The "Clumsy Don Juan"
Queen's Bench Justice Robert Dewar of Manitoba revealed his antediluvian biases more than adequately in the thought processes behind his judgement that no jail time was warranted for a rapist because, according to the judge's reckoning, Kenneth Rhodes who received signals that the woman whom he decided to violate gave off signals that she "wanted to party".
Those signals more than adequately demonstrated in their speech, their enthusiasm, their manner of dress. The raped woman and her accompanying girlfriend were wearing tube tops with no bra, high heels and makeup. Tube tops are made to be worn without bras. Women mostly wear high heels when they're out for the night - or at any other time. Most women also wear makeup.
These mark the currently prevailing dress code of most young women who live in a free society. One that has laws to protect the innocent from criminal acts directed against them. And which has long ago abandoned the old myths that served for far too long to victimize women. In contrast to many male-dominated cultures that blame women for irresistibly luring men to violate them.
The judge felt the the women's makeup was excessive, their bra-less tube tops signalling they were prepared to indulge in intimate relations, their high heels provocative. And of course, men being men they are helpless, hapless creatures, nastily manipulated by women who have the devil in them. Making those women undeserving of respect, and ripe for rape.
Too bad about Kenneth Rhodes, the judge moaned, empathy obvious for his dilemma; the clear incapacity to control his virile energies that obviously escalated into undeniable priapic urgency thanks to the provocations of the 26-year-old woman he had paired with for the evening. A getting-to-know-you evening, where two young women met two young men on a night out.
"They made their intention publicly known that they wanted to party", the judge concluded. 'Party' obviously denoting that they were signalling they were prepared to have sex with the men. That was obvious because of the manner of their dress, their social exuberance, their chattering of swimming in a nearby lake that night "notwithstanding the fact neither of them had a bathing suit".
Damn, damn, damning!
They left the bar parking lot and made their way into a wooded area, after meeting outside a bar in "inviting circumstances". Invitation to abuse was written all over these women's faces, their gestures, their open friendliness. Hostility to the young men's interest in them would have represented a far more socially acceptable device, according to the judge's way of thinking.
"This is a different case than one where there is no perceived invitation", claimed the judge. "This is a case of misunderstood signals and inconsiderate behaviour." Rape is a criminal offence, it does not quality as "inconsiderate behaviour" to excuse its violent contempt of a woman's right to retain ownership of her body.
The defence lawyer brought in another mitigating circumstance, that alcohol was involved, obviously impacting on the judgement of both the rapist and his unwilling victim. His client did not threaten the woman, had no weapon, was simply "insensitive to the fact (she) was not a willing participant." Adducing mere lack of civility in this matter is ludicrous.
"Protection of society is not advanced one iota by putting Mr. Rhodes in jail", explained Judge Dewar in his great good wisdom.
How he arrives at that comfortable conclusion is beyond the understanding of most men and women who understand quite well that predatory men who claim that they have been provoked beyond endurance, and that their act of rape was not deliberate, and find their claims of innocence well received, with the penalty helpfully eased, will encourage other such events and claims.
This is the kind of inexcusable, obnoxious precedent-setting finding in law that sets back decades of acknowledgement that rape is a violent and vicious tool of sociopaths, social deviants and misogynists. The blame is placed squarely on the victim, extenuating reasons are found for the aggressor.
Yes, punishment for his crime was handed down in the form of a year-long curfew, the man's name placed on the national sex-offender registry. He will be ordered to write a letter of apology to his victim. She will doubtless have learned a life-lesson.
It's doubtful that her rapist will have.
Those signals more than adequately demonstrated in their speech, their enthusiasm, their manner of dress. The raped woman and her accompanying girlfriend were wearing tube tops with no bra, high heels and makeup. Tube tops are made to be worn without bras. Women mostly wear high heels when they're out for the night - or at any other time. Most women also wear makeup.
These mark the currently prevailing dress code of most young women who live in a free society. One that has laws to protect the innocent from criminal acts directed against them. And which has long ago abandoned the old myths that served for far too long to victimize women. In contrast to many male-dominated cultures that blame women for irresistibly luring men to violate them.
The judge felt the the women's makeup was excessive, their bra-less tube tops signalling they were prepared to indulge in intimate relations, their high heels provocative. And of course, men being men they are helpless, hapless creatures, nastily manipulated by women who have the devil in them. Making those women undeserving of respect, and ripe for rape.
Too bad about Kenneth Rhodes, the judge moaned, empathy obvious for his dilemma; the clear incapacity to control his virile energies that obviously escalated into undeniable priapic urgency thanks to the provocations of the 26-year-old woman he had paired with for the evening. A getting-to-know-you evening, where two young women met two young men on a night out.
"They made their intention publicly known that they wanted to party", the judge concluded. 'Party' obviously denoting that they were signalling they were prepared to have sex with the men. That was obvious because of the manner of their dress, their social exuberance, their chattering of swimming in a nearby lake that night "notwithstanding the fact neither of them had a bathing suit".
Damn, damn, damning!
They left the bar parking lot and made their way into a wooded area, after meeting outside a bar in "inviting circumstances". Invitation to abuse was written all over these women's faces, their gestures, their open friendliness. Hostility to the young men's interest in them would have represented a far more socially acceptable device, according to the judge's way of thinking.
"This is a different case than one where there is no perceived invitation", claimed the judge. "This is a case of misunderstood signals and inconsiderate behaviour." Rape is a criminal offence, it does not quality as "inconsiderate behaviour" to excuse its violent contempt of a woman's right to retain ownership of her body.
The defence lawyer brought in another mitigating circumstance, that alcohol was involved, obviously impacting on the judgement of both the rapist and his unwilling victim. His client did not threaten the woman, had no weapon, was simply "insensitive to the fact (she) was not a willing participant." Adducing mere lack of civility in this matter is ludicrous.
"Protection of society is not advanced one iota by putting Mr. Rhodes in jail", explained Judge Dewar in his great good wisdom.
How he arrives at that comfortable conclusion is beyond the understanding of most men and women who understand quite well that predatory men who claim that they have been provoked beyond endurance, and that their act of rape was not deliberate, and find their claims of innocence well received, with the penalty helpfully eased, will encourage other such events and claims.
This is the kind of inexcusable, obnoxious precedent-setting finding in law that sets back decades of acknowledgement that rape is a violent and vicious tool of sociopaths, social deviants and misogynists. The blame is placed squarely on the victim, extenuating reasons are found for the aggressor.
Yes, punishment for his crime was handed down in the form of a year-long curfew, the man's name placed on the national sex-offender registry. He will be ordered to write a letter of apology to his victim. She will doubtless have learned a life-lesson.
It's doubtful that her rapist will have.
posted by Pieface @ 9:47 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home