Tag Archives: violence

She Dressed That Way, She Must Have Wanted It

Creative Commons: catatonickid.wordpress.com

The title of this piece is one of the most common excuses given by a rapist who’s been caught. We hear variations on the theme such as “She was dressed provocatively; what did she expect?” “Why didn’t you fight him off?”  “I knew she wanted it.” “Saying no is just a game; she was playing hard to get.”

Over three years of writing this blog I have seen trends as to what becomes a popular post. Sometimes it’s a few months after the original date. Some of my more popular posts were on Polygamy: I Do, I Do, I Do, and Polyamory: I Love You and You and You, as well as Starbucks and the Censored Mermaid, Travels in India: Betel Nut Adventures (who knew betel nut was such a popular search item) Incest, Betrayal and Genetic Sexual Attraction and Rape: It’s Just a Social Media Trend. Except for the Starbucks and the betel nut you could say that my top posts are about sex in one form or another. It’s not that I’ve written exclusively on this topic but when I look at the daily search topics that bring readers to my site the top one, since I wrote “Rape: It’s Just a Social Media Trend,” is “rape.”

In a way this disturbs me because I’m wondering what people are looking for when they  are searching out rape. I would hope that it is a concern for women (and men) the world over who have been victims of rape, a violent physical crime that can leave a lifetime of emotional (as well as physical) scars. I would really hope people are trying to find solutions and ways to protect themselves and others from such crimes, as a way of education to stop the perpetration of such violence. But I worry because I know the internet, when it first started, was a big pit for people to look for sex, talk about sex, seek out all things sexual.

Sex is never a bad thing when between consenting adults and I’m certainly not against sex. However, rape is never a good thing and never consensual. It is the forcing of oneself on another. It may be less or more violent (resulting in death at its extreme) but it is never nonviolent. Holding a gun or a knife to someone’s head is still a violent assault when coupled with rape.

Rape is used by men to denigrate women in countries under unrest, being overthrown, destabilized by guerrilla warfare. It is far more horrible than being shot dead in a war. It is a crime against the defenseless, because of strength and/or weapons. A culture does not have to be so different from ours (in fact it can be and is the same as ours,) for it to perpetuate the stigma of rape. Some Middle Eastern countries put all the onus on a woman. If she is raped, she must bring witnesses. In other cases she’s charged with adultery, no matter that she couldn’t resist in one way or another. It’s always the woman’s fault.

But even here, we see the onus put onto the victim for the crime. As my first paragraph indicates, it doesn’t matter if you’re wearing a burka or a mini skirt, somebody will decide that you are a) nothing but the possession of a man, b) dressing to bring about a violent act upon your person and/or c) having to cover up because men cannot control themselves. If these atatements were true, then in fact it would show that men are more like animals than women and really, if that’s the case it’s obvious who should be running the world. But I want to point out that not all men are rapists and should never be considered so.

Yet, any man who is a rapist, is responsible for his acts. Not his mother, not his teacher, not his father, not the woman he rapes. Especially not the woman (or man) that he rapes. They are victims. It doesn’t matter if they’re naked or in a parka. If they say no, it’s no. In our western culture our ads and our lifestyle pumps up sexuality all the time. It’s pretty much the norm but it shouldn’t condone rape. And ads, like the Dolce & Gabbana piece that I mentioned in the earlier blog, are more than offensive. They’re criminal because they try to say that rape is sexy. And there are computer games where one can rape animated characters over and over again. Sure, a real person isn’t being hurt but there is no justification (as there is in shooter games where you might be shooting aliens or the enemy) that justifies such reprehensible acts.

This following site is by someone studying trends of crime against women and has some good information. How to Justify Rape No one should ever make rape acceptable or feel responsible if they’re raped. If you were specifically searching about rape, please take a moment to fill out the anonymous poll.

Advertisements

6 Comments

Filed under crime, Culture, history, internet, security, sex

Uttering Threats Can Get You Arrested

In one of my recent posts someone sent a comment that is both disgusting and offensive and shows the problem with the attitudes of some people towards women. I have set my filters to approve comments before they are posted, so I will not give the person the satisfaction of seeing their horrid comment. But be forewarned, anyone who threatens me in any way will be reported.

This did bring up an interesting issue about internet and abusing people online. If you do a search you will find sites for cyber bullying (a form of harassment) and for cyber luring. In fact there is a lot of information on protecting children who maybe be lured, raped or otherwise abused through internet stalkers. There is cyber stalking and information on internet fraud, Nigerian scam letters and viruses. But there isn’t much on being threatened by someone on the internet.

In fact, I checked both my local police and the RCMP websites and it was very unclear. I did find that the comments the person made fall under section 264.1 of the criminal code, that of “uttering threats.” Threats are indeed considered a criminal offence and I will report all such threats to the police and did so with this comment. The police said that should this happen to any of you, you should call the police in the jurisdiction in which you reside, unless you know there is a specific task force set up for such reasons.

These attitudes, whether as a sick joke or someone who is intent on harm, should not even be tolerated. I will never condone jokes about rape because to do so makes the attitude more acceptable. I will never accept that women are chattel, lesser creatures or deserving of abuses because they are women. I will never agree that one race, religion or gender is superior over another. There are fine lines on jokes but those of a violent nature are not only in poor taste but set up precedents for increasingly violent behavior.

If you feel threatened by someone making suggestions to you on the internet, contact your local police on their non-emergency number (unless the person says they’re going to attack you on a set date or time). Keep all information so that you can give them as much evidence as possible. And don’t ever think you should just take it. I will not be intimidated by a jerk in any way.

2 Comments

Filed under crime, internet, people, security

What I Really Think About Sex

I have posted some very strong-minded articles in regards to sex and sexual abuse. I’ve mentioned that I was sexually abused and rather than be a victim I’ve pursued a healthy mindset and not let the past or the perpetrator control me (I hope).

I’ve commented on how I am somewhat skeptical (and a bit disgusted) with the whole genetic sexual attraction thing, and though I could see a small percentage of people maybe truly just falling in love (or physically lusting after) their relative as adults, I still think that there is too much room for power over. Not to mention the cultural guilt and taboos, and of course children of such relations limits them due to the narrowing of the gene pool and the increase of genetically damaged results.

I’ve commented at least to friends on the subjugation of women in various countries where wives and girls are treated as possessions and don’t have equal rights. I’ve made strong statements about child abuse of any sort and abuse of animals, if I haven’t mentioned it before is extremely disturbing and wrong. Any living creature that can’t give its consent or understand the full impact of what is being done to it or her/him should not be coerced into sexual activity. Laws are there to protect the innocent.

So, with these opinions, it might also seem that I’m pretty hard-edge, straight and narrow on the whole topic of sex. But I’m not. I am for eliminating abuse and for equal rights, and when it comes to sex I’m all for it.

What I mean by this is that it is neither my job nor my right to snoop into someone else’s life (be it a politician’s, a movie star’s, a neighbor’s, a relative’s, a friend’s) and make judgements on how or who they have sex with (unless it is of course the aforementioned animals, children or subjugated people). I don’t care if someone does it doggy style or hangs from the rafters in a bat costume. I don’t want to know if they yodel during coitus or exchange fluids from which my imagination runs screaming. It doesn’t matter if they have sex with the same gender, five people at the same time while chanting Monty Python, or pay for it.

When we get right down to it, it is nobody’s business but those involved. Humans are sexual creatures and we like to have sex. We are also not set into a mating cycle like most animals and therefore can have sex whenever we want. Like bonobos, we do it for fun as well as procreation. It is in fact human nature.

Now I also think that people need a sex education, starting in school, that goes beyond “these are ovaries–they produce eggs, this is a penis–it (and the scrotum) produce sperm. Babies can form…etc.” They need to understand what sex is, how the process of excitement and arousal works, how to achieve it, what the results are. There needs to be a healthy wholesome attitude about something that everyone (or nearly everyone) does at some point in their lives. Instead of telling people that masturbation is bad and dirty, tell them it is healthy and normal. Instead of shushing any talk about the sex act, explain it.

I strongly believe that if we took the mystery and “dirtiness” out of sex, (this idea perpetrated by too many religions) that we would have less sexual perversion. I’m not saying no perversion but if it’s suddenly not dirty and wrong, where is the illicit thrill? Granted sex has its own thrill but it’s our society’s constraints on sex that causes some of the illness surrounding it. And prostitution should be legalized. It would take it off the street, remove the stigma from women and johns, keep it clean and safe, improve other neighborhoods, and gosh, give the government revenue. It’s only the moral religious backwardness that prevents this and makes it “dirty” as well.

At some point the greater majority of humanity has intercourse, and some of it pleasurable. However, the majority of people will not kill someone (war in some areas is still not the majority of the planet). So then why is it bad, naughty and X-rated to even see full frontal nudity, let alone intercourse, but on any prime time night you can see someone beaten, strangled, cut, shot or otherwise mutilated? HBO has shifted this somewhat but on average there is more violence than sex on TV. Is it any wonder we have a sick and atrophied culture when violence is okay to view but sex and naked bodies is bad? What a sad state. And here the Glenbow Museum’s ad (in Calgary) was banned by Calgary transit. What was the subject of the banned picture? A baby’s head and umbilical cord. Oooh, now that’s really disgusting.

But I digress. North American culture has so many sexual hangups that a nude person on a beach is wildly titillating and sex is something done in the dark and not talked about. It’s time to wake up, teach people about the joys and pleasures and wholesomeness of consensual sex (notice that important word–consensual) and stop getting all aghast when it happens near you. Don’t judge, just accept that it’s part of normal life.

Leave a comment

Filed under crime, Culture, health, life, nature, people, relationships, religion, sex

Taser Inquiry–Dziekanski’s Death

The inquiry continues into the Tasering death of Robert Dziekanski, or the conducted energy weapon, as the police call it. One of the RCMP officers testified yesterday to conflicting admissions. Now, if you’ve seen the video the crucial moments are fuzzy, where Dziekanski is actually tasered. But even though he tossed a chair or two he was not in a high fury. You can see he is agitated or scared, by his fast breathing. Then you see there are security guards who don’t seem to be talking to him but keeping him penned in and it looks as if he’s barricading the doors.

What the guards and RCMP probably didn’t know was that he was there for hours and hours. He would have been dehydrated and confused, tired, maybe angry. What the guards did know is that he spoke a foreign language, pretty common for people coming in to an airport. It doesn’t look like anyone tried to communicate with him in his language.

The video shows four RCMP coming in and talking to him. He throws up his hands and walks away. What I thought, was that a taser needs to touch a person’s skin, but it fires dart-like electrodes. At the point that they fire the Taser Dziekanski smashes his fist into his hands and does look a bit combative but he’s just been zapped. Then they hit him again, and he rolls out to the floor, obviously in great pain. You see an officer fire a third time and I don’t know when the other two shots were fired.

Now the officer, Constable Gerry Rundel, testified yesterday saying that Dziekanski resisted and took a combative stance. If I throw my hands into the air, does that mean I’ll now get shot by the police, by Taser or gun? How does this gesture then differ between that of saying “I give up” or “I’m frustrated and can’t communicate” with uh, “Rarrr, I’m coming at you like a man-eating tiger”?

Rundel also said that he feared for his life at one point. Fear? For his life? Let’s see, there were three security guards just standing around before the police came. The four, count em, fourRCMP officers carrying weapons and wearing bullet proof vests somehow couldn’t talk to or restrain one man just standing there at the time. It used to be, before Tasers, that cops were trained on how to restrain a person without causing more damage. But they seem to just fire at him, and five times?

There’s much ado made about the stapler. Not a staple gun, not an industrial, electric staple gun. Just a stapler used for stapling a few papers together. I’ve put one through my finger before and somehow not only lived to talk about it but have borne no scars. But the RCMP who are supposedly trained in methods of restraint and oh, powers of observation, mistake the nasty office stapler as a weapon for which they fear for their lives? All you secretaries and aides of the world unite! Forget the pitchforks and scythes. Grab up those staplers and we will put fear in the hearts of those who oppose us.

If this is the state of our police force, then no wonder gangs are taking over. Sorry, but they’ve becoming pussies if a stapler scares them and if it takes four men armed with Tasers to take down an agitated man. If an officer fears for his life over such an action, then he should not be a police or RCMP officer. And if this is how they’re trained, I too fear for my life should I ever have to encounter the RCMP.

The police chiefs are now out in force today, defending the Taser and saying it saves lives (and it does seem to take a few too). Well,  if we go with the adage, guns don’t kill people, people kill people, then it stands that indeed Tasers don’t kill people, police kill people. I am critical here because there has been far too much abuse by those who are supposed to uphold the law. If their training makes them more fallible than the perpetrator, then they need new training, including how to minimize damage and physically restrain someone. How about some martial arts?

It used to be that a Taser was to be used if there was risk of injury to the individual or others. Serious risk of injury. Use as a last resort before pulling out the gun. But now, everyone better be on their best behavior because the next time you give someone the finger, swear, or turn your back on the RCMP they will Taser you as being combative and resistant. They won’t talk to you, they won’t find other ways to take you down. In fact, if you’re going to jump off a bridge and you turn your back, make sure you really mean to commit suicide because they’ll Taser you on the way down.

3 Comments

Filed under crime, Culture, life, news, people, security, travel

Police Recruitment: Beat a Brownie

Here’s a new recruitment poster for police forces in BC. Something that more fits the bill.

XYPD (fill in your favorite force here)  is looking for a few good white men. You must be in great physical condition and have good coercion skills. A narrow-minded attitude is an asset. You should have failed your degree in criminology or have no education beyond high school. Blind obedience, anger and a need for power are why you want to join the force.

 Considered an asset:

  • bigotry
  • beating innocent people
  • racism
  • drunk and disorderly behavior while off duty
  • stupidity
  • bullying
  • prolonged and unprovoked use of a Taser
  • able to swear more colorfully than a sailor
  • will dump drunk people in cold and inhospitable places
  • creative excuses
  • a criminal record (physical violence, bribes, blackmail, drugrunning)
  • will shoot instead of subduing
  • will shoot and ask questions later

If you think you have the wrong stuff and know you can prove you’re a tough rookie, join XYPD today. Going places with power. Judge Dredd is our hero.

Who is Judge Dredd? A British comic book character in the future Britain who is strict, harsh and follows the letter of the law. In this future world police are also judge, jury and executioner. Though in fact I believe Dredd does have some scruples. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judge_Dredd

Police in BC are fighting a marred image that has come after such cases as the drunk Native man dumped in an alley and found frozen to death, the highly publicized death of Robert Dziekański (5 Tasers to the chest) Cases of corruption and now the latest public relations nightmare hasn’t helped the sinking ship of a police force that is supposed to uphold the law, not abuse it and use it for their own means.

Last Tuesday, January 20, three off-duty policemen took it upon themselves to beat up a man who delivered papers to the hotels. Phil Khan had been delivering papers for seven years, was well known on his regular route and was only doing his job, when  a guy started asking for directions, verbally abusing him. Khan is a Muslim and of brown skin.

The guy proceeded to beat him and when a cab driver dropped of two other guys, they joined in on kicking and beating the man who was crying out for help. When the cab driver and others told them to stop, they said they were the police and told the guy they were beating that they had a Taser and would use it on him. One of them said that they didn’t like “brown people.”

Obviously they’d been drinking but three off-duty cops, one from Delta, one from New Westminster and one from West Vancouver who were stupid enough to beat a person and then tell everyone that they were cops really shouldn’t be on the force. Let’s not mention a racist hate crime here. And this is the police force. Whether on or off-duty they’re supposed to uphold the law, not abuse it.

It used to be that you couldn’t get a job on the police force if you had a record. These days it’s becoming par for the course. Two of these cops are now on desk jobs awaiting word of the investigation while a third still patrols the beat, (and perhaps threatens other people). The investigation by the Vancouver police department has yet to net charges but there were witnesses: two city workers, a MacDonald’s worker, a cab driver who tried to stop it until the guys said they were cops.

But someone did call 911 and when the police came they handcuffed Phil Khan. Of course, if in doubt as to who to incarcerate, go for the colored guy. Now probably these three stooges who decided to boot the guy about also told the cops that they were cops, which went well until the witnesses said, no you’ve cuffed the victim. Then the three were arrested. All I can say is with the rep the cops have it almost makes more sense to trust the criminals these days. But then they’ll soon be hired to be the new police force.

2 Comments

Filed under crime, Culture, life, news, people, security