  I’M MISSING THE IRONY!  These are the very same men who immediately argue that women, say, just don’t have the mental capacity to excel at physics because their brains are too busy empathising and planning their weddings and that’s just biology and you can’t fuck with biology, oh no.  Feminists argue against the idea of gender essentialism but it’s their fault that when you get hit by an ‘iddy biddy woman’ society calls you a poof who should just quit whining and act like a real man.  Jeez, we really are to blame for everything.  Part of me feels quite proud.

To delve deeper into ironic territory (I almost can’t bear to look!),  we’ve not only got the police firmly in our pockets, we’ve got everybody convinced that men are complete animals.  Er, no.  I can only imagine that the thousands of feminists these men must interact with on a daily basis just aren’t of a radical enough ilk.  Probably more of the type to think equality means the freedom to be equally as yuk as men.  Because radical feminists are in fact the only group in the known world who don’t think that men are – inescapably – all animals, beholden to their biology, such biology apparently having been subject to no change whatsoever since they were out chasing woolly mammoths.  Radical feminists, my dear men friends, are the only people who will ascribe to you higher cognitive functions which allow you to make choices – real, informed choices – about how you behave and how big an arsehole you are.  Or not.  Rad fems are the only people giving you the personal agency of an adult.  It’s all those ‘biology is destiny’ people your public relations people need to have a word with I’m afraid; I don’t know the collective noun for them but I suggest you start with anybody who writes a book called ‘Why Men Wouldn’t Know an Emotion if It Bit Them On the Backside And Why Women Do the Biting For Fun’ or anything similar.

And know this: it is only post the feminist revolution when people are finally accepted as individuals rather than a gender on two legs that you will be able to go into a police station and not only be believed in your tale of DV, but be protected and cared for as well as any DV victim should.


Just How Much Do They hate Us?

If you were wondering, just take a sneaky peek at this piece of vile bile striaght out of the Misogynists-R-Us Handbook.

Rape Defendant Anonymity

God, I heard about this when it was proposed and I did nothing, thought no more about it because I thought it was just sabre-rattling shit; it couldn’t possibly come to pass, could it?  Such naked, outright, institutionalised hatred of women.  Nooo.

Sometimes I wonder about my level of stupidity.

And then something like this comes along and I know I’m as thick as constipated dog doo.


Reading Murder

When I first heard about the murder of Asha Muneer on the news last night, my blood boiled a little bit.  Obviously at the fact that someone has taken the life of this teenager, but also at the way the murder was reported on my local news in a 10 second segment.  Listening to that 10 seconds, you could only take away the impression that the most important part of the story was not that a life had been lost but was instead a combination of (1) a woman was walking (2) it was dark and (3) she was alone.  Why these facts taken together were deemed to be so important is a mystery.  Well, it is if you discount the over-riding patriarchy commandment that women shouldn’t go out on their own and certainly not after the sun has set (cos only prostitutes do that, see? and whatever they get they deserve, OK?).  Discount that and you’re left with no reason at all why.  As it was the message was brief but clear: she’s been murdered but it is somehow, in a way we can’t explicitly spell out but we’ll provide the dots and let you join them up, her fault. 

I let it go, though.  I spend too much of my time being mad.

But then I unfortunately read this in the Guardian this morning http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/jan/19/teenager-murdered-reading-river-footpath and again this emphasis on the actions of the victim, only this time we got the ‘expert’ opinions of local dogwalkers who expressed ‘shock’ at the death, ‘but said the stretch of footpath was considered dangerous to walk on at night.’ So, they’re shocked but not entirely surprised? If you’re stupid enough to walk on it at night, you get what you deserve, huh?  One (female) dogwalker asserted that she ‘would never go down there in the dark on [her] own.’  The inference of the article is clear, viz: we have no idea about what happened or why, but we’re sure that the victim had some culpability in her own death by her own ignorance and stupidity and, unfortunately we can’t even go on about the fact that she was drunk (cos she was on her way home from work) so we’ll light upon the fact that she was ‘female, alone, in the dark’. Like that’s the real crime here. 

How about this instead: a teenager was walking home minding her own business when somebody decided to brutally murder her; whilst we have no other facts at this time, we are completely certain that culpability for the murder rests entirely with the murderer.


The Modern Age

You wake up and read this little gem http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-na-rape-craigslist11-2010jan11,0,1128043.story?page=1 and all you can think is: I do not want my children to grow up in this world.

Aside from all the obvious (too obvious) reactions of disgust and outrage, two points.

1. the article describes it as a ‘violent sexual fantasy’.  Er, no.  There was nothing ‘sexual’ about it.  It was the ex-boyfriend’s fantasy and it had nothing to do with sex.  How about ‘violent, sadistic, revenge fantasy’.  Cos that’s what it was.  It was so far removed from sex as to be on another planet – when will people get this?

2. An official is quoted as saying this was a crime only possible because of the Internet.  Nope.  I studied law many, many moons ago and remember (all too) clearly rape cases where, for example, a boyfriend told his mates that his girlfriend wanted to be raped and yes, she would resist, but that was all part of ‘her’ fantasy, so they should just carry on.  Inevitably, the rapists were cleared on the basis of ‘reasonable’ belief in her consent.  I wonder what will happen this time around.  Twenty years later and we’re still wondering?  To be honest I feel sick.