Western Culture Is A Good Thing For Women

Despite what the feminists rage, western culture and its dreaded patriarchy are actually protective of women. This was illustrated recently by a decision in a French court. The Voice of Europe posted an article about the case on November 22.

The article reports:

A refugee from Bangladesh was tried by a French court and was acquitted of the rape of a high school girl. The verdict was handed down yesterday.

The young man also sexually assaulted another young girl. He was charged with both cases but acquitted of the rape.

According to the defense the refugee has ‘different cultural norms’ or ‘cultural codes’ and could have misinterpreted the contact with the girl.

Experts who investigated the man, described him as narcissistic and self-centred and that in the male culture of Bangladesh, his country of origin, “women are relegated to the status of sexual object”.

…In custody, the refugee says that the girl was consenting and the police closed the case. After which the young girl attempts suicide in late 2015 was hospitalised for a week.

Four months later the refugee was arrested again and the final verdict was handed down yesterday.

The refugee is acquitted of the rape but sentenced to two years in prison as a suspended sentence for the sexual assault of the first victim.

He will be registered in the sex offender file, according to the court’s decision.

I guess we should be grateful that he will at least be registered as a sex offender.

Bringing Justice Into The Legal Process At Colleges

We all remember the Duke lacrosse scandal in 2006 where three fraternity brothers were charged with rape. Obviously, hiring a stripper was not the smartest thing these fraternity brothers ever did, but it hardly rose to the level of a crime. A lot of outside forces got involved. It was labeled a ‘hate crime,’ and a racial element also came into play with the arrival of the professional racial complainers. After all was said and done, part of the lacrosse season was canceled and team members were put through various legal processes before their names were finally cleared. Three accused players were eventually paid millions of dollars by the University in exchange for nondisclosure agreements after they were found not guilty. Some of the players transferred to other schools in order to continue playing lacrosse. The players were definitely guilty of bad judgement, but were eventually cleared of any other charges. The damage done to their reputations, however, is incalculable. Enter Education Secretary Betsy DeVoss.

On Saturday, The Detroit News reported:

Education Secretary Betsy DeVos is following through on her commitment to stand up for the due process rights of all students on U.S. college campuses. From what we’ve seen of a new framework, it would go a long way to restoring constitutional protection in campus sexual assault investigations.

That’s a long-overdue change. Last September, DeVos began this work, rescinding overzealous Obama-era guidelines that pushed university administrators to investigate and adjudicate serious accusations and even crimes.

Using the threat of withheld funding if schools didn’t comply, the former administration instructed universities to lower the burden of proof and create a framework to give alleged victims the upper hand. Title IX, the law preventing sex discrimination in schools that take federal funds, has been expanded greatly in recent years to apply to cases of sexual misconduct.

All this led to accused students with little recourse to defend themselves, with serious repercussions as a result, including expulsion.

…As reported by the Times, the new rules would allow both the accused and the complainant to request evidence and to cross-examine each other — something that was discouraged previously. Also, universities could apply other avenues for solving complaints such as mediation and restorative justice, as long as the individuals involved mutually agreed.

The Education Department also seeks to define sexual harassment in a much more specific way: “Unwelcome conduct on the basis of sex that is so severe, pervasive and objectively offensive that it denies a person access to the school’s education program or activity.”

Previously, universities were told to handle any unwelcome sexual conduct.

Obviously there are many aspects to this story. We have instances of male college students accused of rape because their dates woke up the next morning regretting foolish decisions made the night before, and we have genuine instances of rape that were not punished sufficiently.

On June 3, 2016, The Cut reported the following:

Brock Allen Turner, the former Stanford swimmer who was discovered raping an unconscious woman behind a dumpster on campus in January of last year, will be sentenced to six months in county jail and probation. Prosecutors had recommended that Turner receive a sentence of six years, but judge Aaron Persky determined that Turner’s age — 20 — and lack of criminal history warranted him a much shorter sentence.

To me, that is as unjust as what was done to the Duke lacrosse team. Both extremes need to be avoided.

Something Doesn’t Seem Right Here

On Friday The Washington Times reported that the two illegal immigrants charged with raping a classmate in Rockville High School in Maryland in March have had the charges against them dismissed.

The article reports:

“Montgomery County State’s Attorney John McCarthy told a judge Friday that after an investigation, authorities are dropping rape and sex offense counts against 17-year-old Jose Montano, who was charged as an adult,” the Daily Mail reported. “He and 18-year-old Henry Sanchez, both of who were in the U.S. illegally, were charged in the alleged assault of the girl at Rockville High School in March.”

McCarthy also said his office was dropping charges against Sanchez, for the same reason — no evidence.

His statement, to reporters, was blunt: “The facts in this case do not support the original charges filed,” he said, the news outlet reported.

There is, however, some good news here. The article reports that both suspects still face charges tied to possession and distribution of child pornography.

The boys’ defense lawyer claimed that the incident was nothing more than consensual sex. I tend to wonder.

Laws Have Consequences

On February 14, 2015, the Gatestone Institute posted the following:

  • Forty years after the Swedish parliament unanimously decided to change the formerly homogenous Sweden into a multicultural country, violent crime has increased by 300% and rapes by 1,472%. Sweden is now number two on the list of rape countries, surpassed only by Lesotho in Southern Africa.
  • Significantly, the report does not touch on the background of the rapists. One should, however, keep in mind that in statistics, second-generation immigrants are counted as Swedes.
  • In an astounding number of cases, the Swedish courts have demonstrated sympathy for the rapists, and have acquitted suspects who have claimed that the girl wanted to have sex with six, seven or eight men.
  • The internet radio station Granskning Sverige called the mainstream newspapers Aftonbladet and Expressen to ask why they had described the perpetrators as “Swedish men” when they actually were Somalis without Swedish citizenship. They were hugely offended when asked if they felt any responsibility to warn Swedish women to stay away from certain men. One journalist asked why that should be their responsibility.

The article further reports:

In 1975, the Swedish parliament unanimously decided to change the former homogeneous Sweden into a multicultural country. Forty years later the dramatic consequences of this experiment emerge: violent crime has increased by 300%.

If one looks at the number of rapes, however, the increase is even worse. In 1975, 421 rapes were reported to the police; in 2014, it was 6,620. That is an increase of 1,472%.

Sweden is now number two on the global list of rape countries. According to a survey from 2010, Sweden, with 53.2 rapes per 100,000 inhabitants, is surpassed only by tiny Lesotho in Southern Africa, with 91.6 rapes per 100,000 inhabitants.

One of the tenets of Sharia Law is that Muslim men can take infidel women as ‘sex slaves.’ Generally Sharia Law has little respect for the rights of women, but it has even less respect for the rights of infidel women. If a woman is not wearing ‘proper Muslim attire,’ she is open to sexual assault, This is part of the culture in Islamic countries. My question is simple–“How much of that are you willing to bring to America?”

Justice Under The Law?

I have no idea why the sentence in this case was so skewed, but I think it is just wrong.

The New York Magazine posted an article on Friday about the sentencing of Brock Allen Turner. Brock Allen Turner was convicted on raping an unconscious woman behind a dumpster on the Stanford University campus. He was sentenced to six months in the county jail and probation.

The story reports:

“A prison sentence would have a severe impact on him,” Persky (Judge Aaron Persky)said at Turner’s sentencing on Thursday. “I think he will not be a danger to others.” Meanwhile, the 23-year-old victim in the rape case, who had had a blood-alcohol level three times the legal limit at the time of the rape and who had no memory of the attack, gave important testimony at the trial.

“You took away my worth, my privacy, my energy, my time, my safety, my intimacy, my confidence, my own voice, until today,” she said, reportedly directly to Turner. “I am a human being who has been irreversibly hurt.” And yet it’s Turner who would be severely impacted in his sentencing? Right.

Does anyone else have a problem with this? I agree that the woman was drunk, but that still does not excuse the young man’s behavior. There is no doubt about his guilt, the assault was interrupted by two other students who chased him down and held him until the police arrived. I don’t understand why the judge feels that this man will not be a danger to others–he obviously has a problem with respecting women and their privacy. This behavior belongs in jail for at least five years. Otherwise, you are sending a message to all young men that it is okay to rape a woman if she is drunk–the penalty will be minor.

Where Is Common Sense ?

Fox 25 News in Boston posted a story yesterday about a rapist who is requesting visiting rights to the child he fathered in the rape. Seriously?

The story reports:

An admitted Massachusetts rapist is seeking visitation rights to the child he fathered after raping his underage victim, setting the stage for a precedent-setting legal fight in the Bay State.

There is a sentence in this story that indicates where our society is going:

The attorney for the man who admitted raping the teenager would not comment on his client’s fight for visitation rights. But he did claim the relationship was consensual, even though he acknowledged it was inappropriate, given the victim was only 14 and his client was 20.

The bottom line:

“The consequences of sentencing this man to probation for 16 years, which is really until the child becomes an adult, and making him declare paternity and pay child support, includes that this guy gets a legal father-child relationship out of the deal,” Murphy (family attorney attorney Wendy Murphy) said.

Murphy has filed a motion with the court, asking the judge to amend the sentencing conditions and order the man to pay restitution instead of child support, which would force him to support the child he fathered but not give him visitation and other parental rights.

Murphy’s motion also asks that the man be ordered to stay away from the mother and the child.

“All this family wants is to cut the cord. Get the rapist out of their lives. And if the judge wants to help them financially that’s great. But let’s call it restitution, not child support,” Murphy said.

It will be interesting to see how the court rules on this. I really can understand the judge’s decision for probation, but I think a restraining order should be included in that sentence to protect both the mother and the child. Regardless of whether or not you choose to blame the victim, it is obvious that the 20-year-old father had very poor judgement and very poor moral standards.

Enhanced by Zemanta