Pleasure Her Posted September 22nd 2019
Interesting that feminists see a world full of potential if not actual rapists, but women expect men to take viagra to deal with performance problems.
They often ridicule men who cannot get it up. Is that not a form of psychological bullying and rape? I think so. If it was man forcing a woman to take a sex performance drug it would certainly be called rape.
Feminists need to realise that given time ‘ action and reaction are equal and opposite.’ Newton Laws of Motion. Also if women really do not want to be seen as sex subjects, men will get the message and find other interests.
Why men won’t get married anymore: Women complain chaps today won’t settle down. Sorry, ladies, but it’s all your fault, argues a wickedly provocative new book Posted September 22nd 2019
Published: 00:36, 20 April 2015 | Updated: 14:26, 20 April 2015
16k shares 3.6k View comments
A controversial new book argues that the triumph of feminism has meant men are now second-class citizens.
On Saturday, in our first extract, it laid bare how men are abused, belittled and exploited. Today, it shows how men are treated unfairly in marriage and fatherhood.
According to the Office for National Statistics, marriage in Britain is at its lowest level since 1895
George Clooney, Benedict Cumberbatch and Eddie Redmayne may have all taken the plunge recently — but they are a diminishing band of brothers, for the number of men marrying in the West has plunged in recent decades.
The state of matrimony is not just ailing. It is dying out faster than a mobile phone battery.
According to the Office for National Statistics, marriage in Britain is at its lowest level since 1895. In 2011, there were just 286,634 ceremonies — a 41 per cent free fall from 1972, when 480,285 couples tied the knot.
For an army of women, Mr Right is simply not there, no matter how hard they look for him. And the reason? When it comes to marriage, men are on strike.
Why? Because the rewards are far less than they used to be, while the cost and dangers it presents are far greater.
‘Ultimately, men know there’s a good chance they’ll lose their friends, their respect, their space, their sex life, their money and — if it all goes wrong — their family,’ says Dr Helen Smith, author of Why Men Are Boycotting Marriage, Fatherhood And The American Dream.
‘They don’t want to enter into a legal contract with someone who could effectively take half their savings, pension and property when the honeymoon period is over.
‘Men aren’t wimping out by staying unmarried or being commitment phobes. They’re being smart.’
When British businessman Alan Miller married his first wife, Melissa, in 2003, he thought it was for ever. She immediately decided to give up work, including her £85,000 salary, to become what is known as a ‘Harvey Nichols wife’ — spending her time shopping and lunching.
When they separated just two years and nine months later, he was forced to pay her a £5million divorce settlement, which included his £2.3million home in Chelsea and a £2.7million lump sum — despite the fact they did not have children. That’s £5,000 a day of marriage. Ker-ching!
Or take former Arsenal footballer Ray Parlour. When he wed girlfriend Karen in 1998, it all started out rosy. But by the time the relationship fell apart in 2004, the former optician’s nurse didn’t just get two mortgage-free houses, £38,500 in annual support for their three children and a £250,000 tax-free lump sum…
Oh no. She also got personal maintenance of £406,500 a year from her ex’s future earnings. This, she said, was because she had ‘encouraged’ him to be a good midfielder.
This is precisely why the WAG culture rages through our country like an aggressive disease. Girls of 16 aspire to be glamorous girlfriends because it’s an easy life — not because they love the game or even the men playing it.
George Clooney (pictured with his wife Amal), Benedict Cumberbatch and Eddie Redmayne may have all taken the plunge recently – but they are a diminishing band of brothers
Young women who wear so much make-up they have to tip their heads back to get their eyes open are encouraged to hunt in packs until they snag a rich footballer.
Why? Because it beats getting up at 7am, doing the daily commute and actually thinking about something other than themselves.
And then, when the marriage is over, it’s time for the wife to make what Mayfair-based divorce lawyer Camilla Baldwin calls ‘some real money — more than the average person ever dreams of’. Especially as some judges, particularly those in London, are renowned for favouring the wife in the division of assets.
So, what’s a man to do? ‘If he’s determined to get married, then he must get a pre-nuptial agreement,’ says Baldwin. ‘Otherwise steer clear altogether.
‘Be in a relationship, even live together. But don’t get married. Especially if you have any prospect of making money.’
American social commentator Suzanne Venker agrees. The problem with divorce settlements, she says, is women want to have their cake and eat it.
‘We messed with the old marriage structure and now it’s broken,’ she says. ‘Back in the old days, stay-at-home mothers got a financial reward because child-rearing doesn’t pay cash.
‘Now we want total independence from men, but if we divorce — even without having children — we expect to get alimony for ever. We can’t have it both ways.’
Along with the prospect of endless domestic criticism, this is why men are saying ‘I don’t’ rather than ‘I do’. Men need marriage like a fish needs a bicycle.
‘Many women have been raised to think of men as the enemy,’ says Venker. ‘It’s precisely this dynamic — women good, men bad — that has destroyed the relationship between the sexes.
‘After decades of browbeating, men are tired. Tired of being told there’s something fundamentally wrong with them. Tired of being told that if women aren’t happy, it’s their fault. The rise of women has not threatened men. It has just irritated them.’
But by far the most negative aspect of marriage is the likelihood of being edited out of your children’s lives — if it all goes pear-shaped — by a state that has relegated the role of father to its lowest point ever. Peter Lloyd discusses the state of 21st Century manhood Loaded: 0%Progress: 0%0:00PreviousPlaySkipLIVEMute00:00Current Time 0:00/Duration Time 2:01FullscreenNeed TextVideo Quality576p540p360p270pForegroundBackgroundWindowFont SizeText Edge StyleFont Family
Video: A Voice for Men
Former Arsenal footballer Ray Parlour’s ex-wife Karen got two mortgage-free houses, £38,500 in annual support for their three children, a £250,000 tax-free lump sum and personal maintenance of £406,500 a year from her ex’s future earnings when they split
It wasn’t always this way. In the 1800s, men typically got custody of the children in the event of a split — not as a result of privilege, but because they were solely financially responsible for them.
They got the children, but they also got the bill. Benefits Britain didn’t exist, encouraging single mums to go it alone.
Now, 200 years on, women get the children, but men still get the bill. Sometimes, men even pay for children who aren’t theirs.
The Child Support Agency has 500 cases of paternity fraud a year, where a mother names a man as the biological father of her child, even when she has a good idea he isn’t. And that’s just the cases we know about. According to a YouGov study, 1.2 million men doubt they are the fathers of their partners’ children.
The recent case of Steven Carter, from Devon, is not unusual. The CSA deducted £50,000 from his bank account between 2007 and 2014, even though a DNA test later proved the child in question wasn’t his.
TV MAKES MEN LOOK LIKE IDIOTS
Men have long been considered aggressors and threats to the safety of children, but getting it wrong is a human trait, not a male defect.
In fact, in the past few years, some high- profile perpetrators of child abuse have been women: Karen Matthews, who staged the kidnap of her daughter Shannon; Amanda Hutton, whose son’s mummified body was found two years after he died; and Baby P’s mother Tracey Connelly.
‘There is absolutely no magic ingredient that women have when it comes to being parents,’ says Adrienne Burgess from the Fatherhood Institute. ‘Men are equally innately hard-wired to care for children.
‘The only difference is that the rest of the world thinks they’re dangerous, uninterested and lacking skills mothers are born with. That is a total myth.’
The problem is exacerbated by the way fathers are portrayed in countless films and TV shows as being utterly inept and untrustworthy. Off the top of my head, I can cite Men Behaving Badly, Last Of The Summer Wine, The Simpsons, Everybody Loves Raymond and Friends as examples, plus Three Men And A Baby — the highest-grossing box office hit of 1987.
They acknowledged this, but the Department of Work and Pensions still will not refund him because the ‘child’ is now 22, thus an adult, and so the case is officially closed.
Then there’s Mark Webb, who raised his ‘daughter’ for 17 years, only to discover she was not biologically related to him. When he sued his former wife for compensation, county and appeal court judges denied his damages claim, brushing it off as ‘a man’s obligation’. To this day, no British woman has been convicted of paternity fraud.
This set-up is no accident, though. Since Harriet Harman and her pals entered politics, the laws that govern family life have been re-jigged to put women on top and men on the back foot.
They decided that families aren’t society’s natural, balanced building block, but a cunning plot to oppress mothers while placing men in undeserving positions of power (when many men were breaking their backs in jobs they hated to keep everything ticking over).
To avenge this, they squeezed men from the home and hit them where it hurts: the heart.
Don’t believe me? The Children Act of 1989 specifically declares: ‘The rule of law that a father is the natural guardian of his legitimate child is abolished.’
A year later, a report by the Institute for Public Policy Research called The Family Way saw Harman declare: ‘It cannot be assumed men are bound to be an asset to family life or that the presence of fathers in families is necessarily a means to social cohesion.’
Even now, the Children and Families Act of 2014 doesn’t mention the word ‘father’ once. Not once.
Sir Bob Geldof was one of the first high-profile men to challenge the legislation after losing access to his daughters Peaches, Pixie and Fifi when Paula Yates left him in 1995.
‘It was beyond expensive,’ he told me. ‘I had to borrow money and was close to losing it all. In the end, my circumstances changed, but it could have been very different.
‘Men still spend thousands getting court orders that aren’t worth the paper they’re written on. The whole system is disgusting.
‘I remember a court clerk telling me: “Whatever you do, don’t say you love your children. Family courts consider men who articulate this as extreme.” It was madness.’
Sir Bob Geldof challenged legislation after losing access to his daughters Fifi, Pixie and Peaches (pictured left to right in 2005) when Paula Yates left him in 1995
According to the Office for National Statistics, one in three youngsters have no access to their fathers, which equates to four million children in the UK.
But there is a ray of hope, says Dr Craig Pickering, from the charity Families Need Fathers. ‘The Children and Families Act says, for the first time in English law, that both parents should be involved in a child’s life after divorce,’ he says.
‘The trouble is that its effectiveness depends on what the judges make of it. It wouldn’t be the first time that they came up with their own bizarre interpretation of something straightforward.’
Pickering says sanctions should be imposed on mothers who fail to co-operate, such as passports and driving licences being confiscated.
WE DO HAVE LESS SEX AFTER MARRIAGE
Think your wedding day will be the happiest day of your life, chaps? You may need to think again. The quantity — and quality — of sex dwindles after marriage, say researchers.
A recent survey of 3,000 couples found those who had sex four times a week before their wedding did the deed just once a week afterwards.
Then there’s the cost of bankrolling the average wedding — a burden that is increasingly falling on couples rather than their parents.
It’s not called the ‘big day’ for nothing; the latest stats say you’ll need to have saved up around £18,000 to pay the bills.
For the same amount, though, you could get an amazing holiday with first-class flights round the world, a nice car, a deposit on an apartment or a wardrobe of Savile Row suits.
Makes you think, doesn’t it?
‘The Government consulted on this, but stopped mid-way through,’ he says. ‘We don’t know why.’
I put this to Edward Timpson, Minister for Children and Families. Eventually, I was told by the Ministry of Justice: ‘The consultation concluded we should not introduce further punitive enforcement elements. There are already punishments available.’
Hmm. Perhaps someone needs to tell them they don’t work.
Considering that the annual cost of family breakdown is reportedly £44billion — that’s more than the defence budget — you’d think curing fatherlessness would be a priority for a country haemorrhaging money. But it isn’t.
Instead, everyone is petrified of inadvertently apportioning blame to single mothers, even though it’s not about them. Only recently, in a bid to woo the female vote, David Cameron said deadbeat dads ‘should be looked at like drink drivers’, yet said nothing about the mothers who deliberately steer them off the road.
Here we had the head of the Government telling men to raise children properly, yet offering a law that actively keeps children and fathers apart as the solution. So much for family values.
Meanwhile, single-parent organisations such as Gingerbread — supported by children’s author J. K. Rowling of all people — casually dismiss studies that suggest a lack of male role models at home increases the likelihood of crime and mental illness.
This is despite a study conducted by Oxford University, which followed 20,000 children from 1958 and found those with a father were far less likely to break the law or suffer from psychological issues. Young boys with involved fathers also performed better at school.
Dr Paul Ramchandani, of Imperial College London, conducted a study that found ‘disengaged and remote father-child interactions as early as the third month of life’ often lead to behaviour problems in children when they are older.
The logic is simple — not having a father leaves a hole in the soul.
For an army of women, Mr Right is simply not there, no matter how hard they look for him. And the reason? When it comes to marriage, men are on strike (picture posed by models)
A void that young people frequently fill with drugs, alcohol or intimacy. This might not sit well in the feminist family framework, but sometimes the truth hurts.
In 2012, the substance misuse charity Addaction published a report that proved father deficit to be real, causing anger, self-loathing, addiction and identity issues.
It saw young men compensate with a ‘counterfeit masculinity’ of strength, anger and violence, often combined with sexual prowess.
Meanwhile, young women ‘act out a skewed version of femininity that prioritises the use of sex and relationships with men above all else’.
Cruelly, this creates the cycle all over again, with teenagers jumping into bed with each other without a thought for the consequences.
The Trust for the Study of Adolescence recently proved scores of teenage girls in Britain are deliberately becoming young mothers as a career move because, with the state and the father contributing, it offers more guaranteed security than a job.
Even 13-year-old girls admitted this, which might explain why Britain has the highest teenage pregnancy rate in Europe, at an annual government cost of nearly £63million.
Perhaps the law-makers need to think about radical action to break the cycle. Maybe men could be allowed to have a financial abortion from a child to which they didn’t pre-consent.
In a specified time — say, legal abortion guidelines — men could be allowed to formally relinquish all monetary obligations, rights and responsibilities if duped into fatherhood. The woman still wants to proceed? Fine, that’s her choice. But not on his salary.
Controversial? Yes. But overnight we would see fewer acts of conception by deception. And that can only be a good thing — for men and for society.
Stand By Your Manhood by Peter Lloyd (Biteback, £16.99). © 2015 Peter Lloyd. To buy a copy for £13.59, visit mailbookshop.co.uk or call 0808 272 0808. Discount until May 2, P&P free for a limited time only.
Editorial Comment Feminism tolerates no argument. It is a belief system and polemic that permits no discussion, It is upper middle class female totalitarianism. Female greed, arrogance and dishonesty has and still does destroy male and childrens’ lives. The legal system has a total bias against men.
Thursday, May 30, 2019
Swedish Sex Pistol Aimed at Assange
In my article, Avoiding Assange, a month ago, right after the first US indictment was issued, I addressed two diversionary arguments that I knew would be used by those who want to hide their complicity with American imperialism under leftish cover—that is, those who don’t want to be seen as endorsing the United States government’s prosecution of Assange for, and intimidation of every journalist in the world from, reporting the embarrassing truth about American war crimes, but who also don’t really want to stand in the way of Assange’s extradition to the United States.
The first of those arguments was the denial that the USG’s charge against Assange posed any threat to press freedom—that it was just about “hacking,” not publishing. Both the New York Times (NYT) and the Washington Post (WaPo) pretended to believe in, and celebrated, the Trump administration’s meticulous threading of the legal/constitutional needle to avoid endangering freedom of speech and the press. For the NYT: “The administration has begun well by charging Mr. Assange with an indisputable crime…not with publishing classified government information, but with stealing it, skirting — for now — critical First Amendment questions.” For the WaPo, the indictment was “not the defeat for civil liberties of which his defenders mistakenly warn,” but “a victory for the rule of law.” Well, that argument and pretense have now disappeared with the USG’s superseding indictment that uses the Espionage Act to threaten Assange with 175 years in prison. Even the most Assange-hating liberal media personalities and institutions—from the NYT and WaPo to MSNBC and the Guardian—have no way to deny the threat this poses to freedom of the press. As Alan Rusbridger, Assange-hating former editor of the Assange-hating Guardian, recognizes, the US indictment is an attempt “to criminalise things journalists regularly do as they receive and publish true information given to them by sources or whistleblowers.” And, for the NYT Editorial Board, the present indictment no longer “skirts,” but “aims at the heart of the First Amendment.” (Though, as if it just couldn’t help itself, in its statement, the NYT sneaks in a pernicious point, saying Assange was “a source, not a partner.” This actually ratifies the USG’s “he’s not a publisher” argument, and I foresee the possibility of the USG quoting and using this editorial against Assange.) At this point, nobody can pretend they don’t know what Assange is in for if sent to the United States. He’s facing 175 years of charges under the Espionage Act, which forbids a “public interest” defense. As John Kiriakou has stated, from personal experience: “A fair trial in the Eastern District of Virginia…is utterly impossible.” Furthermore, by asserting the extraterritorial jurisdiction of American law to demand the extradition of another country’s (Australia) citizen from a third country (Great Britain) for activities that took place entirely outside the US, the present indictment is, as Joel Simon of the Committee to Protect Journalists, points out: “a direct threat to journalists everywhere in the world….Under this rubric, anyone anywhere in the world who publishes information that the U.S. government deems to be classified could be prosecuted for espionage.” Indeed, under this legal rubric, China can demand that Italy extradite Dean Baquet (Executive Editor of the NYT) for publishing true, leaked information about Chinese military crimes, in contravention of Chinese espionage law! Hard to imagine, I know, because we all—and especially the US political leadership—assume that American imperialism makes that impossible. A correct assumption, for the moment. But we all also know the tricks “assume” can play on us. Like many, I did not expect the USG would bare its fangs so quickly. I thought the Trump Administration would wait until Assange was on US soil before going for the jugular. The not-so-bad news is that by, for whatever reason, coming on so strong and fast with such an extraordinary threat, the USG has, I think, widened Assange’s base of support, at least for the moment. This makes the real stakes clear in a way that’s particularly important in the British context, where Julian Assange’s fate is being decided. It also makes, more quickly than I expected, the second of those leftish diversions—a possible Swedish extradition request—a crucial tool for creating confusion in ways helpful to the US prosecution. As I mentioned in the previous essay, it was heartening to see Jeremy Corbyn and his shadow Home Secretary, Diane Abbott, declare that “the extradition of Julian Assange to the US for exposing evidence of atrocities in Iraq and Afghanistan should be opposed by the British government,” and it was bizarre to see, immediately thereafter, a concerted campaign arise among liberal British politicians and press, with a letter from 70+ MPs, demanding that the present and future British governments “do everything…to ensure” that Assange be extradited to Sweden, “in the event Sweden makes an extradition request.” In the space of 48 Hours, Jeremy Corbyn was pressured to say that Julian Assange “must answer” sex allegations “if Sweden decides to re-open their investigation.” It was bizarre because somehow a non-existent, hypothetical Swedish extradition request had instantly taken precedence in British liberal discourse over an actual US extradition request. Corbyn had immediately accepted that Great Britain must give greater priority to showing “the seriousness with which such [sex] allegations are viewed” than to protecting the freedom of the press to expose evidence of US atrocities. Since then, the US extradition request has become considerably nastier and even more difficult for ostensibly anti-imperialist British left-liberals to leave unopposed. This leaves a possible Swedish sex-crime extradition request as the only remaining crutch for those who want to appear less complicit with the U.S. attack on Assange than they actually are. Nothing epitomizes this more disgracefully than the Guardian’s editorial of 24 May, under the sub-head: “The founder of WikiLeaks faces charges of espionage in the US and rape in Sweden. He should stand trial for rape.” Yes, embedded among its repeated reminders of how much the Guardian “disapproves” of this “unattractive character” who revealed US war crimes to the world, is the statement that Assange “must be defended against this [US] extradition request because the indictments against him threaten to damage freedom and democracy.” Also because “the Espionage Act is quite the wrong instrument [Is there a right one?] to use against journalists or even their sources,” and “the American penal system would be more cruel than …even in our shameful prisons.” The Guardian’s editors even evoke, on point, the case of British hacker Lauri Love, whom Britain refused to extradite to the US because of the cruelty of its penal system. But how is it that the Guardian proposes “defending” Assange against US extradition? By demanding that the UK “send Mr. Assange to Sweden”! Somehow, the Guardian thinks that conjuring up an extradition request from Sweden that still does not exist trumps and solves all concerns about extraditing Assange to the US. The editors never consider the possibility that there may be no extradition request. (Perhaps they know something, but it’s not a sure thing.) Or what happens if Assange goes to Sweden and either is not charged with a crime (He is not, and never has been.), or is tried and found not guilty. In other words, they completely ignore the obvious: That the United States will demand extradition from Sweden just as it is doing from the UK, and that Sweden will comply. Sending Julian Assange to Sweden does not “defend” him from US extradition at all. It’s a liberal media version of “Don’t think of the elephant!” Does the Guardian not see, or care, about this glaring logical and consequential fault in its position? Of course it does. The Guardian knows exactly what it’s doing. The purpose of this editorial as written is not and cannot be to “defend…against this [US] extradition”; it is to support that extradition by ignoring it. The Guardian here is carefully crafting a discourse in which the threat of the US indictment and extradition disappears behind the evocation of a rape allegation. The intended effect is to encourage its British readers to support the capitulation to that threat as it will inevitably reappear in Sweden, while thinking they are not—while thinking that all they are doing is assuring their own virtuous adherence to “the seriousness with which such [sex] allegations are viewed.” The Guardian isn’t asking the British government to honor an extradition request that doesn’t exist, it is suggesting a set-up by which Britain passes Assange through Sweden to the US. This use of a sexual allegation against Assange to divert attention from, and effectively support, the American extradition demand is pernicious and phony. It’s an obvious attempt to give virtue-signaling identity-politics liberals a reason not to protest Assange’s extradition or imprisonment. It’s already the dominant ruse for such purposes in England, and it’s going to become more prominent everywhere now that the indictment can no longer be portrayed as a relatively minor matter. As I said before, I agree with Katrin Axelsson and Lisa Longstaff of Women Against Rape that “the pursuit of Assange is political” and “the allegations against him are a smokescreen behind which a number of governments are trying to clamp down on WikiLeaks.” The Swedish prosecution effort against Assange has been part of this stitch-up from the outset, and has been presented in misleading and mendacious ways by the western media, which is also part of it. Most people do not understand that Julian Assange is not, and has never been, charged with a crime, and that the Swedish process has always been, and still is, a “preliminary investigation” that seeks to determine if there’s enough evidence to bring a criminal charge. There is one extant allegation against Assange: that, after a night of sexual activity together, he initiated condom-less wake up sex with his partner (SW). It is agreed that the sex was consensual. It is agreed that the condom was at least asked about but definitely not insisted upon. The sole disagreement is over how fully awake his partner was at the moment of initiation—“half-asleep” according to a text she sent and what she told witnesses, “dozed off” according to a police summary (“protocol”) of her interview. Here’s how the Nordic New Network explains it: “According to the interview protocol Ms. Wilén somnade, which can be translated as “dozed off” or “went to sleep.” Prior to the interview, however, she had confided to friends that she was only ‘half asleep’ at the time of penetration.” The only open legal question is whether SW’s state of somnolence, at the moment Assange initiated a consensual act of intercourse, means she was “unduly exploit[ed]” while “in a helpless state,” supporting a charge of “rape.” (See the helpful video from Kim Iversen for the extremely expansive definition of “rape” in Swedish law.) The Swedes have been “preliminarily investigating” this for nine years. They have all the physical and interview evidence they will ever have. If they could have charged Assange with a crime on the basis of that evidence, they would have. They don’t need him in Sweden to do so. They can charge him in absentia, as they have others. This means they do not have the evidence to make a charge. And they are not going to get it. There is no new evidence that’s going to magically appear when Julian Assange arrives in Sweden. It is, therefore, unlikely that a charge will ever be made, or that a trial—in which Assange may very well be found not guilty—ever held. It’s Assange who has been seeking the resolution of the sex allegations for nine years; it’s the Swedish prosecutors who have been avoiding it—and have been berated by the Swedish Court of Appeals and the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (UNWGAD) for doing so. The resolution of the sex allegation is not what any of state actors here—Sweden, Britain, or the US—want. The purpose of all this is not to resolve the rape allegation—to make it into a real charge and bring it to trial. It is to get Assange moved judicially out of Britain to Sweden under the cloud of “rape,” and for Sweden to send him on to the US—precisely with the rape allegation unresolved and hanging over his head forever. Leaving so many with: “He deserves to be in prison, anyway.” But, hey, that’s my wild and crazy take on the situation. There is a simple way for the Guardian and all liberal Brits to demonstrate both that the Swedish prosecutors are really interested in resolving the sex allegation, and that the Guardian liberals’ demand for the UK government to honor a Swedish extradition request is something other than a virtue-signaling gesture to wash their hands of imperialist stench with feminist soap: They can demand that any extradition to Sweden be made contingent on no onward extradition to the US. If Sweden is claiming to want Assange in country to resolve a rape allegation, then, to get him, it must promise to do just that—either charge and try him or close the case and release him, and not send him off to the US to face 175 years in prison for something entirely irrelevant to that allegation. If, per the Guardian, the UK really has the ethical obligation to defend Assange from US prosecution, then it must carry that defense through any process of extradition to Sweden. And it can. The Swedish Prosecutorial Authority tells us so:
Once the British authorities enforce the UK Supreme Court’s decision to extradite Julian Assange to Sweden, Sweden is bound by the so-called “Doctrine of Speciality” which means that Sweden cannot extradite him further to a third country, for example the USA, without permission from the UK. This means that Julian Assange would be in the same position in Sweden as he would be in the UK with regard to further extradition to a third country.
you know about this rather significant point of law, which is publicly posted
on the internet? Did the 70+ British MPs, and the entire editorial staff of the
Guardian and of liberal politicians and media organizations crying for extradition
to Sweden not know about this? Or did they just ignore it? Which is more
course, we don’t need this law to demand no onward extradition from Sweden, but
it’s quite nice to know that it is there to support us, and quite interesting
to know that nobody mentions it.
now we know: The British courts can, as a matter of ordinary law, make Sweden
honor the defense of Assange from US extradition. And we can insist that anybody
in Britain, Sweden, the US, or the outer planets who claims—as the Guardian and Jeremy Corbyn and most of
the liberal media now do—to be concerned about resolving the sex allegation and
to reject the threat to press freedom posed by the US indictment must demand
those who may claim not to care much about the US indictment, with all the
issues it raises and penalties it carries, because resolving the sex allegation
is so much more important to them, have to recognize now that it’s reasonable
for Julian Assange and his supporters and most of the journalistic world to be
very concerned about those issues and penalties. Indeed, those people especially
should be eager to demand that the entirely irrelevant US indictment, with
all its heavy baggage, be taken off the table, so that proper, focussed
attention can be paid to what they see as the much more important issue task of
deciding, after nine years of preliminary investigation, whether consensual
wake-up sex should be charged as felony rape.
other words, in the present situation, the only people who would not demand that
extradition to the United States be taken off the table as a condition for
extradition to Sweden are those for whom the US political charges are more
important than the Swedish sex allegations, and who support extraditing
Assange to the US for trial on those charges.
line: Anyone who explicitly supports extradition from Britain to Sweden without
explicitly objecting to onward extradition to the United States is, in fact,
supporting that onward extradition—and, now, knowingly.
principal task here, as it always has been, is to prevent Assange from being extradited
and imprisoned in the US for revealing the truth about US war crimes. With the
demise of the “hacking not publishing indictment” argument, the Swedish sex
allegation is going to become the prominent tool for misdirecting us from that
task over the next few months, as Julian Assange’s fate is settled in Britain.
It is a ruse and a diversion whose purpose is to support Assange’s extradition
to the US by ignoring it. This can be proved by raising the obvious and legally
valid demand that any extradition to Sweden be conditioned on no onward extradition
to the US, and watching the reaction from those who claim to be so concerned
about resolving the sex allegation. Those who are speaking in good faith will accept
that position immediately. Those who are liars and hypocrites, and are basically
chill with Assange being extradited to the United States, will hem and haw and try
to ignore. Don’t let them.
who actually do oppose extradition to the US cannot let that diversion stand
unchallenged. Everyone—from the Guardian
to Jeremy Corbyn—who demands Assange be extradited to Sweden must be challenged
to also demand forbidding onward extradition to the United States. The defense of
freedom of the press and the just
resolution of any investigation into a sexual allegation demand it.
call on the Guardian, the 70+ MPs,
and all the media voices who have been crying for the UK to honor any Swedish
extradition request, to revise their calls to include the condition of no onward
extradition, or stand exposed as lying, hypocritical enablers of the empire’s
war on free speech and freedom of the press.
mind the bollocks.
Related article: Avodiing Assange Posted by The Polemicist at 5/30/2019 02:00:00 PM9 Comments
We need a Middle Eastern style morality police to protect men from false allegations which officially never happen because women never lie, but men do – September 21st 2019
Men need to be very careful with women and sex. It really is time for agreed terms, secure videos should court become an issue and signed agreements. Sex should also be more seriously controlled. The couples sexual history, including lewd suggestive messages from the complainant, along with evidene of previous bad character, should be revealed to the defence. Unisex non revealing clothing should be mandatory from birth till death.
Women are at least equally likely to lie as men, but women’s equality battle is only interested in targets with a price tag or other material reward- justice for them and their lawyers is highly selctive Love and romance are male fanatsies. It is incredible that this highly dubious sex charge against Assange is taken more seriously than framing a war crime whistleblower for espionage.
it is high time rape cases went back to being judged on the evidence and that the legal definition reverts to being aboiut actual biological rape, not what a woamn might allege as any form of unproveable after the event inappropriate sexual contact. No wonder we have so many male to female transexuals- but even they get accused of rape because most feminists hate them.
As it stands men are immediately assumed guilty, with addresses and names publicised as soon as anonymous woman makes her allegations- inviting female fantasists to add to the police case. The lack of rape convictions speaks for itself, but feminists and the media just won’t accept this. So it is very easy to destroy a man’s life. The burden of proof in these matters always rests with the men, so much for equality. If a man’s character is opened to question in rape cases then so should be a woman’s. We need the Western equivalent of the Islamic World’s morality police.
Christina Dalcher | “The idea was to go back to Biblical roles, to separate men and women”
Published August 1, 2018 by Alice O’K
How many words do you speak in a day? A scientific study from the University of Texas, Austin, put the average figure at around 16,000 words a day for both men and women. In Christina Dalcher’s début VOX, women are permitted to speak just 100 words a day. Each must wear a bracelet around their wrist, capable of delivering a powerful electric shock as soon as the daily word limit is exceeded.
It’s a terrific hook for this commercial feminist novel set in a dystopian near-future America, where the conservative, religious right has risen to total political power. Dalcher writes of the Bible Belt as “that swathe of Southern states where religion ruled”, expanding across the country, “morphing from belt to corset”. The new US president is in thrall to a preacher named Reverend Carl Corbin, the leader of the Pure Movement, which believes in traditional gender roles and that a woman’s place is in the home.
The angel in the house
Over the telephone from her home in Norfolk, Virginia, Dalcher tells me that the Pure Movement in her novel is based in part on a late 19th-century/early 20th-century movement in America called the Cult of Domesticity. “The idea was to go back to Biblical roles, to separate men and women,” she says, explaining that women were expected to conform in four ways; piety, purity, submission and domesticity. She adds that there is a modern version of the Cult of Domesticity active in the US right now; the True Woman movement, part of a larger religious campaign called Revive Our Hearts. Later, I look up the website and find its manifesto, which includes the following, rather chilling, statement: “We are called as women to affirm and encourage men as they seek to express godly masculinity, and to honor [sic] and support God-ordained male leadership in the home and in the church.”
In the world of the novel books are forbidden to women, their bank accounts have been transferred to the closest male relative and all female employment suspended. So Jean McClellan, once a leading neurolinguist, is now occupied with running the household and helping her children—three boys and a girl—navigate this new society in near-silence. Her daughter Sonia is six years old, an age where she should be soaking up language like a sponge and chattering non-stop, but she too is restricted to 100 words a day, a deprivation with potentially catastrophic consequences.
“I think that women especially will read VOX and think the horrible part is being limited to 100 words a day,” says Dalcher. “But in my mind the horror actually comes from thinking about what is going to become of the next generation. What is going to happen to these little girls who aren’t learning language in time?” A limit of 100 words for someone who can already speak “doesn’t take away your language faculty, or remove your ability to think, to rationalise, to process information. But if we take language away, take the linguistic faculty away, by not ensuring that children acquire it by a certain age during the critical period, then we are really in trouble, right?”
In writing the scenes featuring Sonia, Dalcher, who has a PhD in theoretical linguistics, found herself thinking of a famous case study which she came across at the beginning of her academic career. “Genie” was a “wild child” who was rescued from her abusive and neglectful parents in California in 1970, after nearly 14 years of almost total social isolation; she had no language, nor, psychologists and linguists discovered, any hope of acquiring it.
“Genie was severely abused and neglected. She was denied language, which is what is happening with these little girls in the book. We only see Sonia but we know that Sonia goes to school with other little girls and there’s a whole generation that we can almost imagine—projecting two generations into the future—a time when women have lost their language faculty completely. The older women who had it have died off, and where would we be then? We’d have this situation where men were really running things, and women were, I don’t know, like pets! That to me is much more horrifying than being limited to 100 words.”
Jean is offered a reprieve out of the blue—her voice is given back—when the President’s brother has a skiing accident which affects his speech. She is suddenly addressed as Dr McClellan again, her bracelet is removed, and she is invited back to her old lab, where she used to lead a team working on a cure for aphasia (a language and communication disorder resulting from damage to the language centres of the brain). But she soon discovers she is part of a much larger plan: to eliminate the voices of women entirely . . .
VOX (Latin for “voice”) grew out of a piece of flash fiction, which Dalcher defines as “very, very short stories . . . Sometimes as few as 100 words”. She started writing the novel in 2017 but not, she says, as a response to the Trump administration. (Although, in a nice topical touch, supporters of the Pure Movement drive around in cars with bumper stickers that read “Make America Moral Again”.)
VOX owes a debt to Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale, which Dalcher first read when it was published back in 1985, and re-read last year before starting her own novel, prompted by trailers for the hit HBO TV series: “I’m not a big television adaptation person, so I thought I’ll just go read the book instead.” She is a big fan of Atwood’s writing: “She writes scenes that almost stand alone, like little slices of a great whole. You don’t need the whole context to appreciate the beautiful lyricism of her writing. So, more than the content [of The Handmaid’s Tale], I was actually studying the form; how did she deal with flashbacks, how did she build the world, how did she interweave the now and the past? That to me was very insightful.”
Advance reviews of VOX have been very positive. Dachler sees her novel as “not so much a call-to-arms but a call to pay attention”, and to “not necessarily live our lives as though everything is going to be the same tomorrow because that’s not the case. The fact is that our lives really can change in a heartbeat. We saw this with [Donald Trump’s] executive order banning travel from Muslim countries to the United States. Everything changed very quickly.
“Also, what I would love is for a reader to take away something about how precious this commodity of language is and how we take it for granted. I’m not just talking about free speech, or the ability to go out and march…but I’d like readers to contemplate how much we depend on our language faculty and what would happen to us if that were taken away.”
About The Book
Set in an
America where half the population has been silenced, VOX is the
harrowing, unforgettable story of what one woman will do to protect
herself and her daughter.
Editorial Comment It seems ironic that women of a certain class have never had such a big voice in media and public affairs as they do today. Still the myth is that they are silenced, to see and not be heard. Differences of social class are never mentioned.
Women of the lower orders are treated like sheep, herded by their bigger better sisters into the pen of feminism. Literary agents have described themselves as gate keepers, choosing what is published. Only 3 % of the British population go in bookshops, with women over 40 making the biggest market for fiction. According to a recent report, these women cannot find enough fiction involving women that they could identiy with.
Emotional Abuse of Men: Men Victims of Emotional Abuse Too Posted
September 16th 2019
While abuse of women is widely known, what is not widely recognized is that men can be victims of emotional abuse too. It’s unfortunate, but true, that women and men can be just as emotionally abusive towards men as they can be towards women. And emotional abuse of men is every bit as unacceptable as the emotional abuse of women.
Emotional abuse of men is more common than once thought although the exact numbers on its occurrence aren’t known due to lack of study. In domestic abuse, about 40% of cases involve violence of women against men.
What is Emotional Abuse of Men?
Emotional abuse of men is the same as emotional abuse of women: it is acts, including verbal assault, that make a person feel less self-worth or dignity. Emotional abuse of men makes them feel like less of a person.
Male victims of emotional abuse may experience partners that:
- Yell and scream
- Threaten them and try to induce fear
- Insult and demean them; tell them they are not worth the trouble
- Socially isolate them
- Lie or withhold information
- Treat them like a child or servant
- Control all the finances
When Women Emotionally Abuse Men
Some believe that men are more sensitive to emotional abuse than woman and can “brush off” physical abuse more easily. Male victims of emotional abuse who are called a “coward,” “impotent,” or a “failure,” may be more affected by these remarks than their female counterparts.1
Controlling and emotionally abusive behaviors elicited by women may include:2
- Falsely accusing or threatening to accuse a man of assault on them or their children
- Threatening to take away custody of the children
- Threatening to kill themselves or others
- Making the man feel like “he’s crazy”
- Minimizing the abuse; blaming the victim of the abuse
- Playing mind games
- Making the man feel guilty
- Falsely obtaining a restraining order
- Withholding affection
Why Do Men Stay in Emotionally Abusive Relationships
Like women, many men stay in emotionally abusive relationships. This can be for many reasons but certainly in part due to the toll that emotional abuse can take on a man’s self-worth. He may not believe he is worthy enough to leave the relationship or he may believe he deserves the emotional abuse.
Men may also stay in emotionally abusive relationships because:
- Of threats made by their abuser
- To protect the children
- They feel dependent on the abuser
What Can Male Victims of Emotional Abuse Do?
Unfortunately, due to lack of awareness, programs for male victims of emotional abuse are almost nonexistent. However, private counseling and general anti-violence advocacy groups may be helpful.
Male victims of emotional abuse can:
- Call the National Domestic Abuse Hotline at 1-800-799-SAFE
- Call the Child Abuse Hotline at 1-800-4-A-CHILD
Male victims of emotional abuse should also:
- Leave the relationship, if possible
- Tell others about the abuse
- Keep evidence of abuse for possible legal actions
- Not retaliate
More information on Emotional Abuse Treatment and Therapy.
Ms. Monopoly: ‘Feminist’ version of cult game released in which women are paid more than men
Click to follow
The Evening Standard Matt Drake
Register with your social account or click here to log in I would like to receive lunchtime headlines Monday – Friday plus breaking news alerts, by email
A new “feminist” version of Monopoly has been announced in which women get more money than men to “teach children about the gender pay gap”.
Hasbro said it has released Ms. Monopoly to celebrate women empowerment.
A new female mascot will be featured on the cover of the game and women will receive £240 for passing go while men will receive the usual £200.
According to those behind the idea, the idea is to create a game where women earn more than men do, which is the first game to do so.
The company said in a statement: “It’s a fun new take on the game that creates a world where women have an advantage often enjoyed by men. Read more Monopoly players joke at new version of game which prevents cheating
“But don’t worry, if men play their cards right, they can make more money too.”
Instead of buying property, players invest in inventions created by women, such as Wi-Fi.
But it will still include things such as jail, luxury taxes and chance cards.
Other updates include new tokens such as a white hat, a watch, a barbell, a glass and a jet plane.
Jen Boswinkel, senior director of global brand strategy and marketing for Hasbro Gaming, said it was to teach kids a subject they may not know about yet, USA Today reports.
He added: “With all of the things surrounding female empowerment, it felt right to bring this to Monopoly in a fresh new way.
“It’s giving the topic some relevancy to everyone playing it that everybody gets a turn, and this time women get an advantage at the start. Read more Monopoly board’s cheapest square to be transformed by £10bn investment
“We made sure that this felt authentic and was a fun game families could play and learn about these things that they love and are a part of their life that they didn’t know were invented by women.”
Ms. Monopoly is available for pre-ordering as of today.
Hasbro also released Monopoly Socialism a few weeks ago, which is a tongue-in-cheek game that angered some for its “flippant” treatment of socialism.
Instead of Mayfair and Park Lane, there is the Healthcare For All Hospital, the No-Tip Vegan Restaurant, and the Together We Rise Bakery.
People cannot buy property and have no money of their own, instead they purchase “projects” from the “community fund”.
The fund is stocked with £1,848, which the instruction booklet points out is the same year The Communist Manifesto was released.
Also, most Chance cards tend to be about uncovering corruption, negligence or absenteeism among the labour force.
Editorial Comment Britain is probably the most feminist country in the world, and a major influence on the U.S.A in this respect. The world has never been such a fragmented greedy conflict ridden place in spite of the rise of women in charge.
The British and U.S ( Brmerican ) elite remain safely out of site, their greed and war crimes unnoticed by an ironically arrogant poorly educated mass- in a world where degrees are awarded to remdial class students.
Greta the child environmental campaigner is the icing on this fruitcake world where the goal of women out earning men is sanctified, rather than face up to the global consequences of elite greed, resulting overpopulation, ludicrous diversity smokescreens, unprecedented rebirth of religious bigotry, mass migration of the poor old Third World Masses into the fragile world of the rich nation’s indigenous neglected and poorly rewarded underclass of people who are little more than slaves and scapegoats.
Here world of the underclass- Marx’s lumpenproletariat- the words ‘protecting our Western Style Democracies’ is rather over used and revealing of hidden truths.
Thus it is no surprise that drivel about women’s struggles dominates media and the real freedom fighter, Julian Assange is labelled a sex offender while his work is riducled as fake journalism and spying.
Women Abuse Men, Too—But It’s Often Not Called Abuse Posted September 16th 2019
Thomas Fiffer reverses the genders in an article about abuse written for women to expose the euphemisms we use when women abuse men.
Note: If you don’t want to read the statistics showing that women abuse men in nearly equal numbers, skip down to the list of the 15 signs of an abusive relationship.
| Even though I typed “men” first, Google found more results for the |
reversed phrase, indicating the huge imbalance of available online
Last night I was searching the Internet for a video on “women abusing men” to run here on The Good Men Project. Not only were there just a few actual hits, most of which I’d already seen, but I also found that most of the results that did come up were for men abusing women. Even though I typed “men” first, Google found more results for the reversed phrase, indicating the huge imbalance of available online material. And yet, recent statistics confirm that men represent approximately 40% of the victims in cases of abuse.
According to a British survey, Domestic Violence: The Male Perspective, conducted in 2010:
About two in five of all victims of domestic violence are men, contradicting the widespread impression that it is almost always women who are left battered and bruised, a new report claims.
Do women have a higher chance to get away with domestic violence?
Yes. Mostly because men are culturally shamed into not reporting. That combined with a fear that they will get counter accused and unfortunately many assume law enforcement will side with the female.
Abuse is wrong regardless of the gender that is committing it. More awareness is needed about female on male domestic violence as well as sexual assault. We need to create openess where men are comfortable disclosing said abuses.
For men who are experiencing domestic violence- you are not alone and should not hesitate to come forward. If still wary keep a record including dates and incidents. I have advised patients of mine to do this by emailing an email their partner does not know about and deleting the sent/empty the trash folder. This way if things escalate or you do decide to come forward and report the abuser, you can have a documented pattern of abuse. Also this gives police the ability to lay multiple charges as most police forces require a date, sometimes time and such to form individual charges.
No one should get away with abusing another person. Unfortunately it is common that women are underreported as perpetrators. Hopefully that will change.250 views · View 1 Upvoter
Related QuestionsMore Answers Below
- What percentage of women commit domestic violence?
- Do women get away with domestic violence?
- Do women commit violent domestic violence at the same rate as men?
- What help could women get for domestic violence?
- How can domestic women violence be avoided?
I once saw an item on Dutch television, about a house for men, who were abused by their wives, or girlfriends.
They interviewed this big Hulk of a guy. He looked like you could send him to Syria, all by himself, where he could beat the crap out of ISIS terrorists, just toting a baseball bat.
But he had run away from home, because his wife abused him.
The interviewer asked him questions:
“You are one strong hell of a guy! How can you be afraid of your wife? Are you afraid, she is gonna hit you?”
“You are right. I am a hell of a strong dude! But if my wife hits me ten times, she “a psychological problem”. Psychiatrists and psychologists will help her, and sympathize with her.
If I hit my wife only one time, I am a low down criminal. A psychopath. A wife beater. They will put me in jail, and take the children away from me.
That is why I have decided to leave. Not because I am afraid of my wife”.
Now, I hope, this answers your question.
Yes, abuse to males is very often not turned in to the police. The abused male feels ashamed (due to stigma of the idea of men being sissies if their wife/girlfriend beats them). I do not know about recent research. If the abuse is not called into the police, the abuser can not be prosecuted.120 views · View 1 UpvoterKelsey Hicks, Domestic Violence & Abuse survivor. In it for three years.Answered Oct 10, 2016 · Author has 1.5k answers and 7.3m answer views
Yes, because men typically won’t report the abuse.
Or, also because they tell a friend, and a lot of their ‘guy friends’ would call them names and say they were just being weak. A lot of times, the woman will threaten to go to the police and say HE was abusing HER if he tries to tell them about the abuse.
It’s sad honestly.
Editorial Comment It is rooted in feminist ideology and British political correctness that abuse is always caused by male behaviour, even if the woman is delivering the abuse. When the subject of 17 men being killed by their partners in Britain every year, the ‘Woman’s Hour ‘ presenter suggested that the men had provoked their killers.
In spite of the endless rants for gender equality, men who cry or compalin about women bullying them are regarded as sissies rather than victims. If the gender debate was maths nothing would add up. If the society the PC Feminists and their sympathisers are building was an aeroplane, none of the parts would fit together and it would crash on the runway.
Women are portrayed on the one hand as superior across the social class board, but are never held responsible and are always victims. A word against this zeitgeist and one is villified as misogynistic and sexist.
Man brutally tortured by his wife and her boyfriend in Toronto apartment
By Jayme Poisson and Liam CaseyStaff ReportersFri., Jan. 13, 2012timer8 min. read
Warning: This story contains graphic material that may disturb some readers.
It took 75 minutes Thursday for Crown Attorney Paul Leishman to read aloud in court the 25 pages detailing one of the most heinous crimes in Toronto’s history — one man, confined to a closet and brutally tortured, physically, sexually and psychologically, over the course of three months.
His body cut with razor blades and beaten with hammers and broom handles until they broke. Lighter fluid poured over his skin, and then set on fire. Cartilage ripped from his ears with a pair of pliers. Pins pierced through his lips, sealing his mouth. Bleeding wounds cauterized with hot knives or sewn up with a needle and thread.
Those responsible for the horrific abuse were the man’s own wife and her new boyfriend.
The location was a cramped one-bedroom basement apartment in the city’s west end.
John Michael Siscoe, 40, and the victim’s wife, 30, quietly pleaded guilty earlier this week in the Superior Court of Justice to a slew of charges, including endangering a life and sexual assault causing bodily harm, from Oct. 31, 2009, until police rescued the man on Jan. 19, 2010.
Responding to a call from neighbourhood acquaintances, they found the victim huddled in the dark bedroom closet, naked, shivering, malnourished and with grotesque wounds.
He had five fractured ribs, two collapsed lungs, facial fractures, abrasions and burns all over his body. Pictures taken after he was found show what resembles a man’s face, but black, blue and bloated to three times its normal size. His eyes were swollen shut as pus and plasma oozed from his wounds.
YOU MIGHT BE INTERESTED IN…
- John Michael Siscoe: ‘Sick and deviant’ abuser’s dark, cruel history revealed in court
- Neighbours haunted by Toronto man’s torture in their midst
On Thursday afternoon, as the agreed-upon “horrible litany of facts” was read out, only a handful of people were in the courtroom at 361 University Ave.
They heard a story of a victim whose spirit was so broken that he never tried to escape and who, even when rescued, continued to protect his torturers.
The court ordered a ban on publication of anything that could identify the victim, who is still legally married to the woman in the dock. During the abuse all three were living together in Toronto and she was pregnant with Siscoe’s child.
The story started back in 2005, in a small town southeast of Vancouver. The victim and his wife married in a backyard civil ceremony. Pictures from a Facebook account reveal a smiling couple surrounded by family. They lived off disability insurance — she handled the bills while he cooked.
Starting in 2008, the relationship soured. She was unfaithful and took to the Internet to chat with other men. In December that year, at an Alcoholic Anonymous meeting, the victim met Siscoe, a short, solid man with jet black hair, prior convictions and a history of drug and alcohol abuse. He invited Siscoe to spend New Year’s Eve with him and his wife.
At the time, Siscoe had been living in a recovery house. Shortly after that night, he asked if he could live with the couple as he worked toward his goal of opening a “recovery house.” It wasn’t long after that Siscoe and the woman — heavy-set with wavy, short brown hair — began a sexual relationship, sleeping in one bedroom while her husband slept in another, all under one roof.
The threesome moved to another apartment nearby, living on a tight budget controlled largely by Siscoe, who told the victim that he (the victim) wasn’t ready to afford his own place. There were incidents of anger — like the time Siscoe put his fist through a wall or hit the victim sending him to hospital at least two times with serious injuries to his face, abdomen and hands. He never explained how he got the injuries.
Siscoe “flipped out” when he learned that the victim had a conviction for sexual interference involving a boy years before.
In September of 2009, all three, and she pregnant, decided to move to Toronto.
Yes, things out west were “getting out of control,” but the victim was worried for his wife — now pregnant with another man’s child.
It was supposed to be a new beginning. But what it turned into is so sinister it is difficult to comprehend.
They found a small one-bedroom basement apartment in the city’s west end. The victim initially slept on a pull-out couch.
Around Halloween 2009 came the first major assault. Siscoe punched and kicked the victim, calling him a liar and injuring his face and ears. “Things ended up getting worse,” and then, “really bad,” said the victim, according to court documents.
At the beginning of November, there was a severely broken jaw, explained away by Siscoe’s concocted story that the victim was mugged by a man wearing a black hoodie. When police spoke with the victim in the hospital, he relayed the lie.
There were threats from Siscoe: That if the victim ever “ratted him out” he would find him and kill him. And if he couldn’t, he would find his elderly parents and torture them. Due to their age, “they wouldn’t last long,” the victim said.
And so he stayed, crippled by the psychological abuse.
YOU MIGHT BE INTERESTED IN…
- Man who brutally tortured lover’s husband speaks publicly for first time
- He named the baby Gary, after himself. He allegedly kept the biological father enslaved in the basement
During his confinement and torture, the victim was forced to comply with rules set out by Siscoe and the woman, such as “To do what it takes to not be stupid” and “To do what I have to do to stay alive.” He had to write them out while the new couple watched TV, with little boxes along the side. An “X” marked for when “I didn’t do good things,” the victim said.
By mid-December, things started to get “really bad,” he said, according to court documents. The victim was attacked almost every day, using methods that became increasingly more twisted.
His hands, knees, arms, legs and elbows were struck with broom and mop handles until they broke, as well as a hammer. When police retrieved the household items from the apartment in January there were traces of blood on them. Razor blades were used to cut his body. He was kicked with steel-toed boots and stomped on.
While the victim was naked in a bathtub — sometimes filled with a little bit of water, other times dry — Siscoe poured lighter fluid on his body, then set him on fire. Hairspray, aftershave and rubbing alcohol were alternates. “Stop crying or I’ll give you something to cry about,” Siscoe would tell the victim, court documents show.
“Shut up,” the victim’s wife would say when he screamed loudly. At times, she would be sitting on the toilet in the tiny bathroom or elsewhere while the abuse went on. She told her husband she was worried social services would take her unborn baby away if people heard and the police got involved.Get more of today’s top stories in your inboxSign up for the Star’s Morning Headlines newsletter for a briefing of the day’s big news.Sign Up Now
Of his wife, the victim also said, “There were a couple of times (she) asked him to stop beating me because she thought I had enough.”
Siscoe would also pull cartilage from the victim’s ears with a pair of needle-nosed pliers. Straight pins were placed through his lips, preventing him from talking. Hot knives used to burn the wounds closed and cuts sewn up with a needle and thread — his wife holding down his hands. And swelled injuries punctured to let the blood and fluid out — something Siscoe told his victim was done to drain the infection. Blood was collected in a red bin when he wasn’t in the bathtub. And when blood splattered on the walls, the victim was forced to clean it up with his own clothes.
Siscoe commented that burning and beating the victim was turning him on. There were numerous sexual assaults, too disturbing to print.
At the worst point during the ordeal, the victim was forced to sleep in a 5-by-2-foot bedroom closet. When the couple left, they would sometimes jam the closet doors shut with a chair or take away the access to a telephone, so the victim couldn’t call for help.
A photo of the closet taken after police found the victim shows a thin sheet and pillow lying on the floor, covered in blood stains.
Despite the abuse, the victim still went out, always accompanied by his captors. Eventually, neighbourhood acquaintances stopped believing the excuses the couple gave explaining the victim’s wounds.
One woman ran into the couple while out shopping with her own child in mid-January, and they invited her back to their apartment to see the crib they had just bought for their coming baby.
As they approached the apartment door, the woman recalled Siscoe calling the man by name and saying “Go to bed, go to bed.” She initially thought he was talking to a dog since there was a puppy in the apartment.
After proudly showing her the crib, Siscoe asked if the woman wanted to see the victim, pointed to the closet door and told him to come out.
And from the closet, a man appeared, with a towel around his waist. His eyes swollen shut, his skin purple and black, she couldn’t tell his race. “You guys are sick,” said the woman as she grabbed her own daughter and left.
The victim was told to get back in the closet.
A week later, the woman, and a man from a nearby bar who also suspected something, walked into a police station. The evening of Jan. 19, 2010, the couple was arrested.
Siscoe, who showed little emotion as the details were read aloud, has pleaded guilty to aggravated assault, sexual assault causing bodily harm, confinement and uttering threats. He is in custody and will undergo a psychological assessment. The Crown intends to seek a dangerous offender designation.
The victim’s wife pleaded guilty to aggravated assault, sexual assault causing bodily harm and failing to provide the necessities of life. She is currently out on bail and under the watch of a surety as assessments and sentencing move forward.
When asked Thursday if there was anything she’d like to say, she said, “No there’s not.”
On the night the victim was rescued, a police officer opened that closet door and peered down on the broken man.
“You are safe now,” he said. The victim did not respond initially, so the officer asked him if the two people living in the apartment were responsible for his injuries.
“I don’t want to get them in trouble,” said the man in the closet.
Women who kill their partners are still being treated differently to men Posted September 13th 2019
After we cleared Emma Humphreys’ name 23 years ago we thought the law would support women who had been violently abused. We were wrong @bindelj
Tue 10 Jul 2018 09.00 BST Last modified on Tue 10 Jul 2018 11.25 BST
Emma Humphreys being released from prison. Photograph: David Sillitoe/The Guardian
Twenty years ago tomorrow, Emma Humphreys died of an accidental overdose. In 1985, when Humphreys was 17 years old, she was convicted of murdering her pimp/boyfriend, Trevor Armitage, following threats of rape. Humphreys’ childhood had been dominated by violence and abuse. Her stepfather was extremely violent, and she had witnessed regular abuse. From the age of 12, she started to run away from home, and was soon abused into prostitution by men offering her a bed for the night in return for sex. At 16, Humphreys met Armitage, a local punter, and moved in with him. Armitage immediately became violent and controlling. Humphreys was regularly raped and beaten by clients, so her life was pure hell.
At trial, Humphreys was advised not to give any evidence. Unsurprisingly she was convicted and sentenced to life. Little, if anything, was said in court about the violence and abuse she had endured from Armitage as well as other men. There is no sympathy or understanding as to why this child, with no history of violent offending, had been driven to kill.
Seven years into her life sentence for murder, Humphreys heard about the cases of other women who had killed as a response to domestic violence, and contacted Justice for Women. Together we launched a massive campaign to clear her name. Three years later, Humphreys won her appeal and walked out of court to hundreds of cheering supporters, her victory making headline news all over the world. Her case resulted in a change in the law. Judges could now direct juries in such cases to take into consideration the whole life histories of women like Humphreys who ended up on trial for murder.
Feminist campaigners were buoyant, certain that the tide was turning and that other women in Humphreys’ position would be better understood, and treated fairly by the courts. We were wrong: 23 years after Humphreys was freed, very little has changed. Justice for Women is currently dealing with the cases of several women who have killed violent men and subsequently been convicted of murder. It is almost as though the huge campaigns of the past three decades never happened.
Farieissia Martin was 22 when she was convicted of the murder of Kyle Farrell in 2015, and sentenced to 13 years in prison. Martin, who at the time had two small children with Farrell, grabbed a knife when he tried to strangle her. Farrell’s violence often left Martin in fear of her life, but she too was frightened to call the police in case social services became involved and removed her children. Farrell’s history of violence was not adequately explored during the trial. Justice for Women is campaigning for the case to go to appeal, on the grounds that the evidence of domestic violence was not afforded enough significance during the trial.
Another case is that of Sally Challen, who killed her husband Richard after decades of domestic abuse. Sally met Richard when she was 15 years old and he was 22. Sally was abused and controlled by Richard from the beginning of their relationship.
Sally now has a new legal team, and her appeal against the murder conviction will be heard later this year on the grounds that she was subjected to “coercive control” for decades. She was given a sentence of 22 years in 2011. The prosecution suggested that her motive was “jealousy”. Richard had a number of affairs, and also was known to have visited brothels on a regular basis. One neighbour said: “‘It was well known that he had an eye for the ladies.”Make catcalling a hate crime? First get current laws to work for women Julie Bindel Read more
This is somewhat different to the way that many men who kill their female partners are treated. Infidelity is regularly used as a defence in such cases, often successfully, by men who kill, and yet women such as Humphreys are given no understanding of or sympathy for their experience of horrendous domestic and sexual violence.
In January 2017 new grounds were submitted to the court of appeal, claiming that at the time of the killing Sally Challen was subject to “coercive control”, a form of abuse prevalent in domestic violence relationships that has only recently been made a criminal offence.
In 2016, Emma Jayne Magson stabbed her partner, James Knight, after he had attacked and attempted to strangle her. There was a known history of domestic violence perpetrated by Knight towards Magson. On the night he died, Knight was captured on CCTV, pushing Magson into the road. She had grown up witnessing horrific domestic violence, which led to mental health problems in later life. During the murder trial, no mention of this history was made.
Why are so many women charged with murder, as opposed to manslaughter, if there is strong evidence of domestic violence?
How different is the attitude to men defending property than to women defending their own lives or the lives of their children against violent men? When Richard Osborn-Brooks was arrested after stabbing a burglar who tried to break into his home, the hashtag #FreeRichardOsbornBrooks was launched alongside a petition calling for the Crown Prosecution Service to take no action against him. He was released without charge. “We have the right to protect ourselves in our own home,” tweeted one man, in support of Osborn-Brooks.
The victims of domestic violence, who live in well-founded fear of their lives, have the right to a fair trial. Tragedies could have been avoided had the perpetrators of these crimes been dealt with in the first instance. For the sake of all the Emma Humphreys out there, let us demand that domestic violence becomes a thing of the past.
• Julie Bindel is a freelance journalist and political activist, and a founder of Justice for Women
Feminist Humour Directed only at men- September 12th 2019
This picture suggests the woman is mad to make such a seaside postcard display of herself. In my view feminism is dangerous to social stability and has little if any connection with human rights or biological truth. Humans take them selves too seriously at the planet’s expense, with all sorts of mind numbing isms to protect them from the reality that is closing in on us all. ‘What is the best thing to come out of a man’s penis when it gets erect? The wrinkles.’ That’s feminist humour and sexual repression all in one.
Will the feminine male aesthetic ever gain popularity in the West like it has in East Asia?
So while a country that looks like this:
Might occasionally have ideals of beauty that look like this:
…in the long run, they’re likely to look more like:
and side note: when my mother met my father in college, the only posters he had in his room were of Bowie and Sting, and his roommate was gay, so she thought he might be as well*
- Asian stars in Asia are more attractive than the ones in the West. Why do they not want to (or are unable to?) become famous in the West?
- Is there a cultural divide wherein males in the West are expected to be masculine/macho, but in the East, like Japan or Hong Kong, it is more …
- Why do Western men flock to the Far East in search of love? What do Far Eastern Asian women possess that Western women don’t?
- Do you think East Asian men were more popular with Western women, WMAF hate would go down?
- Why do western women wear so little in comparison to women from other parts of the world such as the Middle East and South Asia?
- Why do the people native to Far East Asia share an appearance different from the rest of the world?
- If the Philippines, Indonesia, and Malaysia are Asian/Southeast Asian because of their proximity to the continent of Asia, then why aren’t Cub…
- How come Korean and Japanese cultures are regarded as immature and nerdy in the west but seem very popular in Asia, China, and SEA?
13 reasons women lie about rape
Note: This article is also available in Portuguese.
Two sensational rape stories in the media have brought to light the question of false allegations, prompting many to wonder just why a woman would lie about rape. In her memoir, Lena Dunham claims that she was raped by Barry, a flamboyant, well-known campus Republican, but her story does not hold up under scrutiny. Jackie, the woman at the center of the Rolling Stone profile on Greek culture at the University of Virginia, claims to have been gang-raped, but the discrepancies in her account resulted in the magazine backing away from the story and questioning Jackie’s credibility. We do not know if either of these women has made false allegations, but false allegations of rape can and do happen. Here are 13 reasons women lie about rape.
1. Women lie about rape to cover up their infidelity.
One night, Nicola Osborne got a bit drunk and ended up in bed with a man and they enjoyed “extensive sexual activity.” The episode was entirely consensual and the two swapped phone numbers after they were through. On the way home, it occurred to Osborne that her husband might not think very highly of her “activities” and she became flustered and visibly upset. When passers-by came to her aid, she told them that she had been forcibly abducted and raped by a stranger, sparking a massive police response to find the rapist. A subsequent DNA test led police to the man whom she had slept with and he was arrested and held for 12 hours. Once the truth came out that the encounter has been consensual, Osborne was charged with filing a false report and sentenced to 18 months in prison. Women lie about rape to cover up their infidelity.
2. Women lie about rape to explain why they are looking at porn.
When Elizabeth Coast’s mother discovered her looking at porn on the internet, Coast explained that her actions were the result of sexual abuse she had experienced at the hand of a neighbor. Coast testified that when her neighbor was 14, and she was 10, he had sexually molested her. Her testimony was compelling enough to secure the man’s conviction. He was sentenced to seven years and served four of those until Coast’s guilty conscience became too much to bear and she admitted that she had lied about an innocent man. Coast was sentenced to two months in prison for her lie and must pay the man $90,000 restitution. Women lie about rape to explain why they are looking at porn.
3. Women lie about rape because they are mentally ill.
Rosanne England scratched her face, tore her clothing and concocted a story about a man asking to use her telephone and then violently raping her. She gave police a detailed description that happened to match a 59-year-old father of two teenaged daughters who had no alibi as he had been walking his dog in the woods when the rape allegedly occurred. The man was arrested and held for 28 hours until DNA tests finally cleared him. He continues to face suspicion from his neighbors about his guilt. England gave no justification for the accusation other than she suffers from “mental illness.” Women lie about rape because they are mentally ill.
4. Women lie about rape because they feel guilty.
Kelly Harwood had a few drinks and decided that sleeping with her friend’s son was a good idea. Upon reflection, she decided that she had betrayed her friend by doing so and reported her friend’s son for rape. She told police that she had been raped while sleeping, and her friend’s son was subjected to an “intrusive medical examination and interviewed under caution.” Two days later, Harwood relented and admitted that she had lied about the rape. She suffers from depressive illness, exacerbated by the amount of alcohol she had consumed. Women lie about rape because they feel guilty.
5. Women lie about rape if the sex is bad.
Lynette Lee arranged to meet a man whom she had contacted through a dating site. They went on a date, which ended with consensual sex in a motel room. Lee then reported the man for forcible rape. He was interviewed by police, who then re-interviewed Lee, who confessed to lying about the rape because “she did not enjoy the sex” and “it was bad.” Women lie about rape if the sex is bad.
6. Women lie about rape when they fail school exams.
Rhiannon Brooker knew her party lifestyle was catching up with her when the law student failed her bar exams. She told her exam committee that her performance was affected by “extenuating circumstances” and had her boyfriend charged with multiple counts of rape and assault, including punching her so hard in the stomach that she miscarried. She faked her own injuries to support the charges. The accused spent 36 days in jail before police confirmed that he was at work and had alibis for each of the alleged rapes. Brooker was sentenced to three and a half years for false allegations. Women lie about rape when they fail school exams.
7. Women lie about rape because of psychiatric medication complications.
Katherine Bennett had consensual sex with a national guardsman but then reported to police that he had abducted her from a parking lot, taken her to his house and drugged her and raped her at knifepoint before she was able to escape. The police were able to establish that the story had been fabricated but not before the guardsman lost his job and had his reputation seriously damaged. Bennett’s attorney said that Bennett suffers from depression and obsessive-compulsive disorder and “although her condition and complications from medication were not an excuse for the false report, they were contributing factors.” Women lie about rape because of psychiatric medication complications.
8. Women lie about rape when they want attention.
Gemma Gregory, desperate for attention from police officers, filed eight false rape charges, accusing seven different men over a period of six years. Former boyfriends were subjected to DNA tests and interviews and huge amounts of police time were wasted so that Gregory could have the attention she craved. After recording hundreds of calls with Gregory, the police arrested and charged her with false allegation offenses. Women lie about rape when they want attention.
9. Women lie about rape to get sympathy.
Linsey Attridge was having some relationship problems with her boyfriend and needed to win some sympathy from him. She trolled Facebook and found a picture of a 26-year-old man and his 14-year-old brother whom she had never met and reported them both for a violent rape. To make her story more credible, she punched herself in the face, ripped her clothing and told police that the two men had broken into her house while her boyfriend was away and subjected her to a brutal attack. Both were arrested and had their lives turned upside down as word of the charges spread throughout the community. Attridge eventually admitted to making the whole thing up and was sentenced to 200 hours of community service. She has never apologized. Her boyfriend dumped her. Women lie about rape to get sympathy.
10. Women lie about rape to make boyfriends jealous.
Hannah Bryon was mad at her boyfriend for breaking up with her. Wanting some attention from him and to make him jealous, she told him that a man whom she had been flirting with attacked her on a bridge, raped her and then threw money at her to get a taxi. The man whom she identified as her rapist was arrested and put through a stressful examination and questioning but was able to provide police with evidence that he had not attacked Bryon. Bryon was given a suspended sentence and 150 hours of community service. Women lie about rape to make boyfriends jealous.
11. Women lie about rape for revenge.
When Cori Lynn Osiecki’s boyfriend broke up with her and started “spreading rumors,” she decided to exact revenge on him by filing a rape charge. She was taken by ambulance to the hospital, where a rape kit was collected and an investigation was started. Eventually Osiecki admitted that she had lied about the assault because she “wanted to get back at him.” Women lie about rape for revenge.
12. Women lie about rape because they are “moody.”
Isabella Himmel was at a bar and her friend wasn’t paying attention to her, which left her feeling “moody,” so she told another friend that she had been gang-raped by a group of male students at the University of Connecticut. That friend believed her story and reported it to police, triggering an action alert to more than 30,000 students and a considerable amount of distress on campus. Surveillance video, however, showed no attack. Himmel then agreed that she might not have been grabbed by the hair and gang-raped by five men, but she might have been kicked or she might have just fallen. Himmel must complete a program that could lead to the dismissal of the false rape report charges against her. Women lie about rape because they are “moody.”
13. Women lie about rape when their friends get mad at them.
Biurny Peguero was extremely drunk, out a bar with friends, and impetuously accepted a ride in a van with three men. When she realized where she was, she became frightened and hysterical. The men took her back to the bar, and that’s when the trouble started. The friends she had left behind were angry with her and a brawl broke out among the women, who punched and bit one another. When a friend demanded to know if the men had raped Peguero, she said that they had. The bruises she had sustained in the fight with her friends were accepted as evidence of rape, and one man spent four years in jail on the charge. Women lie about rape when their friends get mad at them.
Shockingly, this is not even a complete list of the reasons women lie about rape, but if anything is clear, it is that women do lie.
This post originally appeared at Thought Catalog and is reprinted here with permission.—Eds.
Real Men at Play? Huntley Gloucestershire Saturday morning August 24th 2019
What is normal behaviour for the males of Britain’s indigenous population? Is feminism changing them for better or worse? Robert Cook
A British teenager has appeared in court to deny making a false rape claim against 12 Israeli tourists in Cyprus. August 27th 2019
The 19-year-old woman had been in prison for nearly two months on a public mischief charge before the hearing, after reporting she was raped by 12 Israelis at an Ayia Napa holiday resort.
© Getty Twelve tourists were accused of raping the teenager
A trial is now set to start on 2 October, with the judge releasing the accused teenager on bail after deeming it “proper and fair” to do so following her detention.
The woman surrendered her travel documents and must appear at a Nicosia police station three times a week.
She has also been placed on a stop list, which prevents her leaving the country.
The charge the teenager faces carries a maximum penalty of a year imprisonment or a fine. © Getty The teenager had reported she was raped at a holiday resort in Ayia Napa
Lawyers representing her claim investigators used “oppression” to make her retract her allegations. Cypriot authorities strongly deny the accusation.
The Israelis were initially detained but later released without charge.
They denied the allegations against them and have since returned home.
Editorial Comment British females have become accustomed to the idea that they can make rape allegations long after the alleged event when there is no forensic or any other evidence. They are assured, so as to encourage more complaints, that their identity will be kept secret, but the accused will be exposed across the media.This is an appalling situation.
If this girl is not prosecuted it will give the impression that her alleged assailants are guilty, which feminists want because – for all of their equality ranting- women have to be protected and men are sex amd.
Men need to realsie that intimate contact with females should not be spotaneous and should have evidence of being authorised, with specified rules of engagenment. Jail is not good, especially for the innocent. Hanging would be more humane, although the Jeffrey Epstein case is somewhat different as he was in a posotion to expose high level sex offenders. We can’t have that. Think of the public (class ) interest here ( sic )
Man investigated by police for retweeting transgender limerick August 6th 2019
A docker from Humberside has been investigated by police over a limerick he posted on Twitter after an officer claimed it constitutes a ‘hate incident’ against transgender people.
Harry Miller, 53, from Lincoln was contacted on Wednesday by a community cohesion officer following a complaint that had been made about the plant and machinery dealer’s social media posts.
Citing 30 potentially offensive tweets, the PC singled out a limerick Mr Miller had retweeted which questioned whether transgender women are biological women. It included the lines: “Your breasts are made of silicone, your vagina goes nowhere.”
Even though no crime was committed, sharing the limerick online was recorded as a ‘hate incident’.
PC Mansoor Gul told Mr Miller: “I’ve been on a course and what you need to understand is that you can have a foetus with a female brain that grows male body parts and that’s what a transgender person is.”
4. I said, I didn’t write that. He said, ‘Ah. But you Liked it and promoted it.’
I asked why he was wasting his time on a non crime. He said, ‘It’s not a crime, but it will be recorded as a hate incident.’— Harry The Owl – Limerick Criminal (@HarryTheOwl) January 23, 2019
After Mr Miller questioned why the complainant was being described as a “victim” if no crime had been committed, the officer told him: “We need to check your thinking”.
“I can’t believe what is happening in the UK in the name of transgenderism and, worse still, we’re not even allowed to think never mind talk about it,” Mr Miller said.
The married father of four was alerted to the investigation by his company directors after they were approached by officers trying to make contact with Mr Miller.
The complainant had managed to identify Mr Miller’s place of work, despite there being no reference to his business or his full identity on his Twitter account. As part of the complaint to police it was alleged the firm was an ‘unsafe environment’ for transgender employees because of Mr Miller’s comments on social media.
The investigation comes as crime in Humberside has gone up by 13 per cent in the year ending September 2018, above the 8 per cent national average. Violent offences are up 24 per cent, sexual offences are up 19 per cent and robberies are up 17 per cent. The number of officers on the beat has increased by nearly 200 in the past 12 months.
Mr Miller told the Telegraph: “I’m just a hairy a***ed docker who swears, drinks and watches football. But I have a wife, a mother and daughters and when it comes to their rights and safety and those of women everywhere, men need to speak up.” He said he is now in talks with the woman who wrote the limerick he retweeted, who goes under the Twitter name Restless Ellie, to go on a ‘limerick tour’ of police headquarters.
Since describing the incident on Twitter, Mr Miller says he has been inundated with messages from people he said are “terrified” of speaking out on transgender issues in case of police action. “The only way to protect freedom of speech is to keep bloody speaking,” he added.
Confirming that he had spoken to Mr Miller for 20 minutes, PC Gul told the Telegraph he made the remark about the foetus because he had “learned it on a training course ran by a transgender person last summer”.
He added: “Although none of the tweets were criminal, I said to Mr Miller that the limerick is the kind of thing that upsets the transgender community. I warned him that if it escalates we will have to take further action. If someone comes forward and says: ‘I’m the victim of a hate incident and it’s really upsetting me’, then we have to investigate”.
Cleethorpes MP Martin Vickers said: “What on earth are the police doing investigating if no crime has been committed? Have they not got better things to do than acting as thought police?”
A spokesperson for Humberside Police said: “We take all reports of hate incidents seriously and will always investigate and take proportionate action.”
The move comes after feminist campaigner Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull, better known as Posie Parker, was questioned under caution for the second time over comments made on social media about the founder of controversial charity Mermaids that campaigns on behalf of transgender children.
A mother of two was arrested last month after a complaint was made by a transgender woman who also went to police about comments posted on Twitter by Father Ted creator Graham Linehan. A popular transsexual blogger who believes men can’t become women is due to appear in court in March following allegations over a conversation on Twitter made by another Mermaids campaigner.
Editorial Comment The local MP should bear in mind that what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Controlling speech controls thoughts, it can also drive anger and hatred under ground, even breed hatred via resentment and frustration.
The ruling elite’s goal is control. If we can’t ridicule religion because it makes no sense to us, other than power, division or we think even worse, then why should this man say or repeat what he thinks is important and true?
If the police are going to watch us, bug our phones and monitor the internet it should be even handed and we should all be told openly what we are allowed to think, say and write, oepnly and honestly. At the moment thought policing is discrinatory. There will be an article posted soon, on the subject of transgender and whether nature is binary. I am sure my police following will find it interestin.
Women Suffer August 6th 2019
There is not much choice on British Radio. It is dominated bt the BBC and trashy pop stations. On my long daily drives, I rarely listen to classical music and pop is pap. The best of a bad job is BBC Radio 4, and the worst of Radio Four is the Murray/Garvey double act on ‘Woman’s Hour.’ It is an example of self centred egotistical narcisitic polemics.
Yesterday I listened to the horrors of women facing sexual harassment at work. Saintly feminist warrior and ex ‘Harry Potter’ star Emma Watson is helping fund a ‘TIMES UP campaign. Women are suffering a lot, apparently. Watson is funding free legal advice from top posh girl barristers.
Today’s programme featured the difficulties that some women face with breast feeding. Murray opined that women who can’t do it should not feel they are failures. She said that ‘Some women are crippled by the amount of milk they produce.
Past episodes have included an outraged posh young reporter visiting a Staffordshire Pottery on one of its centenaries. This girl spoke to a number of women in the factory. One was a teapot inspector who inspected 30,000 teapots a day for £6.95 an hour.
The reporter was not shocked by the obvious tedium of the job, or low pay. No, what bothered her was that she made her labourer husband’s sandwiches every day. ‘What! He should make his own!’ ‘But I like doing it for him.’ the wifely inspector said pleadingly.
A mum who murdered her two young daughters after they “got in the way” of her sex life has been jailed for life. August 4th 2019
Louise Porton was sentenced to a minimum of 32 years in prison after she killed Lexi Draper, three, and 17-month-old Scarlett Vaughan 18 days apart.
The 23-year-old denied responsibility for their deaths but was found guilty after a five-week trial at Birmingham Crown Court.
Jailing Porton on Friday, Mrs Justice Yip described her actions as “evil” and “calculated”.
© Provided by Independent Digital News & Media Limited ‘Evil’ and ‘calculated’ Louise Porton killed her two daughters 18 days apart
She told her: “These were blameless young children who were plainly vulnerable and ought to have been able to rely on their mother to protect and nurture them.
“Instead you took their young lives away.”
The judge added: “One way or another you squeezed the life out of each of your daughters, only calling the emergency services when you knew they were dead.
“I am sure at the time of the deaths, you intended to kill each of your daughters.
“Why you did so, only you will know.”
© Provided by Independent Digital News & Media Limited Porton who was jailed for life at Birmingham Crown Court (PA) Porton, who described herself to male suitors as a “model”, accepted 41 friend requests on a dating app just a day after Lexi’s death.
She was described as being “calm and emotionless” following Scarlett’s death and delayed calling an ambulance for the youngster, even filling her car up with petrol as the toddler lay dead or dying in her car.
© Provided by Independent Digital News & Media Limited Porton fills up her car at a petrol station (CPS)
When Lexi was ill in hospital, just over a week before she died, Porton took topless photos in the toilets and was arranging to perform sex acts for money with a man she had met through a website, the court was told.
Porton suffocated her in the early hours of January 15 last year and was then heard “laughing” at a funeral parlour two days before killing Scarlett on February 1.
Prosecutors said it had appeared to the funeral arranger present that Porton was “using FaceTime and that she was speaking to a man”.
© Provided by Independent Digital News & Media Limited Louise Porton on CCTV with her two daughters (CPS)
Both children had symptoms consistent with deliberate airway obstruction and Scarlett had signs of recent bleeding in her neck tissue, suggestive of neck compression, jurors heard.
Prosecutor Oliver Saxby QC previously said specialist doctors could find no “natural reason” for why either child had died.
Warwickshire Police said it was also “clear from the evidence” that she had tried to kill Lexi twice earlier in January before eventually succeeding.
© Facebook Scarlett, left, and Lexi, right
Around that time, she used her Google account to search for “Why did my 3 year(-old) stop breathing”, and “How long after drowning can someone be resuscitated?”
The girls’ father, Chris Draper, who never had the chance to meet Scarlett, said today he felt “broken”, with “nothing to live for”.
In a victim impact statement read to court by the prosecution, he said: “Why did Louise do something so evil to our beautiful daughters?
“You are their mother, the person supposed to care for them, protect and love them.
“They were just an inconvenience to you; how could you do this?”
Porton, of Skiddaw, Rugby, sat in the dock throughout the hearing, with her head resting on her hands, looking down at her feet.
After sentencing, Detective Superintendent Pete Hill, of Warwickshire Police, said: “These were premeditated murders for which she has shown no remorse and the length of the sentence reflects this.
“I would like to thank the jury; they diligently went through the appalling details of Porton’s crimes. They saw through her lies before returning a guilty verdict.”
Women’s Sexual Fantasies – the Latest Scientific Research Psychology Today
Team of psychologists led by a woman uncovers surprising findings on sex fantasy
Posted Aug 28, 2015
By Dr Raj Persaud and Dr Jenny Bivona
A team of psychologists led by a woman has uncovered some surprising findings on one of the most secret aspects of female sexual fantasy.
While almost everyone has sexual fantasies, previous research into the subject has found between 31 and 62% of women have rape fantasies. To be sexually aroused by such an imagined scenario represents a psychological mystery. Why fantasise about a criminal act which in reality is repulsive and harrowing?
To investigate these and other riddles at the heart of female erotic fantasy, a team of researchers based at the University of North Texas and the University of Notre Dame studied 355 young women.
A part of the research involved the participants being read a rape fantasy scenario over headphones, to investigate how aroused they became.
In the study, published in the academic journal ‘Archives of Sexual Behaviour’, participants were instructed to close their eyes while listening and to try to imagine themselves as the woman described in the narrative. This scenario was derived from story lines typically found in much women’s romance literature, so it portrayed an erotic rape fantasy, rather than a literal portrayal of actual assault.
This was the scenario: a male acquaintance is strongly attracted to the female character. He expresses a yearning for sex with her, but she’s clearly unresponsive. He attempts without success to convince her. When she continues to openly refuse, he overpowers and rapes her.
The female character is resistant throughout the interaction and at no time gives consent. However, as the man is attractive and he provides erotic stimulation, she does experience gratification from the forced sex. The scenario places more emphasis on the use of coercion than on the sexual pleasure.
The results of the study, (which also explored other sexual and aggressive fantasies, self esteem, attitudes to sex and other personality testing) are that 52% of the women had fantasies about forced sex by a man: 32% had fantasies about being raped by a man: 28% – forced oral sex by a man: 16% – forced anal sex: 24% – incapacitated: 17% – forced sex by a woman: 9% – raped by a woman: 9% – forced oral sex by a woman. Overall, 62% reported having had at least one of these fantasies.
The team of researchers lead by Dr Jenny Bivona, based at the University of North Texas found that overall, 62% of participants reported having a rape fantasy of some type.
Of the women who reported having the most common rape fantasy rape fantasy, ”being overpowered or forced by a man to surrender sexually against my will,” 40% had it at least once a month and 20% had it at least once a week. The authors conclude these results indicate rape fantasies play a significant role in the sexual fantasy lives of many women.
It’s important to note that while headline writers may focus on the fact women have sexual fantasies about coercive sex, this research finds it’s an occasional daydream, not a preoccupation. It would be similarly unfair to tar men with the brush of an occasional fantasy they may have. When these female fantasies are erotic in character, the male protagonist is always described as highly attractive or otherwise desirable.article continues after advertisement
According to this study, entitled ‘Women’s Rape Fantasies: An Empirical Evaluation of the Major Explanations’, a previous common psychological theory as to why women should fantasise about rape or forced sex was termed ‘sexual blame avoidance’. This theory was about women avoiding taking responsibility for sexual desires. The hypothesis argued that women have been socialised by our culture to work hard at not being perceived as promiscuous or overly sexual. For example, stigmatising labels, such as ”tramp” and ”slut,” are invoked which control or restrict female sexuality.
‘Sexual blame avoidance’ theory argues that, for some women therefore, fantasies of consensual sex could generate self-blame, guilt, and anxiety. So by letting the fantasy take the form of rape, the woman in the fantasy is being forced to do something she doesn’t want to. It follows then she can’t be blamed for the occurrence of sex. In contrast to a consensual sexual fantasy, a forced sex theme enhances sexual gratification by allowing the fantasiser to avoid blame and guilt.
The results of this study found no support for this theory.
The authors of this new ground-breaking research concede that ‘sexual blame avoidance’ may have been true in the past when we lived in more sexually repressed times, so it’s possible that over recent decades changes in attitudes to sex means the stress for women of being viewed as overly sexual has disappeared. Now few women appear to have rape fantasies to avoid blame from having openly consensual sexual fantasies.
In direct contrast to ‘sexual blame avoidance’, is the ‘openness to sexual experience’ theory. Instead of being driven by repressed sexuality, this supposition is rape fantasies derive from a generally open, tolerant and guilt-free attitude toward sex. It was this theory which received the strongest support in this new research by Dr Bivona and colleagues.
A notable finding is that women who reported being less repressed about sex were more likely to have rape fantasies, but were also more open to fantasy in general, more likely to have consensual fantasies, and more likely to report a higher level of arousal to rape fantasies.
Interestingly, the women who reported having frequent rape fantasies were also likely to report having fantasies about “overpowering or forcing a man to surrender sexually against his will.”
Fantasising about being a stripper also predicted a tendency to fantasise about rape. Another intriguing result is women who report rape fantasies were more likely to have high self-esteem.
These results suggest that having fantasies about things we would never endorse or choose to do in reality, are not necessarily signs of psychological disturbance. In fact, according to this research, women who have rape fantasies also tend to have more positive attitudes toward sex, high self esteem, and more frequent consensual sexual fantasies.article continues after advertisement
This study in no way condones or tries to justify rape, which remains a violent and reprehensible crime no matter what the research on sexual fantasy of either gender might turn up. While some may even believe that publishing results such as these is going to assist some rapists in justifying their actions, the reality is these violent criminals are not scanning erudite academic research searching for justifications for assault. The editors and armies of academics who consider research submitted for publication in academic journals such as Archives of Sexual Behaviour also clearly believe this kind of study deserves publication, and wider dissemination in the field.
Fantasy is a deeply problematic area for many people and for psychiatry and psychology – why do some people convert strange ideas into actual deeds – as in the case of Brievik the Norway mass murder scenario – while others just enjoy their vivid, creative and somewhat unusual imaginations without taking action. Why do various individuals become disturbed about fantasies of which they don’t approve? As a result much psychosexual therapy involves exploring and confronting the mysteries of sexual fantasy.
We don’t yet know the answers to many of these questions, but this kind of scientific investigation is assisting in our search for understanding.
Dr Raj Persaud is a Consultant Psychiatrist based in London, Dr Jenny Bivona graduated from the University of North Texas and now works as a clinical psychologist.
Follow Dr Raj Persaud on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@DrRajPersau
Women Never Lie about sex abuse and domestic violence- August 2nd 2019
The British legal and police establishment are fiercely resisting giving anonymity to persons ( nearly always men ) accused of sex and domestic violence offences, except in exceptional cases ( the rich, powerful and vulnerable minorities ). This is because the police have moved away from evidence based prosecutions, using the Blairite ( lack of ) principle of bad character.
This means that, by publishing the name of the accused more women will be encouraged to come forward with allegations confident that they can do so anonymously.
The accused are thus exposed to villification, dangers on remand from so called good villains, and permanent damage even if they are eventually cleared- usually on the limited basis of ‘lack of evidence’ because the police and CPS never want to admit malice and face damages claims. This is Britain’s so called ‘open justice’ system. Robert Cook August 2nd 2019
Scale of sexual abuse in UK universities likened to Savile and Catholic scandals
This article is more than 2 years old October 7th 2016
Stories of more than 100 women shared with Guardian expose pattern of harassment which remains largely hidden
- Have you been affected by sexual harassment at university?
- Help fund our journalism by becoming a Guardian supporter
The scale of sexual harassment and gender violence by UK university staff has been likened to the scandals involving the Catholic church and Jimmy Savile in accounts shared by more than 100 women with the Guardian.
Their stories – including those of verbal bullying, serial harassment, assault, sexual assault and rape – expose an alarming pattern of abuse and harassment in British universities which remains largely hidden.
A number of contributors drew parallels with the abuse scandals affecting the Catholic church and Savile, the disgraced late TV star.
Many women said they had not pursued complaints for fear of jeopardising their academic careers. Those who did complain said they felt isolated and unprotected, while the more powerful men they accused appeared to be untouchable.
The women’s accounts follow an exclusive Guardian report on the use of non-disclosure agreements in university sexual harassment cases.
Rachel Krys, the co-director of End Violence Against Women, called for urgent change within universities to both prevent senior male academics abusing positions of power and develop better processes to bring them to account.
“We know this is happening to young women at universities across the country and they continue to be failed by the institutions in which they put their trust,” Krys said. “Our universities need to listen more to the women who are coming forward and telling these stories. They need to investigate properly when there is an allegation of abuse, and act quickly to protect all women from these perpetrators.”
According to EVAW, UK universities are legally obliged under human rights and equality laws to protect female students from sexual assault and other forms of violence against women. Their analysis of universities’ policies concluded that many were likely to be in breach of these obligations.
Later this month Universities UK (UUK) is publishing its long awaited
report on sexual violence and harassment in universities, but there is
concern that it will focus on “lad culture” and incidents between
students, rather than those involving staff and students, which have
remained largely under the radar.
The majority of cases reported to the Guardian involve senior male
academics, often professors, harassing and abusing younger female PhD
students whose work they supervise. There are also accounts from
undergraduates and female academics, while a small number of other
allegations involve assault, male-on-male harassment and one allegation
of sexual assault by a female lecturer.
Many of the accounts indicate that universities are failing in their duty of care to students and staff who are harassed. One female academic who made a complaint of sexual harassment against a more senior male colleague – against whom there had been previous complaints – said she was marched off the university premises and suspended for three months after he accused her of making a false allegation.
Another female academic who complained to HR of being sexually assaulted by a more senior male colleague, was then interviewed by two male colleagues. “I was so traumatised and ashamed, not only by the assault but by having to give details of the assault to two men (one of whom seemed to regard me as a waste of space) that I did not take my complaint to the next formal level.”
In another statement, a PhD student, who brought a complaint after
being raped by a senior member of staff with whom she was in a
relationship, described her sense of utter powerlessness: “He is a
renowned professor. He can do what he wants.”
The incidents are reported to have taken place at a variety of institutions across the UK, including prestigious and high-ranking Russell Group universities. Some date back to the 1980s and 90s, but most are recent and many are ongoing, and in the majority of cases the women involved have asked to remain anonymous, and their institutions unnamed, because of fear of repercussions.
Saul, professor of philosophy at the University of Sheffield and an
expert on sexual harassment in higher education, said she was not
surprised by the deluge of stories: “There’s a systemic problem. Too
often, victims are afraid to come forward for fear (well-justified) of
“When they do come forward, often they are brushed off or not believed. When they are believed, their allegations are still often dismissed as unprovable. Even when things are taken more seriously, harassers are generally allowed to leave quietly, which enables them to move some place else and do the same thing.”
Many of the women who made complaints to their institutions said they
felt they were the ones on trial, while alleged perpetrators were often
protected by management who feared losing a star researcher and their
A number of respondents said their harassers were allowed to remain in post; some moved to other institutions without facing any formal investigation or disciplinary action, leaving them with an unblemished employment record and the opportunity to continue preying on students elsewhere.
“They don’t know where he is or what he is doing, and they don’t care. He is not their problem any more,” said one female academic whose sexual harassment complaint resulted in her senior colleague leaving with a financial settlement and a non-disclosure agreement which prevents any discussion of the case.
A number of PhD students described their excitement to be working
with eminent professors, only to find themselves under pressure to enter
into more intimate relationships. When they refused, they were
ostracised and neglected by their supervisor, putting their academic
future at risk.
“My (much older) supervisor kept messaging me for naked photos of
myself,” said another student who didn’t report the incidents. “When I
refused he told me I was probably going to get raped. He was very well
liked, and I knew he would never be punished for it.”
Another contributor said: “The culture [in universities] is very sexualised. It’s very, very macho. Whenever complaints arise, they are covered up. In general society there’s been a shift in the way in which complaints of sexual misconduct are dealt with – in higher education, not so much.”
A UUK spokesperson said the forthcoming report would identify best practice in a range of areas which would be shared across all universities. “The university sector has been clear that there is no place for violence and sexual harassment on a university campus, nor anywhere else.
“Universities across the UK already have a range of initiatives and policies in place to address these issues, including policies on student-staff relationships.”
How far the higher education sector will enforce the report’s recommendations remains to be seen. A number of universities have instigated reviews of their own policies and practices in response to individual cases within their institution.
The University of Sussex has commissioned an independent inquiry into its handling of the assault of a postgraduate student by a lecturer. The media lecturer Lee Salter met Allison Smith during induction week and they began a relationship. But in September 2015, he punched her, knocked her out, stamped on her and threw salt at her face. He was found guilty of assault by beating and causing criminal damage on 13 July at Brighton magistrates court.
In the 10 months between his arrest and sentence, he continued to teach at the university, to Smith’s distress. “Their policies were clear that he should have been suspended,” she said. “It felt very damaging that the institution would do this. It started to feel that their reputation was more important. They swept me under the carpet and that was that.”
who pleaded not guilty in court and received a 22-week suspended jail
sentence, was issued with a restraining order not to contact Smith. He
has appealed against his convictions.
More than 300 Sussex University staff and students sent a letter to
the vice chancellor, Adam Tickell, calling on the university to
“investigate and publicly acknowledge its mishandling of the case [and]
establish a taskforce to comprehensively examine university policy and
practice on issues of violence and harassment”.
Tickell, who was appointed after the alleged incident and launched the inquiry at the start of his tenure, has promised to appoint a deputy pro-vice chancellor for equalities. “I believe strongly that this institution should learn lessons from this case and rectify any failings, and I’m committed to ensuring that Sussex does what is right for our community,” he said.
Three wicked sisters laugh as they walk free from court because of their kids
July 31st 2019
Pregnant Leanne Whelan swung a hammer while her two siblings screamed vile homophobic insults in front of children
ByNeil DockingCrown Court Reporter
- 20:14, 30 JUL 2019
- Updated09:29, 31 JUL 2019
Three sisters hurled homophobic insults at a man who had a hammer swung at him during a bitter family feud.
Leanne, Louise and Samantha Whelan yelled vile abuse at Peter Taylor when he tried to stop them confronting two women.
Children playing in a Birkenhead street witnessed Leanne, 32, Louise, 29, and Samantha, 33, shouting and screaming.
Pregnant Leanne swung the weapon at the victim, which missed his upper body, before they called him a “queer” and a “f****t”.
But the three single mums all walked free from Liverpool Crown Court – because of the impact jail would have on their children.
Prosecutors said there was a dispute between the Wirral sisters and the paternal gran of Samantha’s children, Deborah McKenna, over a dog.
They said Ms McKenna and her son Thomas Carson had made reports to social services about the welfare of children, but no action was taken.
Paul Becker, prosecuting, said it later involved Katie Cunningham, the girlfriend of Mr Carson, and Mr Taylor, a friend of the McKenna family.
- ‘Should have walked from court ashamed not laughing’: ECHO readers react to sisters who walked free over street row
He said all parties on both sides of the dispute were warned by a housing association about their behaviour before the incident, on August 11 last year.
The Whelan sisters said they were driving to their mum’s when they saw Ms Cunningham outside Mr Carson’s house in Alwen Street, Birkenhead.
Prosecutors accepted it was a “chance encounter” but they got out of a silver Mercedes and shouted “come on let’s go” before Leanne got a hammer.
Ms Cunningham fled into the house but Mr Taylor, who was in the back garden and heard shouting, came out to investigate.
Mr Becker said the sisters shouted to Ms Cunningham and Ms McKenna to come out, but Mr Taylor told them to calm down.
He said: “Samantha Whelan was abusive and said ‘f*** off, we don’t want you.”
Mr Becker said Mr Taylor stood his ground and Leanne swung the hammer, missing his upper body, during “chaotic scenes”.
He said: “Leanne Whelan was seen to be bouncing towards Mr Taylor, threatening and generally acting aggressively. Mr Taylor was shocked and scared.”
Mr Becker said the victim backed off and the sisters walked away but “were all shouting homophobic comments about Mr Taylor”.
He said they also made threats to Ms Cunningham, screaming “you’re getting this over your head”.
Mr Taylor said he was left feeling depressed and anxious, “looking over his shoulder all the time” and struggling to sleep at night.
The Whelan sisters said the victims were lying and claimed to have alibis, before admitting threatening behaviour ahead of a trial.
Leanne, of Treetops Drive, Bidston, who has five previous convictions for 10 offences, also admitted possessing an offensive weapon.
Her criminal record includes assaulting a police officer, common assault and assault causing actual bodily harm.
This is a page dedicated to feminism and the demise of the traditional male stereotype.
British woman, 19, faces court in Cyprus after gang rape allegation is dismissed
- James Morris
- 1 day ago
Click to follow
The Evening Standard
Women 40% more likely than men to develop mental illness, study finds
Researchers say women are more likely to have depression and anxiety, while more men report substance abuse
Mental health campaigners say GPs should be aware of gender disparities when commissioning resources. Photograph: Getty Images
Women are up to 40% more likely than men to develop mental health conditions, according to new analysis by a clinical psychologist at Oxford University.
The finding, based on analysis of epidemiological studies from the UK, US, Europe, Australia and New Zealand, has significant consequences for public health, according to Prof Daniel Freeman, who said that as millions of people in the UK alone were affected by mental illness, the consequences of gender disparities were widespread. Mental health campaigners said GPs needed to be aware of such disparities when deciding how to commission resources for treatment and support.
According to Freeman’s study, women are approximately 75% more likely than men to report having recently suffered from depression, and around 60% more likely to report an anxiety disorder.
Men are more likely to report substance misuse disorders – around two and a half times more frequently than women. Conditions such as ADHD (attention deficit hyperactivity disorder) and schizophrenia did not have statistically significant differences between genders in adults.
Freeman said that because the conditions most affecting women were more common than those affecting men, overall mental health conditions were more common in women than in men, by a factor of 20% to 40%.
The result is based on analysis of 12 large-scale epidemiological studies carried out across the world since the 1990s, for Freeman’s new book The Stressed Sex, published by Oxford University Press. The analysis used only large-scale studies, which looked at the general population, to control for men being less likely to seek help for psychological disorders than women.
However, while pre-set criteria were used to select which studies to include and exclude, the research is not a formal meta-analysis, regarded as the gold standard of evidence.
Freeman said the differences in the types of conditions reported by genders was interesting.
“There is a pattern within – women tend to suffer more from what we call ‘internal’ problems like depression or sleep problems,” he said. “They take out problems on themselves, as it were, where men have externalising problems, where they take things out on their environment, such as alcohol and anger problems.”
He added that there was likely a complex mixture of factors contributing to the differences between the genders – related not only to physiological or biological factors, but society, too.
“Because mental health problems are extremely prevalent, if you do see an imbalance, it’s an imbalance that concerns millions of people, so it’s a major public health issue. The initial things we need to do is establish this fully in the UK, but also crack the issues of why,” he said.
“Mental health issues are complex, they do arise from a range of factors, but we should highlight the environment, because we know discrepancies are greatest where the environment has the greatest role,” he said. “Where we think it has an effect is particularly on women’s self-esteem or self-worth: women tend to view themselves more negatively than men, and that is a vulnerability factor for many mental health problems.”
Other academics cast a note of scepticism on Freeman’s findings. Professor Kathryn Abel, of the centre for women’s mental health at Manchester University, said that when looking for studies to corroborate a particular thesis there was a risk of cherrypicking ones which backed it up.
Abel said that while disparities between rates of particular conditions were well-established in research, she had not seen evidence of significant differences in the overall rates of mental health disorders across lifetimes. She added that age was also a significant factor in different ratios, particularly given physical and social changes at different stages of life. She also noted that thanks to modern healthcare and society, particularly in the developed world where much of the data on rates of mental disorder comes from, “stress” by its formal definition (survival stress) is lower for women and men than at virtually any point in history.
She also considered whether some mental health conditions, though serious, were in part an effect of a relatively low-stress environment when compared with the past.
“In terms of survival, we’re not exposed to stress compared with our ancestors,” she said. “It is estimated that over their lifetime nearly a quarter of women will suffer a depressive illness. As a population, we are incredibly healthy, and in spite of continuing inequalities, we have never had it so good: women are living longer and more healthily than ever before – as are men.
“Some populations show lower rates of some of these arguably ‘stress-related’ disorders; in those countries women and men remain under far more hardship.”
Abel did also note that little good-quality evidence was available to allow us to make more sense of whether or how sex differences were related to any specific physiological factors in different mental health conditions in women, as not much specific research had yet been carried out.
ES News July 28th 2019
A British woman who claimed she was raped in Cyprus is due in court today after investigators dismissed her allegations.
The woman, 19, will have a custody hearing after she was arrested.
The woman faces a public nuisance charge, according to Yiannis Habaris, who represents two of seven Israeli teenagers who were being detained over the alleged incident at a hotel in the party resort of Ayia Napa.
They have now all been released and some were pictured celebrating with relatives after being released from Famagusta police station in Paralimni.
Mr Habaris said investigators questioning the woman had concluded her allegations “didn’t stand to reason”.
Cypriot authorities initially arrested 12 Israeli teens on July 17 following the rape allegation. Five of them were released on Thursday.
The state-run Cyprus News Agency reported the woman allegedly told investigators she filed a rape report because she was “angry and insulted” that some of the Israelis allegedly recorded video of her having consensual sex with a number of them.
Mr Habaris and another defence lawyer, Nir Yavlovitzh, also told reporters they intend to sue the young woman on behalf of those she accused, who were detained for 11 days.
Mr Habaris said: “We will proceed with legal action against the individual that made the false allegations, for damages, for every day and every moment they were in prison falsely.”
Mr Yavlovitzh said the seven teens were aged between 15 and 18 and that the young woman “needs to think clearly about what she [did] to the boys who stayed in jail”.
Editorial : This woman deserves jail as many men have been jailed on the word of lying women. She was either very stupid and or drunk to go with a group of men who were unpleasant enough to make a video of the debauchery. One would have thought that there should be a legal issue regarding consent to that aspect. But as an issue of rape law, she was a liar, and clearly a woman with a reckless attitude to sex.
The British police- and Cyprus, as I know well from experience, is very British- have a policy of naming alleged sex offenders so as to get more complainants to reinforce their case and jail anyone. The police are no longer interested in evidence based prosecution. Thankfully Cyprus seems to have escaped British shackles on this one, for the time being.
Rape victims must hand phones to police or face investigations being dropped under new scheme
Authorities warned ‘intrusion’ could stop women reporting rape after prosecutions fall to 1.7 per cent
Click to follow
Rape and domestic violence victims will be forced to give police access to their phones and social media accounts or face their cases being dropped.
New forms being handed out across England and Wales warn that if a complainant refuses to surrender their digital devices, or tries to prevent any personal information being shared, “it may not be possible for the investigation or prosecution to continue”.
Police were warned that the “traumatising” intrusion might stop victims reporting sexual assault and abuse.
But all forces started using the forms earlier this year, as part of a strategy to improve the way potential evidence is shared between officers, prosecutors and defence lawyers.
The “national disclosure improvement plan” was sparked by public outrage over a series of rape cases that collapsed over newly discovered messages and photos in 2017.
Editor’s Comment re the above article from ‘The Independent’
Police routinely take phones and laptops from men. It is not acceptable. if justice is the purpose, to investigate rape and domestic violence case on the basis and premise that women never lie about these matters.
Women lie about all sorts of things. If women are to be accepted as equals, they and all their support and feminist groups should accept that. There is no statute of limitations on sex and domestic violence allegations, which makes them extremely serious, as are the punishments.
In my experience, the British Police cannot be trusted and mamagement is generally poor and prone to corruption. Government making them and their promotions target driven has made accused men very soft targets.
Men need to tread very carefully through the modern minefield of cis gender relationships. Whatever the serious shortcomings of the police, they are up against the formidable forces of feminism in these cases. July 30th 2019
Teenager boy who scaled The Shard slams soft pampered British Males July 29th 2019
The daredevil teen who scaled The Shard on July 10th has said he wanted to “inspire people to chase their dreams”. George told the BBC Today programme last Friday, that he thinks modern British young men are too pampered, not encouarged to take up challenges.
George told the BBC anchorman, ‘Boys watch ‘Love Island.’ They want to be like the young men on there. I watched it twice, just to understand what’s going on. Not for me, very bad role models. I think we need to step outside of our comfort zones.
Accused of wasting police time, George said: ‘If I had fallen i would have hit the railway station roof, hurting nobody. Anyway, I knew I could it. There were moments. like when I reached the 75th floor, it would have been easy to have a panic response. I stopped, breathed deep for some moments, then I carried on. That is what we have to do when we meet obstacles in life.’
George King, 19, from Oxford, urged viewers on Good Morning Britain on Wednesday to recognise his “philanthropic” purpose as he admitted to was “very lucky” to escape arrest.
It comes two days after he climbed the 1,017ft building, one of the tallest in Europe.
He told the programme: “Of course I take full responsibility. I do apologise if I disrupted anyone’s commute time. However I would hope people see the philanthropic purpose of it.
“To inspire people to chase their dreams. Not necessarily to climb The Shard, but to do something unique. That doesn’t have to be climbing without a rope, to find something unique if it’s music, art, craft, whatever it is, to pursue it with excellence and to have a dream.”
The 19-year-old was “spoken to” by Metropolitan Police officers following the incident but not arrested.
In 2012, The Shard’s owners secured an injunction to stop Alain Robert, known as the French Spiderman, from climbing it.
When Mr Robert later climbed Heron Tower, which is covered by City of London rather than Metropolitan Police, he was arrested on suspicion of causing public nuisance.
The Frenchman was given a suspended prison sentence and ordered to pay £5,500 in compensation.
Mr King said: “I got very lucky, but I think it’s more the fact that I took precautions to reduce the cause and effect. I did it at five o’clock in the morning when it was less busy, and also the fact that I did it in 45 minutes.”
Describing his interaction with police, he said: “They were brilliant. I think they were just more shocked than anything. It’s just not a normal Monday morning for anyone.
“They saw light in it, some saw light in it, but of course they had their concerns and I had my justifications.”
The teenager told the programme his mother first heard news of his feat while listening to the the radio.
“It didn’t come as a surprise to her at all, she knew something was up,” he explained.
“With one month to go I was very much in the zone, my diet changes a bit. She knew something was happening but she just didn’t know what it was.”
He said his mother was “very happy” her son completed the challenge unscathed, but at the same time scolded him saying: “Don’t do it again”.
He added: “She understands how much meaning it gives to me, how much I prepare, how much I train for it.”
Seven of his friends were accomplices to the exploit, helping the teenager “gather intelligence” before attempting the climb.
He also told the GMB hosts that he checked the weather forecast for two weeks before the big day.
Host Piers Morgan extolled Mr King as an “old-fashioned daredevil” and “an exceptional young man”, adding that his spirit was “what made this country great”.
Asked what his plans are next, the 19-year-old said: “I’m going to sit back, have a cup of tea, chill for a bit. A project will turn up.
Number of rape cases that are charged or summonsed has fallen from 14 per cent to 1.5 per cent, data reveals July 27th 2019
‘There is no meaningful access to justice for women, and the men who commit this crime are getting away with it’, said EVAW
Just 1.5 per cent of all rape cases reported to the police result in suspects being charged or summonsed with the offence.
Home Office statistics, analysed by The Guardian, continue to reflect a concerning decline in prosecutions for rape across England and Wales over recent years.
The data comes amid heightened calls for the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to be reviewed following allegations it had quietly changed its prosecuting policies on sexual assault cases to ensure only the most clear cut cases ended up in court.
The numbers are particularly stark compared to figures four years ago, when 14 per cent of all cases lead to a suspect being charged or summonsed.
That’s a change from one in seven reports resulting in charging or summonses in 2015/16 to just one in 64 reports in 2018-19.
Alongside this, recent Ministry of Justice figures indicate the few victims of sexual assault to make it to crown court are also being forced to wait longer for trial dates, with many left for seven months.
Shadow justice secretary Richard Burgon told justice minister Paul Maynard that he found the figures “deeply troubling”.
“This will only add to concerns that the chaos the Conservatives have created in our courts and wider justice system is letting down victims of the most serious crimes,” he said.
In a written response, Mr Maynard said: “The overall median waiting time in crown courts for defendants in sexual offence cases tends to be higher than that for other offences due to a lower guilty plea rate for these cases.
“Demand [for court use] has been falling in recent years and sitting days have been reduced accordingly. Waiting times for trials in the crown court for 2018 have been the lowest since 2014, despite the challenge of increasingly complex cases.”
‘Rape has effectively been decriminalised’
Meanwhile, more victims than ever before are reporting attacks to the police.
The number of rape claims handled annually by police in England and Wales has risen by 61 per cent between 2015 and 2019, 35,847 to 57,882.
“The figures show that overall, of every 200 cases of rape reported to the police, only three will actually be prosecuted and go to trial,” Rebecca Hitchen, campaigns manager at the End Violence Against Women coalition said.
“If nothing changes we could argue that rape has effectively been decriminalised. There is no meaningful access to justice for women, and the men who commit this crime are getting away with it.”
A Home Office spokesperson said of the declining prosecutions: “We welcome the fact that more victims are having greater confidence to come forward and report these horrendous crimes. However, we are concerned by reductions in charges and prosecutions for crimes such as rape and serious sexual offences.”
Subscribe to the i newsletterSign up today Subscribe to the National Newspaper Of The Year
Editorial Comment : This article vents the absurd nonsense that rape has been de criminalised. In fact the definition has been widened to include a whole range of ‘unwanted sexual contact’ allegedly inflicted by males on females.
One example of the full weight of these new laws was when an innocent Irishman was jailed as a result of deliberate police dishonesty and the routine witholding of evidence.
The rape, as it ws called, involved a woman- witnessed by the female friend who reported it- masturbating a drunken Scotsman who had a distinctive scar on his forehead, when they were returning from a night club in the early hours. The Scotsman ejaculated over her the girl’s skirt.
Notorious West Mercia Police obviously thought a working class Irishman who just wasn’t there, was close enough to fit up. The usual deadbeat legal aid lawyer did nothing to defend the man. So the Irishman, the real victim, did 17 years.
West Mercia ( West Merciless would be a better name for them ) hid the forensic evidence that the ejaculate provided. The Irishman was let out on to the street with £47 and his whole life destroyed.
According to Tony Blair, failed barrister as he is, and the Blair reforms, such men must prove they did not commit the crime, not the state’s job to prove it. To help corrupt crime British crime statistics, the Irishman was told he would get a rediced sentence if he pleaded guilty.
Rape used to be a more straightforward matter, now it is highly political as all mainstream parties vie for votes fro m women and their worried fathers.
It is up to men to realise the danger they are in. It is high time for formal consent forms, rules of engagement, pre and post nuptial and recorded evidence to ensure that rules are obeyed. The planned extra 20,000 police officer’s duties should include patrolling night clubs and bars to observe and protect- not just women, because women lie too, not that the feminist equality warriors will accept that.
The best I can say about the police in this matter is that they – and the CPS- are under intolerable pressure from politicians, feminists and smug bourgeoise media to raise rape convictions. Police Chiefs warned of the dangers and extra work load that would come from Blair’s 24 hour drinking culture.
Woman have to take some responsibilty for their presence and signalling in this environment if they want to stay safe. Still, I think the men are more at risk. Equality is getting very lopsided. One wonders where the good ship ‘Female Equality’ is going next. Will it go the way of RMS Titanic, with officers to vein to spot the field if icebergs, ignoring every warning from the telegraph. Who knows? But big ships are slow to stop and slow to turn.
FORGET MAY NOT? Paul Waugh Huffington Post July 24th 2019
Theresa May, remember her? She has her final PMQs today and then what looks like a super indulgent mini speech (yes another one) on the No.10 steps. Many think she should just get off the stage as quickly as possible, but the outgoing PM is clearly thinking of how history will view her (maybe that previous tearful shot of her resignation speech is not the one she really wants in the TV archive).
Tom McTague, now at the Atlantic’s UK bureau, has this new piece revealing that May held face-to-face talks with Gordon Brown in No.10 in early July, and spoke to Tony Blair and David Cameron on the phone to discuss how to shape her time after Downing Street.
Comment Inevitably May’s parting speech included her hope that she had inspired the next generation of girls that they can be what and whoever they like, including high office. If her and her female predecessor as PM are anything to go by, she has nothing to boast about. Thatcher began the destruction of this country’s social fabric. Women like her trivialise the role of motherhood, so crucial to child well being, exaggerating the importance of careers. This awful woman failed as Home Secretary when it came to reforming our corrupt police.
May failed as Prime Minister because she could not foist an absurd lie that remaining in the EU without representation was Brexit. As for all the rubbish about girls can be whatever they like, the real issue is class. All the vile feminist movement is doing is dividing and ruling the working class masses, leading to social breakdown, broken homes, child mental health, alcohol and drug abuse, rising crime, homelessness and racial divisions because the Muslims cling to religion and the white/black non religious working classes scapegoat each other and Muslims. On the international stage, Britain spares no expense bombing the Middle East for oil, its Saudi cronies, toadying to the U.S, Israel and the myth of fighting for world wide ‘western style’ democracy.
No surprise we have Islamic terrorists, religious bigotry on super scale and the rise of the far right as mass immigration and refugees send public and legal services into overload/meltdown.
Our elite think the solution is to get more cameras, hate speech laws and internet police to make sure we stay in line. That is the reality of our fake democracy. Good riddance to narcisistic Theresa May.
Our home for bold arguments and big thinkers.
Would the world be more peaceful if there were more women leaders?
By Josie GlausiuszOctober 30, 2017
During the opening months of the First World War, in the midst of the incendiary jingoism roiling Britain, the poet Dorothea Hollins of the Women’s Labour League proposed that an unarmed, 1,000-strong ‘Women’s Peace Expeditionary Force’ cross Europe ‘in the teeth of the guns’ and interpose itself between the warring armies in the trenches. Hollins’s grand scheme did not materialize, but neither did it emerge in a vacuum; it was nurtured by a century of activism largely grounded in maternal love. Or, as her fellow peace activist Helena Swanwick wrote: The shared fear that in war “women die, and see their babies die, but theirs is no glory; nothing but horror and shame unspeakable.”
Swanwick helped to found the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom, an organization dedicated to eliminating the causes of war. She hoped for “a world in the far-off future that will not contain one soldier.” Many activists believed that if women had political power, they would not pursue war. But how true is this? Do incidences of violent conflict alter when women become leaders, or when their share of parliamentary representation rises? In what sense do women mother wars?
If you ask this question out loud, not a minute will pass before someone says ‘Margaret Thatcher,’ the British prime minister who waged a hugely popular war in the Falklands that led to her landslide 1983 election victory. Thatcher is hardly the only woman leader celebrated for her warmongering. Think of Boudicca, the woad-daubed Queen of the Iceni people of eastern England, who led a popular uprising against the Roman invaders; or Lakshmi Bai, Queen of Jhansi and a leader of the 1857-58 Indian Mutiny against the British; or even Emmeline Pankhurst, who led British suffragettes on a militant campaign of hunger strikes, arson, and window-smashing, then, in 1914, became a vociferous supporter of Britain’s entry into the Great War.
But these examples are anecdotal because, throughout history, women leaders have been extremely rare. Between 1950 and 2004, according to data compiled by Katherine W. Phillips, professor of leadership and ethics at Columbia Business School, just 48 national leaders across 188 countries—fewer than 4% of all leaders—have been female. They included 18 presidents and 30 prime ministers. Two countries, Ecuador and Madagascar, had a woman leader, each of whom served for a mere two days before being replaced by a man.
Given the tiny sample size, does it even make sense to ask if, given power, women are more or less likely than men to wage wars? The medical anthropologist Catherine Panter-Brick, who directs the conflict, resilience and health program at the MacMillan Center for International and Area Studies at Yale University, thinks not. “It stereotypes gender, and assumes leadership is uncomplicated,” she told me. Perhaps she had thinkers such as Stephen Pinker in her sights. In The Better Angels of Our Nature (2011), his study of violence throughout history, Pinker wrote: “women have been, and will be, the pacifying force.” That assumption is not always grounded in reality, says Mary Caprioli, a professor of political science at the University of Minnesota Duluth. Along with Mark A Boyer at the University of Connecticut, she counted 10 military crises in the 20th century involving four female leaders (seven of which were handled by Golda Meir, Israel’s prime minister from 1969 to 1974). To assess the behavior of women leaders during crises, they say, one needs a large sample—”which history cannot provide.”
Oeindrila Dube, a professor of global conflict studies at the University of Chicago and S P Harish at New York University, have studied four centuries of European kings and queens. In their as-yet-unpublished working paper, they examined the reigns of 193 monarchs in 18 European polities, or political entities, between the years 1480 to 1913. Although just 18% of the monarchs were queens—making their analysis less statistically reliable—they found that polities ruled by queens were 27% more likely than kings to participate in inter-state conflicts. Unmarried queens were more likely to engage in wars in which their state was attacked, perhaps because they were perceived as weak.
The fear of appearing weak affects modern women leaders too, according to Caprioli, perhaps causing them to over-compensate on issues of security and defense. She notes that women who emulate men, such as Thatcher, Meir, and India’s prime minister Indira Gandhi (1980-84)—who claimed to be a ‘biform human being’, neither man nor woman—are more likely to succeed as political leaders. They must also contend with negative stereotypes from male opponents: For example, Yahya Khan, former president of Pakistan (1969-71), said that he would have responded less violently toward Indira Gandhi during the 1971 Indo-Pakistan War if India had had a male leader. “If that woman [Gandhi] thinks she can cow me down, I refuse to take it,” he said.
Dube and Harish found that women were more likely to aggress if they were sharing power with a spouse, as in the case of Isabella I and Ferdinand V, who co-ruled the Kingdoms of León and Castile between 1474 and 1504. A notable exception is Catherine the Great, who became Empress of Russia in 1762 following the assassination of her husband Peter III, and whose military campaigns extended the borders of Russia by 520,000 square km, incorporating Crimea and much of Poland.
For women to lead, they must often begin with political involvement—running for state or national parliaments, leading campaigns, organizing women to run for office. In 2017, the worldwide average of women in parliament is only 23.3%—a 6.5% gain over the past decade. That gain is significant: Caprioli’s data shows that, as the number of women in parliament increases by 5%, a state is five times less likely to use violence when confronted with an international crisis (perhaps because women are more likely to use a ‘collective or consensual approach’ to conflict resolution.)
States are also more likely to achieve lasting peace post-conflict when women are invited to the negotiating table. Although the number of women included in peace talks is minuscule (a United Nations study found that just 2.4% of mediators and 9% of negotiators are women, and just 4% of the signatories of 31 peace processes), the inclusion of women can make a profound difference. Peace is more likely to endure: An analysis by the US non-profit Inclusive Security of 182 signed peace agreements between 1989 and 2011 found that an agreement is 35% more likely to last at least 15 years if women are included as negotiators, mediators, and signatories.
Women succeed as mediators and negotiators because of qualities traditionally perceived as feminine and maternal. In Northern Ireland, Somalia, and South Africa, female participants in peace processes earned a reputation for fostering dialogue and engaging all sides. They are also often seen as honest brokers, more trustworthy and less threatening, because they act outside formal power structures. Yet despite the perception of softness and malleability, their actions are often quite the opposite. In 2003, the Liberian peace activist Leymah Gbowee led a coalition of thousands of Muslim and Christian women in picketing, praying and fasting that helped to end the country’s brutal 14-year civil war. Dubbed ‘a warrior for peace,’ Gbowee shared the 2011 Nobel Peace Prize.
Terms such as warrior, weapons, and revolution are often used for groups that agitate for peace, among whom women continue to be ‘disproportionately highly represented’, according to the UN. In Israel, Women Wage Peace organizes protests to pressure the government to work towards a viable peace agreement. In Argentina, the Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo ‘revolutionized’ motherhood by protesting the disappearance of their children during Argentina’s ‘dirty war’ from 1977 to 1983, transforming maternity from a passive role to one of public strength.
The weaponizing of traditional notions of femininity was also a strong component of the decade-long women’s peace camp at Greenham Common in the UK. Beginning in 1981 as a protest against the arrival of 96 Tomahawk cruise missiles at the US air base in Berkshire, the women surrounded and cut the fences of the air base, clambered over the barrier dressed as teddy bears, and pinned babies’ clothes, bottles, teething rings, diapers, and family photos to the wires. Their battle was no less militant than Thatcher’s war in the Falklands, yet she dismissed the women as an “eccentricity.”
It seems that, no matter whether women are fighting for peace or for war, they must also battle against the assumption that they themselves are passive, weak, or peculiar. History shows us that that isn’t true, and that, in the case of Isabella I and Ferdinand V, they could be relentlessly cruel: Not only did the royal couple lead the Spanish conquest of the Islamic Kingdom of Granada in 1492, expelling both Jews and Muslims, they tortured those who remained and converted them to Christianity—in some cases burning them to death.You might also likeLife advice from US Supreme Court justice Neil GorsuchJuly 21, 2019Quartz
Nor are they always as peaceable as their personal history suggests: Aung San Suu Kyi, the de facto leader of Myanmar and a recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1991 “for her non-violent struggle for democracy and human rights,” has been widely condemned for failing to denounce the country’s military for its campaign of ethnic cleansing against the persecuted Rohingya people, a Muslim minority in Myanmar’s northern Rakhine state. According to Human Rights Watch, since August 25 2017, more than 400,000 Rohingya Muslims have fled across the border to Bangladesh to escape the army’s barrage of arson, atrocities, and rape.
As Caprioli notes: “Women leaders can indeed be forceful when confronted with violent, aggressive and dangerous international situations,” but they can also be aggressive in the cause of peace. It is, indeed, a stereotype to dismiss women as inherently peaceable. As Swanwick wrote in The Future of the Women’s Movement (1913): “I wish to disclaim altogether the kind of assumption… in feminist talk of the present day.” That is, “the assumption that men have been the barbarians who loved physical force, and that women alone were civilized and civilizing. There are no signs of this in literature or history.”
Sign up for the Quartz Daily Brief email
Women are experiencing record levels of mental health problems. July 24th 2019.
The latest brilliant official insight into young British women’s mental health problems suggest that apart from needing more resources to look after them, they need a new diet.
As upper class Boris Johnson takes over as PM, it is not his class that is being made the issue. It is Boris’s record as a womaniser that makes him unfit for office. His only chance of redemption is explained below,
10 Things British Women Want From The Next Prime Minister
Photo by Bloomberg/Contributor/Getty Images.As Theresa May’s prime ministership draws to a close – and she desperately tries to ensure she’s remembered for something other than a failed Brexit – it’s time to start thinking about the future, and one that doesn’t revolve solely around leaving the EU. Her inaugural speech may have contained worthy promises to eliminate seven “burning injustices” – from racism in the criminal justice system to young people’s inability to afford a house – but she did little to put a dent in them during her three years in the job.According to one BBC analysis, none of the inequalities she flagged as priorities in July 2016 has improved and many have actually worsened, so the next PM – Boris Johnson, most likely, or Jeremy Hunt – will have a lot to be getting on with besides Brexit when they take office at the end of the month. (However, neither candidate seems likely to prioritise social injustice judging from what we’ve seen so far in the leadership race, which has been light on domestic policy and dominated by Brexit and Boris Johnson’s personal life.)If the seemingly impossible were to happen and the next PM decided to sit up and take note of young women’s domestic policy demands, what would they want to see? Refinery29 put the question to readers, charities and campaigners.
10 Things British Women Want From The Next Prime Minister
Stop Brexit””Any form of Brexit will be bad for the economy, with a hard Brexit the most damaging, and women will be differently impacted to men as workers, consumers and users of public services,” Dr Mary-Ann Stephenson, director of the Women’s Budget Group (WBG), tells us. Refinery29 has previously explored how Brexit will be disproportionately damaging for women, and the WBG believes a no-deal arrangement – which neither Johnson nor Hunt has ruled out – could be even worse, which may explain why so many are backing Gina Miller’s plan to stop it from happening.
“Contraceptive pills such as Microgynon are manufactured in Germany and France and there is no plan in place for their delivery if we leave without a deal – something I suspect isn’t the first thing that comes to Boris Johnson’s or Jeremy Hunt’s mind when they tell us to just follow them blindly into a cliff-edge Brexit,” says Phoebe Potter, 23, head of mobilisation at Our Future, Our Choice, which is campaigning for a People’s Vote. Furthermore, it’s women, particularly ethnic minority women, in unstable zero-hour contracts, low-paid or part-time work, who bear the brunt of austerity. “In a period of economic downturn after a hard Brexit, it’s unlikely we will escape over a decade of Tory austerity any time soon,” Potter adds.
She trusts neither Hunt nor Johnson to deliver a Brexit that minimises the risks to women: “They both live in bubbles of privilege and they haven’t done anything to make sure that women’s voices are heard in the Brexit debate.”What Women Want From The New UK Prime MinisterNews • Politicswritten by Natalie GilPhoto by Bloomberg/Contributor/Getty Images.
© 2019 Refinery29 Inc.
More from Ideas
Babysitter who killed infant with ‘aggressive’ handling gets 21 years in jail author imageJacob GeanousTuesday 23 Jul 2019 3:02 pm Share this article via facebook Share this article via twitter Share this article via messenger Jennifer Baldwin who was jailed for killing Colton Senogles Jennifer Baldwin, 38, was sentenced to 21 years in prison Monday for killing Colton Senogles, who was just 9-months-old when he died
A babysitter who killed a infant with ‘aggressive’ handling was given 21 years in jail. Jennifer Baldwin, 38, was sentenced Monday for murdering 9-month-old Colton Senogles, who died of a ‘catastrophic head injury’ in March 2018, in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Baldwin, who had been babysitting the boy, initially told police she didn’t know what happened to Colton – but admitted she handled him ‘aggressively’ when she was given autopsy results that showed brain swelling. Investigators did not specify how the boy was injured, but said Colton died of blunt force injury to the head.
The autopsy found he had severe brain damage, CBS reported. Baldwin called 911 on March 15, 2018, just an hour after the child’s mother dropped Colton off in Baldwin’s care, according to a criminal complaint. Coldon Senogles Colton Senogles died of brain swelling after suffering trauma to the head (Picture: GoFundMe) Paramedics found the boy struggling to breath and rushed him to the hospital where he died five days later.
A jury found Baldwin guilty of two counts of unintentional second-degree murder on June 21. thumbnail for post ID 10446427Bakery blunder sees girl, 2, given birthday cake iced with ‘Happy Birthday Loser’ Prosecutor Paige Starkey asked for 30 year sentence, calling the child’s injuries ‘catastrophic,’ adding, ‘the brain was swelling inside the skull.’ Starkey also said, instead of calling 911 immediately, Baldwin called other people before calling paramedics, including the child’s mother. It is unclear who else she reportedly called. Baldwin’s lawyer argued that she should only get 150 months in prison because she is a mother of four. Judge Jamie Anderson replied: ‘It’s no question it is tragic for your children to grow up without their mother. But you were found guilty of two counts of murder and that changes everything.’ thumbnail for post ID 10446091Moment mother ‘dropped baby and killed him during cat fight outside beauty shop’ The Hennepin County Attorney’s Office said Baldwin’s sentence was significantly higher than recommended state guidelines because the jury found aggravating circumstances in Colton’s death, including his age, vulnerability, and that he could not run away or defend himself, according to KSTP. In a brief obituary, Colton’s family wrote that he ‘passed far too soon , on March 20, 2018, surrounded by his parents and family.’
Axed Springwatch presenter Martin Hughes-Games: white, middle-aged men an endangered species on TV
© Jo Charlesworth/BBC Martin Hughes-Games (left) with Michaela Strachan and Chris Packham at the launch of Springwatch 2016
A former Springwatch presenter who claims he lost his job for being “white, middle class and old-aged” says he remains too upset to watch the show.
Martin Hughes-Games said his 12 years on the programme were one of the happiest times of his life until the BBC told him his services were no longer required. Advertisement
He believes he will never work for the BBC again, as the corporation seeks to make its presenting line-up more diverse.
Hughes-Games, 63, said: “I think the commissioner’s a bit grumpy with me, because I’m white, middle-class, old-aged… who wants me on their show?
“I’m an endangered species. Let’s hope that conservation efforts keep me going, rather than going extinct.”
He pointed out that there are “white, middle class, old-aged presenters who are actually quite good at their jobs”.
The presenter announced on his social media account in autumn 2016 that he had lost his job. Fans complained and the BBC appeared to have a change of heart, keeping on the show in a revised role until early 2018.
Next week he returns to the screen to present an ITV documentary, Counting Tigers: A Survival Special.
But he has not got over the pain of leaving Springwatch. In an interview with Radio Times, he said he finds it “very, very difficult to watch” his old colleagues, Michaela Strachan and Chris Packham.
“I find it very, very difficult to watch. I do a bit, but I feel so close to them, both professionally and emotionally, that I often find myself adjusting the tappets on one of my old motorbikes or something rather than watching it, because it hurts,” he said.
Hughes-Games said he remains in regular contact with the pair via email and text, and has been to stay with Strachan at her home in South Africa.
“I do miss Chris and Michaela terribly,” he said. “[We] had a lovely chemistry which was the most wonderful thing to be a part of. It was just great, it really was.
“My abiding memory is laughing an enormous amount with Chris and Michaela. Working with them on the programme was one of the happiest times that I ever had in 40 years in telly.”
Strachan and Packham now co-present Springwatch with the biologist Gillian Burke.
Hughes-Games has been spending his time at home looking after his two-year-old son, Sam, but said he could not help sending in ideas to the Springwatch team.
He explained: “I do think that because I’m at home, looking after Sam – which I love, but which is exhausting – and doing a lot of gardening and so on, my brain is quite idle. And, after 40 years in telly, and 30 years as a producer, you cannot stop putting your producer head on.”
For his new ITV show, Hughes-Games goes to India, home to 70 per cent of the world’s tigers. Two tigers are killed there by poachers every week.
The animals remain in demand in China, where they are thought to have aphrodisiac powers. Hughes-Games said: “They are bloody idiots. Why do people still think that they’ll get an erect penis if they eat some bits of a tiger? You know, if I eat a bit of my dog, will I start barking? If I eat a bit of a cow, will I start mooing? It just drives me mad that there’s still this massive demand for tiger parts.”
MSN are empowering Women In Sport this summer. Find out more about our campaign and the charity fighting to promote the transformational and lifelong rewards of exercise for women and girls in the UK here.
Editorial: White upper middle class men and women still dominate and control the BBC’s smug political correctness and naive New World Order political agenda. Martin Hughes can’t bear to watch his old progamme because he is no longer on it. There are people doing really important jobs who risk the sack every day, especially if they say something deemed to be non PC.
6 Dark Traits of The Female Sociopath
By Shahida Arabi, Bestselling Author
Last updated: 3 Jul 2018
~ 6 min read
Female sociopaths and narcissists are dangerous precisely because their manipulation often flies under the radar. Although there is an ongoing debate about the definition of “sociopath” versus “narcissist,” it’s safe to say that both types exhibit the following:
- A callous lack of empathy.
- A tendency to manipulate and con others for their own gain.
- A sense of egocentrism and excessive entitlement along with blatant disregard for the rights, needs and feelings of others.
Sociopaths and narcissists on the high end of the spectrum take it one step further. Those who meet the criteria for the Dark Triad (narcissism, psychopathy and Machiavellianism) often lack remorse for their destructive actions. They use cognitive empathy to assess their target’s vulnerabilities but they lack the affective empathy to truly care about the welfare of others. They are often sadistic in provoking and deceiving others, feeling pleasure at the sight of another’s pain. Studies show that these toxic types experience positive feelings when seeing sad faces (Wai & Tiliopoulos, 2012).
The reality of their malice becomes darker when we consider that females are socialized by our society to be covertly aggressive. As a result, they are more likely to bully others through underhanded methods such as relational aggression – abuse through sabotage of someone’s social relationships and reputation – all while mastering the guise of a sweet exterior.
Here are six signs you are dealing with a female sociopath or narcissist on the high end of the spectrum:
1. They mirror and love-bomb you in order to get information.
When a female sociopath first meets you, they are on a mission to collect as much information about you as possible. The female sociopath is assessing whether you’d make a good target. As her unsuspecting victim, she ‘zooms in’ on you with an excessive amount of attention. Her warm and nurturing façade helps to facilitate her covert machinations. On the outside, she is friendly and inviting, but within, she is vindictive, ruthless and cunning. Yet in the beginning, it’ll appear as if you both have so much in common.
She’ll play to your sympathy and pity by pretending she has similar life experiences as you. She’ll claim she has similar interests, hobbies, passions, life goals and values. Little do you know, this is a cold and calculating gesture used to find out as much as possible about your strengths and weaknesses so she can exploit both to her advantage. Under her hawk-like gaze, the female sociopath mirrors you to win your trust and to make you disclose personal information that she plans to use against you.
In the initial stage, she will build for you a beautiful pedestal so that you’re tempted to buy into her con. Once you’ve sufficiently invested in her false mask, she has no problem using you and your resources for her own gain. Whether it’s sex, money, a place to live, status, reputation, fame, or even just the duping delight of one-upping someone – it is all about power.
2. They are superficially charming and demonstrate exaggerated speech or gestures which lack authenticity.
Much like a male sociopath, a female sociopath’s projected kindness rarely meets her eyes. She is reptilian in her demeanor and you might notice a flash of her envy, anger or greed from time to time when the mask slips. Otherwise, she is eerily calm and lacks a startle response even in situations that warrant fear or anxiety (Lykken, 1957). She might exaggerate her speech patterns, expressing more enthusiasm and joy than she actually feels. She may slip up and into a condescending and contemptuous tone of voice which may reveal her true intentions.
Yet her charm, while superficial and glib, can be just as convincing, if not more, as a male sociopath’s. This is because as a society we are conditioned to see females as the “gentler sex,” incapable of violence. Yet the violence a female sociopath can inflict can be just as psychologically destructive and dangerous as her male counterpart.
3. They sabotage you covertly.
The aggression of a female sociopath is unprecedented, yet it is carefully hidden beneath multiple layers of constructed traits that one can mistake for sincerity. Remember that narcissists and sociopaths are chameleons, adapting to social situations based on what they suspect will bode well and will best suit their hunt for victims. So, they present a very alluring and charitable image, especially to those who can benefit them. However, to those they have no use for or those who evoke their narcissistic rage and envy, they reveal more of their true selves.
Much of the female sociopath’s manipulation is channeled through relational aggression, which involves damaging someone’s social relationships or reputation to destroy one’s sense of self. In the realm of female friendships, female narcissists especially are always looking to protect themselves against outside threats that may overtake their “Queen Bee” status in the cliques they create.
That is why they underhandedly bully their chosen victims (usually those they perceive to have something they covet) by excluding them from social groups, pitting people against them, accusing them of things they did not do, spreading rumors or gossip, slandering or smearing them and also creating rivalries among people. That way, their victims are unable to gain validation or support for the abuse they’re experiencing.
4. They demonstrate little to no remorse in harming others to get what they want – and they exhibit internalized misogyny.
Whoever is in a female narcissist or sociopath’s way will pay dearly – even the ones who pose the slightest threat. The female sociopath harbors a sense of entitlement to everything and anything. They are especially threatened by other women who possess what they cannot.
Female narcissists and sociopaths exhibit internalized misogyny: they despise other women getting ahead or posing a threat to their grandiose ego.
To see another woman achieving in a way that she is unable to do, or to get the attention she feels she must have, is a threat to her very sense of self and sense of entitlement. That is why the female sociopath is notorious for belittling her more successful or attractive female friends, covertly sabotaging and bullying those she is jealous of and having affairs with men who are already in committed relationships (with their friends nonetheless!). Her life motto is “It is all about me, and if it isn’t, I must make it so.”
5. They are sadistic and enjoy inflicting pain.
Female sociopaths and narcissists enjoy seeing people squirm, just for the hell of it. There is nothing they love more than to take down an innocent, good-natured person who was “naïve” enough to believe in them. That’s why they make lofty, false promises they fail to carry through – just to delight in another’s sense of disappointment and depletion. That’s why they deprive their most threatening victims of attention and affection, just to lather other, more loyal cronies with excessive praise.
That’s why they set up scenarios where they know their victims are bound to fail. That’s why they manufacture chaos out of thin air, to create a blend of crazymaking and love-bombing that leaves onlookers confused, on edge and constantly walking on eggshells.
6. They thrive off of male attention (or female attention, depending on their sexual orientation).
Female sociopaths and narcissists enjoy being the center of attention because it gives them power and a harem from which they can derive endless amounts of “narcissistic supply” in the form of praise, sex, and resources. Sociopaths enjoy this because it gives them a power trip, the ability to control others at a whim and play everyone like puppets. Narcissists enjoy it because it feeds their inflated ego and gives them validation.
Female predators are not opposed to using their bodies to get what they want; they have no qualms using their appearance and sexuality to climb the corporate ladder, to take advantage of a doting boyfriend or to seduce a stranger, so long as it benefits them. They get off on the power and control – and their thirst for new victims is insatiable. They are notorious for having extramarital affairs, engaging in numerous flirtations and indiscretions and constantly surrounding themselves with admirers (everything from exes to potential replacements).
They can lie, manipulate and con their way into people’s hearts and lives, pulling the wool over your eyes quite easily while they pursue their own agenda. Yet once they are done with you and you are no longer useful, they will rarely give you the same amount of attention, respect or affection you’ve grown accustomed to. They will discard you without blinking twice. To them, you are merely an object to suit their purposes, nothing more.
The Big Picture
If you have encountered a female malignant narcissist or sociopath, take heart in the fact that their behavior is not your fault. Many have been bamboozled by these toxic types because of how convincing they are. Rather than blaming yourself, examine the ways in which you’ve been manipulated to resolve the cognitive dissonance that might arise. You may still be reeling from the discrepancy between their true self and their false self.
It’s common for survivors of sociopaths to doubt themselves and their experiences. It’s important to close that gap by documenting what you’ve experienced, seeking validating professional support and engaging in self-care healing modalities which will enable you to rise above their malice and move forward into a future without their toxicity.
Centifanti, L. C. M., Fanti, K. A., Thomson, N. D., Demetriou, V., & Anastassiou-Hadjicharalambous, X. (2015). Types of Relational Aggression in Girls Are Differentiated by Callous-Unemotional Traits, Peers and Parental Overcontrol. Behavioral Sciences, 5(4), 518–536. http://doi.org/10.3390/bs5040518
Ekman, P. (2009, December). Duping Delight. Paul Ekman Group. Retrieved from https://www.paulekman.com/deception-detection/duping-delight/
Lykken, D. T. (1957). A study of anxiety in the sociopathic personality. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 55(1), 6-10. doi:10.1037/h0047232
Wai, M., & Tiliopoulos, N. (2012). The affective and cognitive empathic nature of the dark triad of personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 52(7), 794-799. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2012.01.008
AddThis Sharing Buttons
Share to Facebook6KShare to TwitterShare to PrintShare to EmailShare to More481
Shahida Arabi, Bestselling Author
Shahida Arabi is a summa cum laude graduate of Columbia University graduate school, where she studied the effects of bullying across the life-course trajectory. She is the #1 Amazon bestselling author of three books, including Becoming the Narcissist’s Nightmare: How to Devalue and Discard the Narcissist While Supplying Yourself, featured as a #1 Amazon Bestseller in three categories and as a #1 Amazon bestseller in personality disorders for twelve consecutive months after its release. Her most recent book, POWER: Surviving and Thriving After Narcissistic Abuse, was also featured as a #1 Amazon best seller in Applied Psychology. She is the founder of the popular blog for abuse survivors, Self-Care Haven, which has millions of views from all over the world. Her work has been shared and endorsed by numerous clinicians, mental health advocates, mental health professionals and bestselling authors. For her undergraduate education, Shahida graduated summa cum laude from NYU where she studied English Literature and Psychology. She is passionate about using her knowledge base in psychology, sociology, gender studies and mental health to help survivors empower themselves after emotional abuse and trauma. Her writing has been featured on The National Domestic Violence Hotline, The Huffington Post, MOGUL, The Meadows, Thought Catalog and Harvard-trained psychologist Dr. Monica O’Neal’s website.
To upper middle class feminists sex is about power, to us realists it is about reproduction.
Woman killed young daughters because they ‘got in the way’, court hearsThe Independent July 3rd 2019
Mother looked up how long it would take for corpse to ‘go cold up to the shoulder’ before deaths, jury told
A mother murdered her two young daughters because they “got in the way” of her doing what she wanted, a court has heard.
Louise Porton is accused of deliberately obstructing the breathing of three-year-old Lexi Draper and 17-month-old Scarlett Vaughan, in two separate incidents.
Lexi was found dead in the early hours of 15 January, at Ms Porton’s home in Rugby, Warwickshire. Scarlett died 18 days later, on 1 February.
On both occasions the 23-year-old called paramedics, who arrived at the scene to find a dead child.
Opening the case for the prosecution, Oliver Saxby QC said the deaths had no natural cause.
“Later that evening, she took Lexi to hospital,” he said. “Lexi was examined, she had recovered, no cause could be found for the fit and she was allowed home the next day.”
Ms Porton called 999 in the early hours of 4 January, after the three-year-old stopped breathing once again.
On this occasion paramedics attended her address where “they found Lexi in a deep state of unconsciousness,” Mr Saxby said.
“They revived her and took her to hospital where she was admitted for a more thorough examination,” he added. “Lexi’s symptoms were consistent with some sort of deliberate airway obstruction – ie with someone having deliberately interfered with her ability to breathe. But doctors had no reason to suspect this at the time, they thought Lexi had a chest infection and she was given antibiotics before being discharged on 8 January.”
Louise Porton rang emergency services for a third time in the early hours of 15 January. This time paramedics arrived to find Lexi dead.
Weeks later, on 1 February, Ms Porton called 111, saying that she was in her car and taking Scarlett, her youngest child, to hospital.
The 23-year-old said her daughter was asleep and was asked by the operator to wake the 17-month-old.
“But she could not because Scarlett was dead,” Mr Saxby said. “Indeed, it was clear to the emergency services when they attended shortly afterwards that Scarlett had been dead for some time.”
Both children had symptoms consistent with deliberate airway obstruction and Scarlett had signs of recent bleeding in her neck tissue, suggestive of neck compression, the court heard.
Ms Porton is alleged to have searched online for how long it would take a corpse ”to go cold up to the shoulder”.
The jury heard that Ms Porton sent a sexual image of herself to a man in early January.
She is also believed to have had an online discussion about meeting someone who asked her if he could pay her for sex.
Other messages sent by the 23-year-old, in the days before the children’s deaths, included some of a sexual nature, allegedly written while she was at hospital with Lexi.
The young mother’s former landlady, who had looked after the children while Ms Porton was busy, made a statement to police in which she claimed the mother did “whatever she could not to have them with her”.
“No doubt, she would have needed time to herself,” Mr Saxby said, “But, in the context of what was later to happen – in the context of two unexplained deaths consistent with deliberate airway obstruction – it is hard not to draw the conclusion that, for the defendant, at times, her two children got in the way of her doing what she wanted, when she wanted and with whom she wanted.”
Ms Porton denies killing her two children.
The trial continues.
Editorial Comment : It is a matter of fact that women are more likely to harm children than men. There are gender differences. But in the world of elite led feminist biased social engineering, these truths must not be spoken. Mothers also sexually abuse children, but female sexuality is down played. They are the official victims, regardless of evidence or lack of it. If they allege rape, well they never lie do they? They must never be named like the alleged rapists have to be. It is OK to say men think with their penises, but outrageous to say that women think with their vaginas and clitoris.
Men are the whipping boys to sustain the power grabbing march of feminists, with men fuelling this insanity and injustice by continuing to idealise and idolise women, especially those who have daughters.
This is not the path to real true equality. Meanwhile, women are encouraged to believe that anything men can do they can do better, but men better not encroach on the woman’s identity or domain.
Women do not have to make sense or get equal punishment, there will always be a man to blame. Fot the elite it is vital to have an army of feminists to put men down, until they need another army for mass slaughter as they did in World War One and Two, when women handed out white feathers to any man not seen in uniform. Equality is a sick joke.
Mum booted off EasyJet flight for showing too much cleavage by ‘sexist’ stewardess
- Rob Pattinson
- Chloe Kerr
- 28 Jun 2019, 21:30
- Updated: 30 Jun 2019, 18:09
- Rob Pattinson
- Chloe Kerr ‘The Sun’
- July 2nd 2019
A WOMAN was booted off an easyJet flight — because her outfit was too low-cut.
Stunned mum-of-two Harriet Osborne, 31, was told her partially see-through top was unsuitable as children were on board.
The make-up artist, who was not wearing a bra but had nipple covers and tape, covered up with a mate’s jumper but was not allowed back on.
Harriet had to sleep on the floor at Malaga airport with her friend before they flew home the next day.
She blasted: “The crew were horrible and made me feel cheap. This air hostess confronted me in front of the whole plane and said I wasn’t allowed on in that top.
“She said to me, ‘Oh no, move to the side,’ and tried to cover me up with my hands.
“She said, ‘You’re not coming on my plane like that — you need to put a top on’.
“Then she ordered me off the plane, so of course I put a top on. When I tried to get back on she turned to the ground crew and said, ‘She’s not coming on my plane’.
“I was escorted away from the aircraft. I was in shock. It was so sexist.
“I just burst out crying. We had to walk back through the terminal where Spanish police stopped to question us. They were baffled when I told them why we’d been kicked off.”
Harriet, who spent the weekend at a relative’s house, paid £149 for another flight.
Harriet, of Southwold, Suffolk, said: “I never show my body off at home but I felt spontaneous as I was on holiday. It made me feel so self-conscious.”
All women are by default members of the feminist sister hood who think they have a right to turn male sexuality on and off because they own it.
Women do not take responsibility for anything and think they own sex. No wonder male fertility and mental health is in decline. Dressed as she was, she was out for attention, got it, but no one so far has pointed out that dressed as she was she was a risk to male passengers.
There is a big difference between discreetly feeding a baby and flaunting oneself for the duration of an airline flight. She has the attention she wanted and now plays the victim of sexism.
Please note it was a female flight attendant who kicked her off. Also the sight of her so barely dressed, would have offended any Muslims on board. But diversity is a moevable feast mainly about promoting women, along a never ending fight for rights, however stupid they are.
Silencing Germaine Greer will let prejudice against trans people flourish
Ideas progress through argument – no-platforming only serves the status quo @zoesqwilliams
Sun 25 Oct 2015 19.36 GMT Last modified on Wed 29 Nov 2017 08.33 GMT
Cardiff University ruled that the lecture should go ahead, in the interests of free speech, but said: “We in no way condone discriminatory comments of any kind.” This Greer called “as weak as piss”. She rejects the charge of discrimination as logically, of course, she must. If transgender women aren’t women, they can’t be discriminated against as women; instead, she says, she’s merely hurt their feelings. “People are hurtful to me all the time. Try being an old woman. People get hurt all the time, I’m not about to walk on eggshells.” Yet she’s cancelled the lecture herself, put off by the spectre of unpleasantness.
The rigidity and conventionality of Greer’s stance puzzles me: to define a woman as a person born with certain organs in certain places is uncurious – uncharacteristically so from this famously interrogative mind. The philosophical dimension of gender is far more complicated and interesting than the way a person looks or sounds; to refuse to brook any of that, appealing instead to the gut sense of an unidentifiable bloc of “a great many women”, is authoritarian and narrow. You’d expect it from Suzanne Evans, not Germaine Greer. Current Time 0:00/Duration Time 0:00Loaded: 0%Progress: 0%Mute Facebook Twitter Pinterest Speaking on BBC Newsnight, Germaine Greer says her views on transgender people are ‘opinion, not prohibition’ Advertisement
Does this add up to just cause for closing Greer down as a public intellectual? Those who would deny Greer a platform have made arguments of varying effectiveness. One is that her views are hackneyed, and need no broad airing: this falls down because Greer wasn’t invited to talk about transgender issues, but rather women and power in the 20th century. Another is that her ideas incite violence against trans people, which Greer rejects as she has never advocated a hate crime; she’s on shakier ground here. Anti-trans violence – real and growing – is predicated on the idea that being transgender is wrong and unnatural. To foment that violence, one need not literally call for it, it is only necessary to dehumanise trans people by rejecting their own account of themselves.
Those are both moot points, however, since the real root of no-platforming is this impervious modern absolutism. It was devised for racists and fascists, on the basis that moral legitimacy was conferred upon repellent positions just by allowing them in to debate. As a means of closing down the BNP or similar, it seemed like a good idea. There is very little to be gained from including a BNP supporter in a debate about, say, multiculturalism: if they state their views frankly, you have to go back to first principles and have an argument about how people’s qualities aren’t determined by their skin colour.
If they don’t state their views frankly, any argument provides a fig leaf for them. Logically, if racism should be frozen out, the same should hold for all discrimination. To no-platform a fascist but include a homophobe for freedom of speech purposes is to essay an impossible hierarchy of bigotry in which some people’s identities matter more than others. It’s hard to imagine the argument that would unlock the impasse over Greer, but whether that argument exists and how it would progress, we cannot know. Greer’s position has become unsayable; her scholarship, her pioneering, the creativity of her feminism, are as nothing. The determination of no-platformers to admit no context has its own rigidity and its own authoritarianism.
For comparison, take Theresa May’s drive to counter “non-violent extremism”, a bid to snuff out the terrorist threat at source by making its principles unsayable. In immediate practical terms, it looks like an attempt to win greater control over public institutions, principally schools and universities, as well as religious organisations. While May allowed that not all terrorism was Islamic – her tolerance for neo-Nazism will, likewise, be zero – it is impossible to imagine the Church of England suffering as much aggro from this drive as any given mosque. There cannot be anyone, in government or beyond, who seriously believes it possible to kill an idea by making it illegal to express it.
Either May believes her own rhetoric, in which case she has no understanding at all of human beings, or she is acting disingenuously. The cynical reading is that, even if these measures could never succeed in their stated objectives, they are still not worthless. The government has effectively awarded itself the power to redraw the map of political dissent. It can adjudicate between challenge and extremism, and broaden at any point the definition of “extreme”. Advertisement
The government has arrogated to itself the job not just of protecting its citizenry from terrorism, but also of determining which ideas can exist within the boundaries of moderation, where the mainstream begins and ends. It is strikingly authoritarian; indeed, all taboos ultimately serve the status quo. They may affect to protect the weak, but whenever you erect a barrier around the realm of the sayable, you put the power in the hands of the already powerful, and there it remains. The mainstream should never be described by a government, still less policed; its principles are in constant flux, ideally always moving towards greater sophistication and deeper empathy.
The application of this to the no-platforming debate is as follows: it is precisely because there is still so much prejudice against trans people that nobody should be silenced. In terms of social ideas, you progress from A to B – from saying homosexuality is aberrant, for instance, towards homosexuality is normal – not by shutting down homophobes but by argument, persuasion, rage and ridicule, openness and candour.