I agree with you, Perkins. As much as I want the rapist (or attempted rapist) to get his face smashed in, chasing him off enough that the woman was safe was job#1. Apprehending him for the police (citizen's arrest and all that) job #3 (making sure the woman's okay would be #2 for me). Cracking him open with a tire iron is dessert, but you will be charged extra for ordering what's not on the menu.
Jamaican papers are full of reports on crime, and almost as full of reports of communities hunting alleged criminals down and beating and/or killing them. I get it, but it's not right.
Luckily everyone with more experience in the law and order field thinks the kravver will be found innocent. Still, sucks that he was detained overnight.
I'm not sure I see how it's possible to divorce the issue of gender from a rape charge.
But do you really think they assaulted the woman in question because they're men? Personally, I think they assaulted her because they're shitty examples of humanity, and what can go wrong with it.
Because they're men? Um, not quite sure that I'm getting what you're saying. So if it had been a mixed group, or only women, the danger would have been the same? Not my take. Because the victims were women? Hell yeah.
I think they assaulted her because they're shitty examples of humanity,
For sure. They're also shitty examples of men, behaving in a manner that is pretty unique to the group of men/lone female dynamic.
I'm not sure I see how it's possible to divorce the issue of gender from a rape charge.
If you divorce rape from sex, does it become easier?
I'm not sure I see how it's possible to divorce the issue of gender from a rape charge.
Because any gender can rape any other gender? And charging specifically based on which gender the attacker and victim are might lead to bias?
I know that women are at much greater risk because of the sexism in society, and it angers me, but even so, it doesn't mean that men as a whole don't value women. That's why I think the kind of coverage violent crimes get skews our sense of reality. The BF has a friend whose husband left her when she was diagnosed with cancer. He was a total asshole, but he doesn't represent "men" any more than my cousin's husband, whose response when she told him she had a gambling problem and had lost all of their savings was to say, "I am here for you and am not going anywhere. I will help you deal with this in any way I can" represents them.
But do you really think they assaulted the woman in question because they're men?
Yes.
I've heard that men commit 98%-99% (depending on the study) of all rapes. Women are the victims about 90% of the time.
In my darker hours I feel like women are largely still seen as property. You don't mess with the property of someone important if you're not sure you're going to get away with it, but if its some broke down person who can't fight you go ahead and take his stuff. That's why "nice" boys feel like its alright to gang-rape strippers -- but if its some lawyer's daugter in the sorority at least hit her with the roofies first. And, of course, sex is something you do "to" women and not with them... so as long as you get some...
It depresses.
Because any gender can rape any other gender?
Absolutely they can. How often do they? Considering that the opportunities, if you want to call it that, are pretty much the same across the board, why is there such a predominance of male-rape-of-female then, if gender isn't an issue?
ETA: The one place I'm aware of where male-on-male rape is in fact epidemic would be in the prison system, where it occurs a) in the absences of women, and b) often as part of a deliberate and conscious dehumanizing of the victim through "feminization."
Once I recognized him, all I could think was, "I've seen that guy naked." Stupid HBO not having decency standards.
Ha ha
actually you haven't...you've seen my friend Johnny's er... stunt cock
