Radical Feminist Divine Purpose CALLING OUT A MAN: one of many astounding ways to do so...

I do not WANT you to just concede and agree. David for ME this is more than some debate, and it is certainly not just an argument that I want to win. I want to point by point make crystal clear to you YOUR privilege and YOUR ignorance to female issues. I want you to walk away from this discussion and think “Why didn’t I see that saying that women need to take defense classes puts the responsibility on WOMEN to stop rape? Why didn’t I think that it would be MORE PRODUCTIVE to create classes on sexual harassment, rape, and coercion for men as a BETTER means to stop men from raping women? How can I change that, how can I address my male privilege so that I don’t view everything through THAT lens?” I do not want you to simply agree with me, glad you do, but that does NOTHING for me or for women who are raped. It is most important that you address, consider and OWN your own male privilege so as to be accountable for it, and to make sure you filter every thought, word, deed before you proceed. It is your JOB to do so; it is YOUR RESPONSIBILITY to do so.

The above passage by Divine Purpose, aka A Lady Divine was copied and pasted by me from what follows below. I welcome all men to read, and reread, all of this post, as many times as it takes to "get" what she's saying. For the earlier portions of this exchange and discussion, see here.

For me, what Divine Purpose says below stands on its own as what I feel is a superb calling out of a man on his male privileges and ignorance. It angers me that women have to go to such lengths to get men to "get" and "own" the simplest things. But welcome to the world of patriarchal privilege.

David, here, get's what ought to be considered a GREAT learning opportunity to expand and deepen his humanity and consciousness. It is his words that are in quotes. Divine Purpose's comments follow each quoted portion of what David wrote to her.

Does he learn from this? Stay tuned.
-- Julian (ROCK ON LADY DIVINE!!)

Part 1 of 5 of my response:

[David wrote:] “So I'm not sure if it is a pro-male system as much as a pro-white male system. That means that there are plenty of men of color who go to jail for crimes they do not commit, see Troy Davis as a prominent recent example of this.

I am of the impression that you are a white male, so maybe you think your proposed idea will not affect you, because you will not rape/abuse a woman. But a POC male cannot afford the same type of thinking, as they are falsely accused of crimes all the time.”

David, up until this point I’ve been very nice and very kind to you, even in your ignorance of your privilege. I feel very strongly that much of what you are saying stems from ignorance and white supremacy, and I also feel very strongly that you’re largely unaware of it, which is why I have been nicer to you than I would be to most men. That said, gloves are off and swords are drawn, punches will not be pulled, and I request, in advance, that you listen to what I am saying, and not assume it is an attack on you. Disclaimer over.

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 15, 2009 12:50:00 PM EDT
aladydivine said...
Part 2

What you just said above is VERY typical of a male, and of most of our society. Men of color, primarily black men, issues ALWAYS eclipse female issues, and especially black female issues. Take Skippy gates for example. Fool mouths off at a police officer and the nation is a buzz about race… a Boston Police officer responds to Yvonne Abraham (a writer for the Boston Globe) about her article on the situation. Yvonne is a WHITE female who wrote about race issues and the “struggle” Gates has had to over come to be a Harvard professor. First, that in itself is BULLSHIT because if ANYONE knows Gates or has read his writings on the so called black community you would understand that he doesn’t identify with the black struggle. Actually he trivializes it and holds a very white supremacist view on blackness and black people who aren’t middle/upper class pompous assholes like himself, but I digress. So Abraham writes a column, Officer Justin Barrett responds calling her all types of DISGUSTINGLY anti-female pejoratives, and using very inflammatory anti-black language as well. What does everyone see? They see that Barrett called Gates a banana eating jungle monkey. What they FAILED to see is that Barrett also told Abraham, an established and accomplished Journalist, that she was only good to fetch him coffee, that she was a hot little bird, and worse shows his contempt for women, his contempt for blacks, and his contempt for anyone who talks about race issues in general. Officer Barrett was working out of Mattapan Ma, in Boston which is one of the MOST predominantly Black communities in the city. But people didn’t even see that shit, all they saw was an accomplished black man being called a banana eating jungle monkey by a white officer, because black men’s issues are MORE IMPORTANT than any woman of any color’s issues. Read more on that, and my position on black male issues eclipsing ANY female’s issues here: http://aladydivine.wordpress.com/2009/07/31/apparantly-black-mens-oppression-is-more-important/

That said, you are guilty of that same crime by pointing out how MOC will be affected blah blah blah. I’m very aware of the disparity and the disgusting numbers of black men behind bars doing harsh time for shit charges, it’s a serious issue to me. It should be to anyone who isn’t racist, and white supremacist, HOWEVER it does serve a male supremacist agenda to ALWAYS allude to, and discuss black male issues while IGNORAING black female, and any female, realities and issues. You pointing out how the justice system overwhelmingly impacts black men is done so at the expense of women, of all women. I see how it could need to be addressed, and how it is important that we keep in mind that systemic racism and white supremacy STILL EXIST, yes, great wonderful, however, you say this and place your primary focus on MOC. I’m unimpressed by this… and I’m a WOC. I’ll delve more into this further down.

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 15, 2009 12:51:00 PM EDT
aladydivine said...
Part 3:

“ALD responded and agreed, but also added that I was not focusing on male responsibilities and that classes that taught them why rape/violence against women is bad would be good as well. I conceded that, and agreed.

I do not WANT you to just concede and agree. David for ME this is more than some debate, and it is certainly not just an argument that I want to win. I want to point by point make crystal clear to you YOUR privilege and YOUR ignorance to female issues. I want you to walk away from this discussion and think “Why didn’t I see that saying that women need to take defense classes puts the responsibility on WOMEN to stop rape? Why didn’t I think that it would be MORE PRODUCTIVE to create classes on sexual harassment, rape, and coercion for men as a BETTER means to stop men from raping women? How can I change that, how can I address my male privilege so that I don’t view everything through THAT lens?” I do not want you to simply agree with me, glad you do, but that does NOTHING for me or for women who are raped. It is most important that you address, consider and OWN your own male privilege so as to be accountable for it, and to make sure you filter every thought, word, deed before you proceed. It is your JOB to do so; it is YOUR RESPONSIBILITY to do so.

“My goal is to protect the innocent. Innocent men from a punishment that cannot be reversed in light of new information, innocent women from rape/other types of abuse. I am not sure how this is only about protecting innocent men, maybe you could clarify?”

Only recently did you even mention WOMEN when you were talking about innocence. Prior to here, and perhaps in an email to me (but only after I pointed it out to you) you didn’t put innocent and woman in the same sentence. In prior conversations innocent=man as your point of contention, it wasn’t until I asked you were not women and girls innocent? Is a rape victim not innocent? So the point HERE is to yet again get you to see your privilege and ignorance as I believe that your failure to acknowledge the innocence of girls and women who are raped to be a product of your privilege. If your goal is to protect the innocent, period, and there isn’t a presence of thought or a bias towards men, then why was your ONLY solution to defending women and girls one that places responsibility on THEIR shoulders? If your goal is to protect the innocent, why do you continually mention innocent men when we’re talking about MEN WHO HAVE INDEED raped women (as with the fucker in the article on my blog)? Think DEEPLY about that, and when I say think I really mean that. You men are rarely able to think without an instant need to rebut, I do not want to debate you, I do not want you to go on the defense, I want you to THINK and to consider these points without needing to defend yourself. No one is saying you’re a rapist; no one is trying to call you anything negative. What I am trying to do is to get you to see, own, acknowledge and deal with your privilege. If you respond with the same nonsense after I have very clearly spelled it out for you it will be very telling of the depths to which your privilege/ignorance runs. That is not an indictment on your character, it is the truth about men raised in patriarchy and the way we normalize male privilege in this culture in such a way that men don’t even SEE it.

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 15, 2009 12:51:00 PM EDT
aladydivine said...
Part 4:

“The only point of contention I had was that me arguing to defend men who did not rape was not me putting them over innocent women (I felt that was a result of me only referring to men, which was a result of the points I addressed leading me to only responding to points about men). I also suggested a way to protect innocent women, through self defense classes.”

I would first suggest that you do some reading on rape, and on how victims respond. I can tell you that when I had 3 men chase me home because I refused to go round the corner with them the very last thing I was thinking about was the 6in knife I kept in my coat pocket. ALL I could think of was “fuckin pick your feet up and put them down girl, get your keys ready, faster, faster, don’t turn around it will slow you down, breathe, pay attention to the sounds of their footsteps you will know if their gaining on you, ok there are two to the left of you and one right behind you, oh shit one on the left is trying to get ahead of you so you’re surrounded… would it be better to run to the main street where there are more people? What if you run to the main street and NO ONE HELPS You? Make it look like you’re going straight and at the last second bang that left they’ll never see it coming. God help me please I don’t want to be hurt tonight, ok up the stairs, key in door QUICK FUCKIN CLOSE THE DOOR.” After getting safely behind one door and going through the second door to the stairs I collapsed on the stairs out of breath, heart racing, tears streaming down my face, scared out of my mind, wondering if I should call the cops, and then I ran up the stairs to my apartment, of course I didn’t turn the lights on, because they were throwing their bodies into the fuckin door. So typical of a man, who will NEVER in his LIFE have to face the fear of what it means to be a woman being preyed on by men to say take self defense classes. Been there done that, and NONE Of it would’ve helped me in that situation. I didn’t even REMEMBER any of it. This isn’t fuckin Kill Bill! This is real life! And as a woman who has gotten into her fair share of fights with men, I would’ve been no match for THREE MEN hell bent on getting what they wanted from me that night. I was just trying to go home after a long day at work and a night class that went from 7-9pm. But yeah, thank you for throwing us poor womyn folk a bone by saying we should be taught how to defend ourselves against men. How does that address incest? Or Date rape? Or when a woman is raped by her friend? I’m going to say something publicly that I never thought I would… when my “friend” preyed on me, when he waited until I was so fucked up and vulnerable that I wouldn’t be able to resist him, when he got closer and closer to me with the goal of fucking me, I wasn’t able to fight him. I wasn’t in any way prepared for what he did to me… you never are. I don’t care how kick ass you are, how strong and empowered you are, when someone preys on your weakness, and waits until something tragic has happened to you to make their move you freeze. You don’t think of the moves you learned in some damn class… you introvert, you steel yourself emotionally and you prepare for the worst. But of course, a man full off of his privilege would think that he’s “done something” grand by saying self defense classes for women means he acknowledges our innocence. It speaks more to your IGNORANCE and the lack of knowledge you have on rape, and victim responses than anything else.

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 15, 2009 12:52:00 PM EDT
aladydivine said...
Part 5:

“Since the basis of my argument is that it is better to let ten guilty go free than to punish one innocent, I expect you to disagree with me… If you believe that I am saying, a few innocent men are worth more than many innocent women, I am trying to tell you I would not.”

And here is the most male supremacist thing you’ve said to date. Of COURSE to YOU it is better, and my anger wants to tell you to fuck off for being so ignorant to the pain that inflicts on women like me who have been victimized and who have watched their attacker go FREE. How the hell do you think you’re not saying a few innocent men are worth more than many innocent women when you also believe that it is “better to let ten guilty go free than to punish one innocent?” To let 10 guilty men go free is to sentence countless women and girls to victimization. It is to put innocent men over innocent unsuspecting unprotected women and girls and I deeply resent you for saying that. I am enraged in a way I cannot even begin to describe to you cordially, for DARING to say you’re concerned about innocent women and girls then spit that filth about 10 guilty men freed being “better” than 1 innocent punished. How painfully MALE of you to say so, how ignorant, privileged and FUCKED UP of you to say something like that, particularly on a feminist woman’s blog with NO KNOWLEDGE of what her reality is, and with NO CONCERN for what such a comment could and would mean for women who read her blog who have been raped, then further victimized by the “justice” system only to see her attacker walk free. I don’t think I can even attempt to address anymore of your ignorance right now, because I am so fuckin angry at the level of contempt you show for women and the camaraderie you show with men. You are supporting rape in that statement whether you acknowledge it or not.


“If that is disrespectful to you, that’s too bad, but that is a reflection on you seeing the worst in people, not me.”

Yet another privileged statement from you David. You did that same thing to me remember? I was “attacking” you when I pointed out male privilege and the typical arguments male supremacists make when talking about holding men accountable for raping women and girls. It’s not about Julian seeing the worst in people, it’s him seeing the TRUTH in people, and particularly men like you.

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 15, 2009 12:52:00 PM EDT

What to do about Internet Pornography: One Approach

[until the Internet entered the lives of millions of people, making pornography--women's exploited and/or raped bodies, accessible to men 24/7]

What follows is a link to a PDF document, which is an outline, table of contents, and summary of a thesis paper on how best to tackle the problem of Internet pornography. Click here to read this PDF document. The thesis it describes is titled: "Regulating Internet Pornography as an Issue of Sex Discrimination", by Michelle Evans.

The argument put forth by Evans is that a censorship approach to dealing with pornography, which is a form of sexual discrimination negatively impacting women's civil and human rights, as a class, is misguided and inadequate. An approach that cannot even see what pornography is and does, cannot remotely remedy the serious problems its existence presents. Offered as an alternative, by Evans, is a civil rights-based legal approach to combating the harm perpetrated by the makers, marketers, and consumers of pornography.

I wish the whole thesis paper were available online, but until I find that, we have a sketch of what Michelle Evans proposes.

I fully support approaches to ending white and male supremacist exploitation and violence against women that names what is being done rather than pretending "pornography" is some abstract, vague idea in the liberal imagination, a matter of sexual taste, or a bunch of naughty pictures of people being sexual. If you think pornography is any of those things just listed, you are not really examining the content and consequences of pornography as a white heteromale supremacist industry earning billions of dollars annually.

Can you name me one industry that earns billions of dollars annually run by pimps, rapists, and drug dealers that does not harm humans and non-human animals is some way?

What is uniquely harmful about pornography as a practice of sex discrimination, as a practice of oppression, is that it makes sexual violence, sexual exploitation, racist sexism and sexist racism seem like it is simply apolitical little ol' sex, at least to its consumers. It isn't. It is, among other things, virulent misogyny and racism created in such a way as require incest and rape. No other billion dollar a year industry I am aware of so effectively makes hate and harm both invisible as such while managing to sell its product as a kind of sexual stimulant. The result is that people believe hatred of women is sexy, and that racism is hot. How this negatively impacts white women and women of color cannot be understated.
END OF POST.

"Don't Be A Dick": a zine by Paul Brown

[this image is unrelated to the zine linked to below, and was found here]

Below is a link to a PDF document, a few pages long, as many zines are. It is made with typed material and cut-outs of various images, including those of male genitalia (drawings, not photographs), for those who may be triggered by such imagery. I would imagine, given that most or all of the images of people are of white people, that Paul Brown is white.

This is what introduces it at the website where I found it:

Don’t Be A Dick is a zine written (mostly) for men about the connections between the construct of masculinity, rape culture, and mainstream pornography. It combines (hopefully accessible) theory and personal experiences to address sexual assault in personal relationships. The zine also includes a section on radical consent.

Here's his zine, which can also be found here at www.xyonline.net.
END OF POST.

More of My Struggle with Transgenderism and Feminism

[symbol/image is from here]

It's getting clearer to me where I stand on the particular matter of tensions between radical feminist ciswomen and anti-radical feminist transwomen. From the start let's acknowledge that there are, in fact, some radical feminist transwomen. In some places a perception is promulgated that these two groups are somehow only oppositionally related while also entirely distinct from one another. These two groups--as if radical feminists was one group with one perspective, as if transwomen was one group with one experience--are seen as not overlapping, as not sharing a lot in common in terms of what they are fighting for and against.

I am reminded of the battles in feminism over racism within the Women's Movement. I am reminded of the struggle of lesbian feminists to be visible in "Gay Community". And I am reminded that white heterosexual men routinely get away with murder. I have three initial points to make and I'll try not to delay making them.

1. Oppressed people, in my experience, look to one another for kinship, for community, for support, and for understanding, and when that doesn't happen it is deeply painful. I believe this is so because those of us who are part of oppressed groups have largely given up hope that the oppressor, whether that be men, whites, or heterosexuals, or non-trans people will "get it" enough to be a friend, an ally, and, better yet, a warrior fighting on our behalf.

2. The most structurally dominant people, and the systems they maintain from the top, are not in danger of being challenged into becoming humane as long as most of the energy activists in oppressed groups spend is spent fighting one another.

3. That said, the misogyny, racism, homophobia, and transphobia inside and outside groups fighting white supremacy, male supremacy, imperialism, globalisation, and the captivity and mass slaughter of non-human animals, must be challenged until the ciswoman-hating, white supremacist assumptions, harassment of queer people, and marginalisation of trans people is no more. For me, it ought not be otherwise. We cannot allow anti-ciswoman/anti-lesbian/anti-gay/anti-trans sentiments and behavior to flourish in any movement for social justice.

Due to valuing integrity, to a belief in the importance of accountability, and a spiritual priority placed on ending exploitation and harm, and also due to point one above, standards placed on activists for social justice are, in my experience, far more stringent than those placed on people in general; and standards placed on feminists are among the most stringent, I believe because they are women. And women are expected, in a male supremacist system, to accommodate everyone and everything. So where men fuck up all the time, women of all colors are held to account. Where whites fuck up all the time, women of color are held to account.

But there is a perception out there, utterly mistaken and white male supremacist in its assumptions and functions, that women of color have more power than white women, in holding them accountable, that white women have more power than white men in holding them accountable, and that women of color have more power than men of color in holding them accountable. I reject this perception as structurally and socially unfounded.

Men, trans or not, masculinist or not, maintain our male privileges and politically more empowered position with alarming regularity and willful ignorance of what we are doing. The same with white folks and our white privileges. I don't see much of a difference between the denial and defensiveness men are in about our social dominance over women, and the denial and defensiveness white people are in about our dominance over women of color. This includes white men, men of color, and white women.

That is why I centralise my understandings of oppression around the experiences and analyses of feminists of color. Relative to white women, white men, and men of color, feminists of color, collectively, see the white supremacist assumptions and actions of white men and white women, and the male supremacist assumptions and actions among white men and men of color, more clearly than any other group of people.

This impression I have reflects what Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor said about a wise Latina being more aware of what's going on than a [willfully ignorant] white man whose very position means he cannot see very much of how white men harm others, except through the lens of what he is willing to let himself know about what he alone does. And even then, when he sees himself doing harm, he sees it as being caused by depression, alcohol abuse, women having too much power, anything and everything other than the most obvious: that he is socially placed in a position of dominance, and can act on that whenever he chooses.

My own brother, for example, a Christian white heterosexual guy, is never, ever called out on his misogyny as such. (Unless it's one of those two times a year I have any contact with him.) Nor is he challenged to understand and uproot his homophobia. No one even brings to him the matter of his transphobia, so he may actually think there is no problem there, in him.

It is also important to the powerful groups who are most in control of institutions and systems and industries that problems be seen as primarily psychological, interpersonal, not structural or systemic.

There has been some tension in me and in my own queer community and beyond it, between and among trans activists and radical feminist activists. Usually two or three scenarios are revisited to point out the harm done to one or both sides. And harm was done. The issue, usually, is what could have been done differently to produce less harm, more safety, more security, greater accountability, and more responsibility among the people who most need resources and power to effect radical change in society.

In this context, there is a discussion happening, which I was going to link to until I remembered what I consider to be a serious political misjudgment Stan Goff once made on his blog Feral Scholar. He posted a conversation that took place within queer community into an environment where there were mostly white heterosexual men. I do not believe a conversation that happens among women, for example, ought to be relocated to a place viewed and commented on by men, without the expressed permission of all of the women involved.

That conversation focuses primarily on several points of tension between apparently anti-radical feminist trans people and apparently transphobic radical feminist ciswomen. In the discussion that I've been participating in, I felt obliged to speak up due to the fact that I perceived a trans activist to be making a blanket statement that all radical feminist ciswomen are transphobic or otherwise anti-transgender. In particular, Andrea Dworkin was named as someone who believed that the experiences of transwomen were not as important as the experiences of non-trans women. A few people came forward to respectfully debate that point.

When engaging in any discussion I must remind myself of two things:
1. I am a white man and that impacts any discussion I enter.
2. I am an active supporter of many radical feminisms. I am also an ardent defender of some radical feminists, all of them ciswomen. But I'd better be responsible about how and when I enter conversations with people I structurally oppress, such as transpeople and ciswomen.

For me, the tension which was unformed in me is this:
To what extent does a social justice movement that seeks, in the context of male supremacy, to highlight gender as a problem of narrowness of options and bigotry against any person who doesn't neatly fit the categories "man" and "woman" reinforce the invisibilisation of gender as a hierarchy, as a system of sexual dominance, as a practice of degrading those called women, while privileging those called men?

Does active support of trans agendas--as I woefully and generally misunderstand them, require me to betray or pause my commitment to highlight and challenge gender as a misogynistic hierarchy?

What I know, thus far, is this:
My commitment is with ciswomen and transwomen in their various battles against white cismen's systems and institutions, practices and values, which negatively impact all women (trans, intersex, or neither) as a class of beings alleged to be naturally subordinate to, and inevitably vulnerable to cismen and those who defend and protect cismen's abuses of power and structural position atop that hierarchy.

I won't actively support people to be racist, antifeminist, transphobic, or otherwise misogynistic. And my focus usually but not exclusively is on racist misogyny and its impact on ciswomen, white and of color.

I will maintain a focus on understanding and critiquing gender in such a way that gender-as-hierarchy remains especially observable. I will do work that, hopefully, renders rapists an endangered species. (To those inclined to think I said something biologically essentialist: I believe men, masculinists, and patriarchs are humans born of culture and society, not of placentas and DNA.) To the extent that they (cismen) behave as misogynistis, I will call them out. To the extent that they are silent in the face of the rape atrocity, and so many other atrocities disproportionately impacting women, I will call that out. And to the extent that systems and structures of misogynistic harm, of racist harm, are made invisible, I will seek to make them visible and targetable for radical actions which seek a rapid end to white male supremacy in all its manifestations.

Why Don't They Make My Brown Eyes Blue: The Destructive Power and Coercive Influence of White Standards of Beauty and Humanity

What follows is from here.

[caption in original article: Sight for sore eyes: Shenise after the operation to insert a coloured lens over the irises - but doctors later had to remove them]


[caption from original article reads: The NewIris lens: 'For consumers who wish to change the colour of their eyes with a natural appearance and without the limitations, risks and annoyances of contact lenses' - according to the company's website.]

I can't help but notice, above, how there are no brown "NewIris" lens options in this promotional image. Now why wouldn't people with blue eyes want to make them brown? Oh, right: because of white "aryan" male supremacy.

Some of the utterly racist, misognyistic, and classist comments aimed at Shenise Farrell:

As a tax payer how much have I had to contribute to this woman's stupidity?

- Steve Goodwin, Leeds, UK, 28/8/2009 19:23
Click to rate Rating 90


What on earth is wrong with some women??????? Pathetic, vain woman...

- bobo, london, 28/8/2009 19:24
Click to rate Rating 76


What an idiot! And worse, an idiot who's costing the NHS money because of her vanity.

- Martin, Manchester, 28/8/2009 19:34

Note the utter callousness and racist, classist, misogyny directed (above) at this woman in the comments section not fully copied and pasted below. It's so easy to hold those of us who try to assimilate into dominant society responsible for the dominant society's inhumane values and practices. But anyone with any awareness of how oppression works must acknowledge that the inhumanity aimed at Shenise Farrell would better be spent dismantling white heterosexist male supremacy. For without white male supremacy as an overpowering force and influence, the desire to turn brown eyes blue, to bleach hair that is darker than light blond, to enlarge breasts, to "Westernise" eyelids, to narrow, shorten, and straighten noses that don't look Nordic, and obtaining the medical means to do all of the above, would not be possible.

Wealthy white people have all kinds of cosmetic surgery, all the fucking time, and never get the kind of response aimed harshly at Shenise Farrell. Many of her critics are concerned about how much her actions are costing tax-payers. The appropriate answer: not nearly the amount of money tax-payers pay to have white man-dominated societies' police and military forces murder people of color around the world.

The article the assholes above are responding to follows below:

Single mother travelled to Panama for operation to turn brown eyes blue... and was almost blinded

By Julie Moult

Shenise Farrell, pictured following corrective surgery in the UK, still has brown eyes despite spending £5,000 on an operation to turn them blue

When Shenise Farrell read on the internet about a £5,000 operation which could turn her dark brown eyes light blue, she wasted no time in heading off to Panama.

Less than two weeks later, British surgeons were battling to save her sight.

They had to repair a hole in her iris and remove implants. It is unclear whether she will suffer long-term damage – and her eyes are still brown.

‘It was the biggest mistake I have ever made,’ said the single mother of three from Perivale, West London.

‘To think I could have never been able to see my children again. It was totally reckless of me.’

Miss Farrell is taking a community studies degree at Goldsmiths, University of London in the hope of becoming a social worker.

She is believed to be the first person in the UK to undergo such an operation, which involves inserting a coloured lens inside the eye, over the iris, and is not licensed in Europe.

Miss Farrell called the US number of the New Colour Iris company, linked to a clinic in Panama run by a Dr Delary Kahn.

She was told to undergo five tests with opticians in the UK to check she was suitable and then hand over $3,000 (£1,800) deposit and proof of airfare and hotel.

The opticians advised her not to go ahead with the procedure but she raided her savings and flew to Central America in June, telling family she was off on holiday.

‘I’ve already had breast implants abroad in Bulgaria and had been very happy with that, so it didn’t faze me that I would have to go to Panama,’ she said.

‘The procedure was unpleasant and painful. I screamed out at one point. But it was over within ten minutes and I was taken back to my hotel with just some eye drops and
told to buy my own painkillers.’

For the next eight days, her vision remained blurred, particularly in her right eye. When she arrived back at Heathrow, she had to be helped through the terminal because her sight was so poor.

Four days later, with no improvement and after developing a painful sensitivity to light, she called NHS Direct who advised her to go straight to the Western Eye Hospital in Paddington.

They immediately referred her to consultant ophthalmic surgeon Mr Ali Mearza at Charing Cross Hospital.

‘She could barely make out the top letter on the eye chart,’ he said. 'We could have registered her blind.

‘There was no question but to remove the implants which in itself was quite a challenging procedure. I would strongly advise people not to undergo this process.’

Although Mr Mearza managed to save her sight, Miss Farrell might develop cataracts in later life and is at increased risk of glaucoma.

A spokesman for New Colour Iris said that while it sympathised with Miss Farrell, it had carried out more than 600 operations since 2002 with only a handful of complaints.

‘No procedure is perfect,’ he said.
END OF POST.

And the War against Women Continues: 18-year-old Mildred Beaubrun is Gone. Forever.

The above photo is of Mildred Beaubrun who was mercilessly and atrociously shot and killed when she and her friends refused to give their numbers to a group of guys they didn't know.

It's all just unbearable. And unrelenting. And infuriating. And so, so sad.

What follows is horrifying, and is from this website.

May she rest in peace. I send out my condolences to her family and friends.

Cops: Girl Shot For Rejecting Strangers

On May 18, 2008 cops say 18-year-old Mildred Beaubrun left Club Firestone in Orlando, Fla. with two of her friends and headed to 7-Eleven to get gas and drinks.

As the girls were pulling out of the gas station, headed west on Colonial Drive, cops say three guys in a silver PT Cruiser or Chevrolet HHR pulled up next to them.

Cops say the guys started cat-calling and asking the girls for their numbers, but when they weren’t acknowledged, they turned to name-calling. Then, one of the girls threw something and hit the guys’ car.

Thinking the confrontation was over, cops say the girls turned right and stopped at a stoplight at the corner of John Young Parkway and Princeton Street. But the guys pulled up next to them.

Cops say one of the guys pulled out a gun and fired into the girls’ car, hitting Mildred. Cops believe she saw the gun and tried to duck. The bullet hit her in the back and traveled up her torso.

She survived for several weeks in the hospital in a coma, but died on June 3, 2008.

The guys may also have been at Club Firestone that night and could have followed the girls from there.

Cops Seek Three In Young Girl's Killing

Police released this sketch of the man witnesses say was driving that night.

Cops say the other girls in the car weren’t hurt and were able to provide police with sketches of two of the guys, but didn’t get a good look at the third.

One is described as a man in his 30's or 40’s, who appeared older than the other guys in the car, with long dreads, a full beard and a Haitian bandanna around his neck. Cops say he was sitting in the passenger seat of the car.

The driver was a man in his 20’s with short hair, a goatee and glasses, according to police. Witnesses are unsure who fired the gun.

The guys may also have been at Club Firestone that night and could have followed the girls from there, Det. Mike Moreschi of the Orlando Police Department said. The club hosted one of several Haitian events held in Orlando that weekend.

Mildred grew up in the Orlando, Fla. area, but her mother was from Haiti. She attended Olympia High School and was no longer in school at the time of the shooting.

So far, the tips cops have received haven’t panned out, and they’re looking for new leads.

If you have information about this crime -- or know who these men might be -- call our hotline at 1-800-CRIME-TV and put these dangerous criminals behind bars.
END OF POST.

Presumed Heterosexual, and...

AND ALSO FALSELY ASSUMED TO BE RACIALLY, SEXUALLY, AND ETHNICALLY SUPERIOR

[image/poster is from here]
END OF POST.