Wednesday, October 28, 2009

The LATEST Richmond, CA Gang Rape: Reporting and Analysis by abyss2hope

[image is from here]

"On December 13th [2008], a twenty-eight-year-old California woman was brutally raped by four men because she is a lesbian and had a rainbow sticker on her car." [source: here]

"One man and two teens have been arrested on suspicion of gang-raping a woman last month in the San Francisco Bay area while allegedly taunting her for being a lesbian, police said Thursday as they searched for a fourth suspect." [source: here]

But this is not the gang rape that is making the news currently. This one, also in Richmond, CA, involves a fifteen year old girl, raped by ten teenaged to adult males, with twenty bistanders doing nothing except, perhaps, taking photos and video of the rape. Thus turning one teenage girl's horror into pornography which can be posted all over the web.

For the full post on the latest gang rape, please visit here. Thanks to Marcella @ abyss2hope blog for all her great work.

What follows is one small portion of her post linked to above.

There is a solid foundation in our society for this type of crime but there is also a strong movement to try to dismantle this foundation so even far less brutal acts of sexual violence would spark national outrage and a national determination to let go of the myth that there is nothing we can do to stop the endemic level of sexual violence except wait until crimes like this happen and then lock up as many of those involved as we can. -- Marcella Chester

END OF POST.

26 comments:

Runaway1956 said...

It appears that most of these rapists were Latinos. How many of them are illegal aliens? And, how many of them are the sons of illegal aliens? Our nation is being invaded by illegal aliens, who impose an alien culture on us. That alien culture holds that women are chattel, and men must project an aura of "machismo". An unprotected woman is just prey to these people. So - how many are illegal aliens, and how many are US Citizens?co

Anonymous said...

What do you think would make men stop raping women and girls Julien?
What would be the fastest way to get men to stop this? Would we have to kill them? Would we have to lock men up? Would we have to invent a kind of shock collar that would kill the man if he became violent?

Would we have to have male curfews, so that no men would be allowed on the streets at night?

Would we have to outlaw all gatherings of men (say more than one or two)?

What would be the quickest way to end rape? And what are men prepared to do to make other men stop doing this? Should men beat up other men just for mentioning rape in a joke? Should men be banned from high schools or other schools?

Should we avoid all racism or the possibility of racism by having women (in this case Latina women) be judge and jury of these Richmond High rapists? How do we hunt down any man or boy who posts the cell phone videos of this rape?

Should men who rape be killed or should they be branded with a big "R" on their forehead for all to see?

What should we do with men caught with pornography? SHould other men beat them up? Should they be killed as well?

What would stop men? Is mass murder the only solution?

Anonymous said...

Runaway1956, I don't see how the race of the boy and male rapists is relevant here. They committed this crime against a teenage girl.
It doesn't matter if they are legal or illegal, they still raped the girl.

The most horrifying crimes against women that I know of were committed by white men. They are the sexists, the porn dogs, the creeps that I deal with every day.

And in every instance where I had to defend myself against a man, it was a white man the I bashed, beat up, or threw off a subway car. Black men and Latino men have always left me alone. I actually think men generally pick on women of their own race most of the time.

Julian Real said...

(first of more than one part)
To Runaway1956,

I'll respond line by line to you. But first, for a little perspective and clarity on what has been and still is going on here in this country and continent, read this and this. Just so you're clued into whose land you live on, who is systematically (not anecdotally) raping whom, and what this country stands for and honors.

It appears that most of these rapists were Latinos.

Well, get back to me when you know the facts, ok?

How many of them are illegal aliens? And, how many of them are the sons of illegal aliens?

All whites are illegal aliens on this continent, Runaway1956, not Latinas and Latinos whose heritage goes back to the Indigenous people of the Americas. You have, in all your racist zeal, apparently forgotten your own status here: go back home to your people, Runaway1956. You and your white people, and my white family, have no business being here. So, a more historically appropriate question is: how many of us whiteboys are the sons of illegal aliens? Answer: EVERY ONE OF US.

Do you honestly think that just because white men wrote "our" corrupt nation's laws, that means we didn't steal this land and murder almost everyone on it? (Upwards of 70 million in North America?) Where's your self-righteous outrage about THAT reality? And the genocide and gynocide against American Indian women continues, due to us, white men, and our laws, customs, religions, and misogynist-racism. You know that most rapists of white women in the U.S. are white, right? And most of the women a Latino man who is also a rapist targets are Latina, right? Or do you just pick and choose cases based on what the white male supremacist press reports, to be outraged by or incensed about, or just annoyed by? Please direct me to all the blogs where you've posted upset or outrage about white men raping women. Thanks. I'm waiting...

If you are white, your family either once owned slaves here, or committed genocide here, or commits genocide here. Those are the three things white people do here as white people, collectively. Individually, white men rape women of all colors and ethnicities, on and off this U.S. soil, including in Iraq and Afghanistan, in Vietnam, in many other nations in Southeast Asia, in Korea during the "Korean War", and in South and Central America on-going way. You know that, right? You know that U.S. white men routinely cross "the border" to rape Mexican women, right?

Our nation is being invaded by illegal aliens, who impose an alien culture on us.

This is a statement more accurately made by any American Indian alive. Your statement, if referring to whites as "our" and "us" is an absurdly racist statement to make as a white man on stolen land soaked in the blood of men of color, women of color, and white women.

Julian Real said...

That alien culture holds that women are chattel, and men must project an aura of "machismo".

Wrong again, Runaway1956. OUR (white) alien culture has held that white women are carnal chattel of white men (with more legal backing around one hundred years ago), and that all people of color here, at various times, in various atrocious ways, were the chattel of the white man. White men hire so-called undocumented laborers to be indentured servants on this land, to work in terrible conditions for little to no pay. White men enslave and otherwise sexually possess women (and girls) of all colors. Do you "use" pornography, sir? If so, you are accessing one of the many ways white men turn women of all colors into sexual chattel, for YOU to use, at will. Do you have any critique of you being able to do so?

An unprotected woman

How completely patronising and controlling of you to want white men to "protect" women. (As if white men ever have.)

"An unprotected woman"? Do you support ALL women carrying firearms and various poisons so they can shoot to kill or otherwise end the life of any man who attempts to rape them? If so, you realise, if U.S. white man's laws protected such acts of self-defence, and aim was good enough, and the poison strong enough, there'd be mostly dead white men lying in their own beds at home, or lying in their daughter's beds, hopefully after the mother took the child safely out of his clutches.

is just prey to these people.

And not to you, sir? How many women have you coerced or forced or otherwise manipulated into having sex with you? Have you ever fucked anyone who was too drunk to say yes or no to sex? Have you ever known any white buddies who brag about getting a woman loaded so he can fuck (rape) her? What do you say to them about such behavior, about how white men prey on women? I'm listening.

So - how many are illegal aliens, and how many are US Citizens?

You question carries with it a built in white male supremacist bias that you clearly don't want to take responsibility for. Whites are illegals here, and aliens. And whether or not anyone is "an adult heterosexual male U.S. citizen" doesn't mean they are more or less capable of raping any woman or girls.

I hope my reply to you clears things up for you about social reality and who the invaders really are and have been.

Let me know if you're still delusionally confused on this matter in ways that show you to be someone who is overtly racist (white supremacist), and obnoxiously sexist (male supremacist). It's rather sad, pathetic, and convenient for us whiteboys that no other white man have ever told you what's fucked up about your thinking. I hate to imagine how your thinking impacts your behavior.

If 1956 is your birth year, that's make you approximately 53 years old. Do you mean to tell me that in the last forty-five of those fifty-three years, you never learned, inside or outside of school, that the United States of America is founded on, maintains, and violently protects at least two things: white supremacy and male supremacy?

Runaway1956 said...

Uhh, Julian - not so real. For starters, my own heritage ties me to this land. I'm not your typical "white man", alright? So, don't patronize me.

There is a long, long history in this land of the Americas that predates the arrival of the white man. Perhaps you are familiar with some of it? The Azteca were death worshippers, remember? They sacrificed young men and women atop those pyramids that the Conquistadors found in Mexico.

It was normal for those death worshippers to raid into what is now the USA for victims. In short, the American Indian justly hated the invaders from south of the Rio Grande just as much as we hate the invaders today.

Do not attempt to compare the history of the white invaders in North America with the repeated invasion of North America by peoples from Latin America.

The rest of your posts are very much meaningless. What is "machismo" all about, in Latin American culture? A "Macho" owns anything he can take - including women. A woman without a "macho" protector is free for the taking.

Your hatred of the white man is duly noted. Your defense of the Azteca's descendants is also noted.

Runaway1956 said...

Oh, Julian Not so Real - visit the Houston Chron. I post under the same pseudonym there. You will quickly see that I've posted repeatedly to condemn any rapist - white, red, brown, black, it matters little to me what color a CRIMINAL is. You can also find me at www.mauisun.org/vbb I am outraged against criminals of any stripe, go read.

Julian Real said...

To Runaway1956,

For starters, my own heritage ties me to this land. I'm not your typical "white man", alright? So, don't patronize me.

My error. Your comment sounded precisely like those of many racist white men I have heard over the decades. My apologies.

There is a long, long history in this land of the Americas that predates the arrival of the white man. Perhaps you are familiar with some of it? The Azteca were death worshippers, remember? They sacrificed young men and women atop those pyramids that the Conquistadors found in Mexico.

I've never said rape or other atrocities against women are only committed by white men. The point of this blog is to stop focusing so much on what oppressed men do to women, and start focusing on what non-oppressed men do, as they have more structural power, and more access to and control of white heteromale supremacist institutional support and reinforcements, including the military and police.

As for the Azteca and Indigenous civilations: they didn't colonise much of the world. They didn't spread their religion globally, and continue to do so. Their corporations are not committing gynocide, genocide, and ecocide as I type this. So I prefer to deal with what is happening, rather than ponder what once happened, unless it's to point out a legacy that continues to this day.

So what if other civilisations have committed or still commit misogynistic atrocities? Does that mean we shouldn't call out those in the positions of greatest power and leadership here, in the U.S. I believe we should. Perhaps we disagree about this.

It was normal for those death worshippers to raid into what is now the USA for victims. In short, the American Indian justly hated the invaders from south of the Rio Grande just as much as we hate the invaders today.

Right, they raided. And white men killed approximately 70 million here, half of them what we call in English, "women".

The Aztec civilisation no longer exists as the power it once was. White male supremacy is now global. White men, disproportionately in the West, continue to defend practices and policies which allow and make unpunishable the rape of women of all colors. Now, who do you find the be the greater threat to women of any color?

Julian Real said...

Do not attempt to compare the history of the white invaders in North America with the repeated invasion of North America by peoples from Latin America.

All atrocity is atrocity, but when someone in the U.S., not you in this case, starts going on about how Blacks in Africa ALSO commit genocide, I want to scream at them. It is a convenient way to evade responsibility for what we do here and abroad. The white man rapes women of all colors here, systematically, now for at least five hundred years.

European white men destabilised those countries in Africa where there is now mass killings and other atrocities. European white men have committed physical and cultural genocide there, and have brought customs and ways of being not there prior to white men's arrival on that continent. White men supply sub-Saharan African men with weaponry. White men have a similar history here on this continent.

I hear you making the point that if we look at history in the region of what is now the Southwestern U.S. and Mexico, since approximately 1100 ECD (the era of white Christian male domination), the Azteca did considerable harm to people who were not from their own society, including atrocious harm to other Native people on what is now called the North American continent. I don't disagree with you.

The rest of your posts are very much meaningless.

I'm just curious: how many of them have you read, honestly?

What is "machismo" all about, in Latin American culture? A "Macho" owns anything he can take - including women. A woman without a "macho" protector is free for the taking.

Latin American culture is not one culture, first of all. And it expresses itself in a multitude of ways, depending on the cultural and political histories of the "Latin Americans" you are speaking about. So your collapsing of Latinos into a single story is one I find to be racist.

Does the manifestation of "machismo" differ so significantly from white men believing that they historically and currently control everything: women of all colors, non-human animals, the Earth, and the sky?

Your hatred of the white man is duly noted. Your defense of the Azteca's descendants is also noted.

There is no defence of the Azteca's atrocities against women here, and I welcome you to copy and paste the passages from this blog where I do defend such atrocities.

And from which passages do you conlcude that Julian hates white men?

There's no hatred of the white man in me. There is great sadness, rage, and a ceaseless wonder at what we do that we perpetually seem to want to call "not as bad as what those men of color did or do".

I'm a white man, as was my beloved father and grandfathers. (OK, I sometimes have hated by brother!) There is a systematic and unrelenting political critique here at this blog of what it means to be white and a man in the West, under white heterosexual male supremacist rule. Do you think that's an unworthy topic for a blog?

If so, you are welcome to never visit here again and be on about the business of reading about the other important matters which negatively effect life on Earth.

Why does harsh critique equal hatred, for you? This kind of thinking is what leads misogynistic/antifeminist men to think feminists are all man-haters. It's a silly thing to conclude, in my view.

I await your reply.

Julian Real said...

To Anonymous, on the question of how to end rape.

First, all rape is tied to race as well as gender. So to pretend it isn't is to not grasp how rape functions in WHM supremacist societies and in societies impacted by white male supremacy.

I do not know the answers to your questions. I wish I did.

I think part of the answer involves organised resistance to rapist men, and killing them whenever necessary.

I wish part of the answer were shock collars on men who have committed rape, that send strong electric current, enough to immobilise any man, should he make a misogynistic move towards any woman or girl.

I also think it is a matter of changing media so that boys and girls do not grow up taking in rapist messages and imagery.

I also think in necessitates radically dismantling and transforming capitalist patriarchies, Western cultural imperialism, white men's wars against people of color, and white supremacy.

Perhaps most of all, I think it requires people, en masse, to get that there is a war against women waged by men, and that rape is but one tool of this war. And to see rape as a tool of men's war against women, not merely as a tool U.S. and other soldiers use against the women and girls who live in invaded countries, as if "rape of women" can only be part of men's war against other men.

How to accomplish all that? I have no idea. And I suspect the answer will come from women all over the world, not one white man on a blog.

Julian Real said...

To Anonymous, on the question of how to end rape.

First, all rape is tied to race as well as gender. So to pretend it isn't is to not grasp how rape functions in WHM supremacist societies and in societies impacted by white male supremacy.

I do not know the answers to your questions. I wish I did.

I think part of the answer involves organised resistance to rapist men, and killing them whenever necessary.

I wish part of the answer were shock collars on men who have committed rape, that send strong electric current, enough to immobilise any man, should he make a misogynistic move towards any woman or girl.

I also think it is a matter of changing media so that boys and girls do not grow up taking in rapist messages and imagery.

I also think in necessitates radically dismantling and transforming capitalist patriarchies, Western cultural imperialism, white men's wars against people of color, and white supremacy.

Perhaps most of all, I think it requires people, en masse, to get that there is a war against women waged by men, and that rape is but one tool of this war. And to see rape as a tool of men's war against women, not merely as a tool U.S. and other soldiers use against the women and girls who live in invaded countries, as if "rape of women" can only be part of men's war against other men.

How to accomplish all that? I have no idea. And I suspect the answer will come from women all over the world, not one white man on a blog.

Anonymous said...

The thing is I do hate men for what they have done to women. I hate them everytime I hear a sexist joke, I hate them for staring at women's butts as they walk away from a 7-11 cash register.
I hate men's smug attitudes, superior acting idiocy, conversational styles, violence or their constant threat to women.

I hate the way men fill up the streets after football games, stream out of football stadiums yelling and screaming into the night. I hate it when gang banger boys threaten other girls in my neighborhood.

I see very little to like in men, and very much evidense in daily life to completely and utterly hate them. I hate my oppressors and most of the time, wish they would just die or get out of my neighborhood completely. I wish I could move to a country where men didn't exist. I see absolutely nothing wrong with women killing as many men who attack them as possible. I see nothing wrong with women rising up and putting an end to patriarchy by any means necessary.

And someday, I hope to be in a place where I never have to deal with these oppressors again, I don't think it is too much to ask for considering what men do every day to women.

Julian Real said...

Hi Anonymous,

I can well understand your rage and hatred of men. And I'd never want you to feel otherwise.

Re:
I see absolutely nothing wrong with women killing as many men who attack them as possible. I see nothing wrong with women rising up and putting an end to patriarchy by any means necessary.

I am in complete agreement with you, particularly the "by any means necessary" part!

I hope you live to see that happen and to live in a world that is safer for women, post-revolution.

Runaway1956 said...

What an interesting place. It is really dedicated to bashing while heterosexual males? Wow. If so, then why on earth have the two gang rapes in Richmond been brought up? Both kind of undermine the theme that "WHM are the ultimate evil". In the first rape, there are three Latinos, and one black. In the second rape, there are 4 known Latinos, 1 black, and 1 white boy.

White men rape - yes. But, gang rapes seem to be more the province of blacks and latinos. That double rape/murder in Knoxville Tn. was committed against a white couple by - uhhh, was it 4 blacks?

WHM. Interesting. More interesting that I found this site by following a link concerning rapes committed by NON-whites.

Some of you might understand my confusion......

As for executing rapists - I can go for that. A man who can't get laid, or can't get off unless he hurts someone is no man at all - no matter whether he is hetero, or homo, no matter his skin color.

But, I'll point out that "rape" is a multi-faceted thing. No - I've never raped a person in my life. But, I have played the silly games that women often make us play. "No" sometimes means "NO", and sometimes it means "Maybe", other times it means, "Persuade me", and other times it means, "Only if you can catch me". So, I don't think that I'll be apologizing for playing the games that women make us males play. Bottom line - I've never FORCED a woman to do anything she said no to.

Go ahead, manhaters - tell me how wrong I am. Tell me that not taking the first "NO" as meaning "NO, DEFINITELY NOT, AND DON'T ASK AGAIN" amounts to rape. Do so, and I'll just have to laugh at the lot of you.

Runaway1956 said...

@ Julian
"European white men have committed physical and cultural genocide there, and have brought customs and ways of being not there prior to white men's arrival on that continent."

An interesting thing about slavery in Africa - many, many of the slaves taken out of Africa were sold to the white men by the black men in Africa. I'm sure that someone who has researched enough to point at the white man's history of evils already knows that. Also, many blacks were taken as slaves by the Arabs. A lesser number of Arabs and whites were taken for slaves by the blacks. I might agree if you say that Europeans made the slave trade uglier, and more corrupt that it had been before he got involved - but slavery is as old as the human race. Nor is there an innocent race. All have indulged, all have blood on their hands - including those Azteca previously mentioned.

I simply can't justify pointing the finger at one race as being more guilty than another.

Julian Real said...

Hello Runaway1956,

@ Julian
"European white men have committed physical and cultural genocide there, and have brought customs and ways of being not there prior to white men's arrival on that continent."

An interesting thing about slavery in Africa - many, many of the slaves taken out of Africa were sold to the white men by the black men in Africa. I'm sure that someone who has researched enough to point at the white man's history of evils already knows that. Also, many blacks were taken as slaves by the Arabs. A lesser number of Arabs and whites were taken for slaves by the blacks. I might agree if you say that Europeans made the slave trade uglier, and more corrupt that it had been before he got involved - but slavery is as old as the human race. Nor is there an innocent race. All have indulged, all have blood on their hands - including those Azteca previously mentioned.


And if white men hadn't economically coerced slave traders on the continent of Africa, what then? And if only Arabs had slaves (my people, btw), what then?

Your points are missing the point. Yes, the created white race is not the only one to do atrocious things. (Now can we put that discussion to rest?) And what white men have done is immeasurable compared to what any other society of people has done, globally, to harm women. THAT'S the point, NOT that other societies don't harm (or haven't harmed) women, don't have (or haven't had) slaves (often children and women).

I simply can't justify pointing the finger at one race as being more guilty than another.

No one is asking you to. This issue isn't "more guilty". The issue is "currently--and for the last 500 years--more powerful, negatively influential, and ecocidal". Do you see the difference?

Julian Real said...

To Runaway1956,

Some of your comments will not get posted here, as they violate the terms, the rule and regs, of this blog.

You put down the posts here and won't tell me how many you've read. Have you read this one? If not, please do, and keep your comments within the guidelines please, or they will not get posted here. If you continue to misrepresent what is going on here, your comments will be blocked.

So please read this (this blog's first post) before commenting again:

http://radicalprofeminist.blogspot.com/2008/07/welcome.html

Julian Real said...

This is one of the comments that violates the terms of this blog, Runaway1956.

I'm posting it as an example of what NOT to do here, in case other men are confused.

What an interesting place. It is really dedicated to bashing while heterosexual males?

No, Runaway1956, there is no "bashing" here. That's what men do to women, causing broken bones, lifelong injuries, and death. So please stop tossing around words here that have real meaning and real impact.

Wow. If so, then why on earth have the two gang rapes in Richmond been brought up? Both kind of undermine the theme that "WHM are the ultimate evil".

Wow. Why don't you understand what this blog exists to do? And if you cannot, why come here? You know your way out of here, right?

In the first rape, there are three Latinos, and one black. In the second rape, there are 4 known Latinos, 1 black, and 1 white boy.

Yes, men and boys rape women and girls. That's been established. And if those Latin American and Black people had been women, they wouldn't have gang-raped her, right? The issue is how males are socialised, and how men rape with impunity. NOT whether men of oppressed races rape. They do. And nowhere on this blog does it say they don't.

White men rape - yes. But, gang rapes seem to be more the province of blacks and latinos.

And what seems to be true isn't always true, is it? Are you factoring in fraternity gang rapes, and gang rapes in rich and middle class white homes, at "parties" that don't allow males of color to attend? No, you apparently have some racist, classist view of when and how gang rape happens.

That double rape/murder in Knoxville Tn. was committed against a white couple by - uhhh, was it 4 blacks?

Uhhhh, so fucking what?

Julian Real said...

WHM. Interesting. More interesting that I found this site by following a link concerning rapes committed by NON-whites.

More perplexing still is that you'd care to comment at all.

Some of you might understand my confusion......

And maybe not. Not if they actually read what's here, and don't pass it through some distorting liberal-ass lens.

As for executing rapists - I can go for that. A man who can't get laid, or can't get off unless he hurts someone is no man at all - no matter whether he is hetero, or homo, no matter his skin color.

But, I'll point out that "rape" is a multi-faceted thing.


Really? Please do explain.

No - I've never raped a person in my life. But, I have played the silly games that women often make us play. "No" sometimes means "NO", and sometimes it means "Maybe", other times it means, "Persuade me", and other times it means, "Only if you can catch me". So, I don't think that I'll be apologizing for playing the games that women make us males play.

And women "made you" how, exactly? With a knife to your throat? With a gun to your head? Women MADE you? Your statements are so self-serving as to be ridiculous. They MADE you. Oh, you poor dear. How horrible for you.

Bottom line - I've never FORCED a woman to do anything she said no to.

And you still haven't answered my questions about whether you've fucked anyone who was too drunk to tell you yes or no, or to understand what was happening. And you still haven't answered my questions about whether you are entitled to access raped women's bodies, visually, by looking at pornography.

Still waiting on that....

Go ahead, manhaters - tell me how wrong I am.

As someone who isn't a man-hater, let me tell you this: your assessments of what women make you do and what you choose to do, willfully, are fucked up. Take responsibility for your own behavior. And if you don't like "the games" women play, don't play! Surely you can resist them, yes?

Tell me that not taking the first "NO" as meaning "NO, DEFINITELY NOT, AND DON'T ASK AGAIN" amounts to rape. Do so, and I'll just have to laugh at the lot of you.

I'll call you something for not taking her first no as a NO. Laugh all you want, you goddamned self-serving fucker--and quite possibly a rapist as well. "Force" and "consent" are not the only two criteria for determining whether a man has committed rape. But if that's all you go by, well, then you likely have committed rape, and just don't know it. Just like so many other men.

Runaway1956 said...

I still haven't made up my mind whether to be amused or not. You want specific answers about MY conduct? No - I'm not into drunk or unconscious women.

I guess I'm a liberal? I read comments through a liberal-ass lens? This is news to me. Hmmmm.

Actually, I'm more conservative than liberal, though I don't fit into either camp. Note that conservatives favor the death penalty for rape - especially violent rape - whereas liberals want to abolish the death penalty period. A liberal leaning Supreme Court ruled that a man cannot be put to death for a sex crime unless the victim dies.

Do I pick and choose which cases to be outraged at? Certainly not - rape is a crime against nature, as well as against humanity. I don't care if it's a white guy, a black guy, a latino guy, or my own brother - brutally raping anyone should be punishable by death. Roman Polanski may be white, and rich, and popular in half the world, but he is a subhuman who forcibly raped a little girl who was just past puberty, and he deserves the death penalty. I despise every single person in Hollywood, in Paris, or anywhere else who has tried to defend Polanski in the media.

But - I've read post after post here, and I have to disagree with much of what is written about "rape". I've been with my wife for 22 years now. By your definitions, I've probably raped her dozens of times. Hell, hundreds. "Don't - my back hurts." "Want me to rub your back?" "Yes, but behave yourself" After several minutes, "That's not my back!" "Oh, all right - good night." "OH NO, you're not done!" "Well, if I keep rubbing, I'm gonna rub something else too!" and she says, "Shut up and rub"

Is that rape? Come on - some of these posts get pretty outrageous with the definitions of rape.

Approve my post or not - it makes little difference to me. I don't buy into anyone's agenda or way of thinking unless and until I make sense of it myself. If I did, I might be just another gang member....

So far, what I read here only makes sense if I cast both myself and my wife in an evil light. Women use men, men use women - it has always been that way. And, it works out fine for everyone, so long as agreed upon lines aren't crossed.

Violent rape, and coercive rape will always be on the wrong side of the line. The rape of juveniles will always be on the wrong side of that line - whether that rape is part of an arranged child "marriage" or not. (Tony Alamo, Raymond Jessup, or some sheik in Yemen)

Julian Real said...

Hello, Runaway1956.

I'll respond to your comment in sections, as usual.

I still haven't made up my mind whether to be amused or not. You want specific answers about MY conduct? No - I'm not into drunk or unconscious women.

I'm glad to hear that. For women's sake.

I guess I'm a liberal? I read comments through a liberal-ass lens? This is news to me. Hmmmm.

That doesn't surprise me. Most folks I know who operate out of a liberal worldview, even if also conservative, don't own they are doing so. In large part because they've been raised to think "that's the only way to view things". It isn't, needless to say. But if you don't know what's liberal about your perspective, then other perspectives can look really off, because you're not able to understand what the person with a radical view is saying. And so radical views get collapsed into liberal ones, which grossly distorts their meaning. Hence liberals say to radical feminists, "You're perspective on [such and such] makes no sense!" Well, it's not that radical feminist perspectives make no sense, it's that what radical feminists are talking about is beyond the intellectual scope of liberalism, and also calls men out on stuff men would rather not deal with. Because to deal with it might mean men have to challenge themselves and each other in ways they don't want to do. Because to do so would disrupt "the brotherhood". I'm sure you know well there are many codes among men, of what to do and not to do, of what to say and not to say, to other men.

Actually, I'm more conservative than liberal, though I don't fit into either camp.

I'm amazed, and yet not, that folks in the U.S. can only conceive of a two points of view on any subject: a liberal one and a conservative one.

For me, this is the difference between the most conservative view and the most liberal view:

On the far end of conservatism, men think rape is men's right. White men believe men of color are inferior. White men believe all women exist "for" men, even while promoting monogamous heterosexual marriage as "the only holy way" to be sexual and in love with another person. On that end, men think women are either wh*res or good wives.

Within liberalism, there is a range of course. But it all boils down to not challenging beliefs and institutions which maintain liberalism and conservatism, in the white senses of the words. (As opposed to, say, how Winona LaDuke uses the term "conservative".)

In liberalism, there are libertarian thinkers/doers, and more socialist thinkers and doers. And everything in between.

Note that conservatives favor the death penalty for rape - especially violent rape - whereas liberals want to abolish the death penalty period. A liberal leaning Supreme Court ruled that a man cannot be put to death for a sex crime unless the victim dies.

Well, the truth of the matter is conservatives and liberals both don't really give much of a shit about whether women are raped or not. Both conservative and liberal men enjoy raping women. Conservative men may SAY they are for rapists being put to death, but what they mean is BLACK and LATINO rapists, not white rapists. They mean POOR rapists, not rich ones. They NEVER mean rich ones. Liberals say they are against the death penalty, but they aren't against all the systems that cause death: capitalism, patriarchy, white supremacy. White male supremacist liberals, in particular, are known for saying they are against things they have no intention of stopping. Like rape. Or racism.

Do I pick and choose which cases to be outraged at? Certainly not - rape is a crime against nature, as well as against humanity. I don't care if it's a white guy, a black guy, a latino guy, or my own brother - brutally raping anyone should be punishable by death.

What you're about to say reveals the dishonesty in your statements.

Julian Real said...

Roman Polanski may be white, and rich, and popular in half the world, but he is a subhuman who forcibly raped a little girl who was just past puberty, and he deserves the death penalty. I despise every single person in Hollywood, in Paris, or anywhere else who has tried to defend Polanski in the media.

Yes. Fine. And do you oppose all presentations of women as "liking to be raped"? What's your stand on that? What's your stand on the pornography industry, which requires there to be incested and raped girls and women? And you still haven't told me your views on using pornography, on having 24/7 access to FORCIBLY incested and FORCIBLY raped women on display for men's entertainment. Why are you so hesitant to answer this?

But - I've read post after post here, and I have to disagree with much of what is written about "rape".

What you are about to say reveals why.

I've been with my wife for 22 years now. By your definitions, I've probably raped her dozens of times. Hell, hundreds. "Don't - my back hurts." "Want me to rub your back?" "Yes, but behave yourself" After several minutes, "That's not my back!" "Oh, all right - good night." "OH NO, you're not done!" "Well, if I keep rubbing, I'm gonna rub something else too!" and she says, "Shut up and rub"

First, it's for her to name it as rape, not me. Second, the behavior you describe shows self-interest as a motivating factor in how you regard your wife. If she states at the start that she wants a back rub and nothing more, who the fuck are you to go further? What level of respect for her stated wishes does that show?

Is that rape? Come on - some of these posts get pretty outrageous with the definitions of rape.

It's oh so typical heterosexual male behavior that is on a continuum from manipulation to coercion to overtly forced rape. That's what it is.

Why not simply do what your wife asks when she asks for it? Why do you need to "push her boundaries" in order to obtain sex? Is she unable to ask for sex when she wants it? Can you not fucking wait until she does? Please explain that.

Julian Real said...

Approve my post or not - it makes little difference to me. I don't buy into anyone's agenda or way of thinking unless and until I make sense of it myself.

You clearly have bought into a somewhat convervative liberal agenda, without even knowing it!

If I did, I might be just another gang member....

I'm glad you've steered your life away from that.

So far, what I read here only makes sense if I cast both myself and my wife in an evil light.

If you choose to see the world only in terms of "Evil" and "Good" perhaps. How about seeing the world in terms of behaviors that are more respectful to women, and behaviors that are less respectful to women? And ditch the "good" and "evil" shit, which is designed to make you feel so badly about yourself for doing fucked up shit that you can't even look at it without intense self-condemnation.

Women use men, men use women - it has always been that way.

Yes, and more than that too. It's been far more than "just" women and men using each other. Even you agree that's the case. Because YOU state that what Roman Polanski did is BEYOND that, right?

And, it works out fine for everyone, so long as agreed upon lines aren't crossed.

You really are soaked through in liberalism. I doubt you're going to find your way out of it. You do realise, I hope, that women (and men) who are incest survivors and rape survivors sometimes don't know what boundaries to set, or how to get what they need from another person without submitting to things they don't want, right? Is your wife a survivor of incest, child molestation, sexual assault, repeated sexual harassment, or rape--before she knew you? If so, have you bothered to find out how such atrocities have impacted her? Have you bothered to care how such traumas impact someone's wishes and needs? Or do you just selfishly go along with however she behaves, as if sexual trauma doesn't effect anyone in any way at all? Are you a survivor of incest or child molestation or rape? How have those experiences impacted you and how you behave sexually and emotionally. Do you ever dissociate from your body and not know what you want?

If a woman is dissociated when you want sex from her, and she goes along, what do YOU call that?

If a woman grew up being terrified of saying no to the sexually predatory advances she had to endure, from daddy, or whomever, do you care to know, loving man, how such a past "plays out" in the present?

Violent rape, and coercive rape will always be on the wrong side of the line.

As opposed to, say, the kind of rape that you enjoy? As opposed to what kind of rape? Please be clear here. YOU are distinguishing between violent rape and coerced rape and other kinds of rape, right? I'm not doing that. You did it yourself. So what ARE those other kinds of rape, sir?

The rape of juveniles will always be on the wrong side of that line - whether that rape is part of an arranged child "marriage" or not. (Tony Alamo, Raymond Jessup, or some sheik in Yemen)

And who defines who is a juvenile? You know it varies from country to country, right? From age eight to eighteen? So what constitutes "a minor" in your view, and if you think a sixteen year old is not a juvenile, and you engage her in sex when you're thirty, what do you call that? (What do YOU call that, sir, when the age of consent in your state is seventeen?)

Your statements unwittingly reveal where you stand. And where you stand is in a self-serving place that is grossly insensitive to many realities women live with. If your wife of 22 years is a survivor of any form of sexual violation and intrusion, including by you, you might care to ask her about that, yes? And you might care to not push her boundaries, right? Or are you too afraid you'd never "get any" if you actually DID respect her first "no"?

Felicia M. Pitre said...

I am new to this blog and feel grateful for its existence. As I am pressed for time, I am not able to read the entire thread between Julian and Runaway; however, I do have this to say to Julian: in such extreme cases of ignorance and white male (or female) supremacy and privilege, I attempt to take the higher ground and refrain from debating said issue. It only causes me anxiety, and almost always leads to nowhere. The ignorant love to remain so.

Julian Real said...

Welcome Felicia M. Pitre!

I appreciate and will heed your comment. I've just engaged with a man called nmbr, who, at least, demonstrates an openness to actual dialogue. We'll see where that goes. And, for reasons you've made clear, I doubt we'll be hearing from Runaway1956 again.

Again, thank you. I am grateful for you taking the time to offer that wise counsel.

Anonymous said...

You can't reason or engage men in dialogue of any kind. They aren't educated enough to understand what women are thinking, and certainly can't even understand what women are talking about.

Men hate women. I hate them right back, and want women to wake up so that we can rid our spaces of these animals forever. That's what will stop men. Never have dialogue with the class of clueless cretans. It doesn't every work, get the sword, the stick, the lawsuit, the guard dog, the baseball bat--- all things men easily DO understand, but rational conversation, I think actual dogs understand more than men do.