Wear jeans, get raped
Three days after International Women's Day the highest court in Italy ruled that a woman wearing jeans cannot be raped.
Yeah it's totally impossible to remove a pair of jeans from someone half your size and perhaps a tad petrified at the impending crime. Impossible to get somebody to take an action under the threat of violence. Who believes this bullshit?
Also it implies that women are raped by strangers in the bushes. The vast majority of rapes are committed by a friend, acquaintance or relative. The clothes that the victim wears do not matter. The ability to remove jeans without consent depends on terror, resignation or the threat of violence. This ruling is ridiculous and has just punched another hole in women's safety.
I wonder would the Supreme Court uphold that ruling its its members had a gun to their head and told to remove their jeans. Cooperation under the threat of violence does not imply, constitute or prove consent, in the same manner as a forced confession is not admissible in a court of law (in most developed countries).
If a women wearing jeans cannot be raped, can a man wearing jeans be raped. One might argue that men mostly wear trousers, often jeans. Ten percent of rape victims are men. Is this ruling going to affect men too? Can a man wearing jeans be raped?
The judgement should anger more than woman's rights organisations. It should also anger lawmakers, human rights groups and citizens of the EU. This is truly disgusting. The Italian Supreme Court has basically just ruled that a man can rape any woman (and by extension any man) wearing jeans with impunity.
It's the other side to the slutty dress argument. Women and girls and even children wearing 'provocative' clothes are blamed for their rape. Now women wearing jeans are blamed for their rape. When is the blame going to be put where it belong? When is the rapist going to be blamed for rape?
or any other excuses for criminal behaviour. It is a crime. It cannot be excused by circumstances. This ruling is very disturbing and I think it demonstrates some of the latent hate that exists in our society towards female people.
h/t Jeff Fecke
The Supreme Court of Appeal in Rome on Wednesday overturned a rape conviction, saying that the supposed victim must have agreed to sex because her jeans could not have been removed without her consent.
Yeah it's totally impossible to remove a pair of jeans from someone half your size and perhaps a tad petrified at the impending crime. Impossible to get somebody to take an action under the threat of violence. Who believes this bullshit?
Also it implies that women are raped by strangers in the bushes. The vast majority of rapes are committed by a friend, acquaintance or relative. The clothes that the victim wears do not matter. The ability to remove jeans without consent depends on terror, resignation or the threat of violence. This ruling is ridiculous and has just punched another hole in women's safety.
The Supreme Court ruled that it was impossible to remove a pair of jeans "without the collaboration of the person wearing them", and that the young woman must therefore have consented to sex.
I wonder would the Supreme Court uphold that ruling its its members had a gun to their head and told to remove their jeans. Cooperation under the threat of violence does not imply, constitute or prove consent, in the same manner as a forced confession is not admissible in a court of law (in most developed countries).
If a women wearing jeans cannot be raped, can a man wearing jeans be raped. One might argue that men mostly wear trousers, often jeans. Ten percent of rape victims are men. Is this ruling going to affect men too? Can a man wearing jeans be raped?
In a judgement likely to anger women's rights organisations, the rape conviction was reversed.
The judgement should anger more than woman's rights organisations. It should also anger lawmakers, human rights groups and citizens of the EU. This is truly disgusting. The Italian Supreme Court has basically just ruled that a man can rape any woman (and by extension any man) wearing jeans with impunity.
It's the other side to the slutty dress argument. Women and girls and even children wearing 'provocative' clothes are blamed for their rape. Now women wearing jeans are blamed for their rape. When is the blame going to be put where it belong? When is the rapist going to be blamed for rape?
Yeah this was different to the usual sexual assault. This time the woman was wearing jeans. If the norm is sexual assault on a lonely country road then what are police doing about it? If driving instructors have a reputation for molestation then what is being done to prevent this? The police have a responsibility to catch criminals. Rape is a crime. Rape is crime but the justice system and majority of the general public blame the victim and not the criminal.
Driving instructors in Italy have a reputation, deserved or undeserved, for molesting young female pupils, and the case appeared at first to be a familiar story of sexual assault on a lonely country road.
A rapist is a criminal.
A rapist is a criminal.
A rapist is a criminal.
No ifs. No buts. No 'she was wearing...'
A rapist is a criminal.
A rapist is a criminal.
No ifs. No buts. No 'she was wearing...'
or any other excuses for criminal behaviour. It is a crime. It cannot be excused by circumstances. This ruling is very disturbing and I think it demonstrates some of the latent hate that exists in our society towards female people.
h/t Jeff Fecke
|
Bookmark this post:
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment