morganj/realism/insignificant
The moral of the lesson is…
“Even the most heinous sexual violence does not trump prior military service.”
James Allen Selby is charged and convicted with a total of 27 crimes including rape, as well as the rape of a 9 year old girl, kidnapping and attempted murder (he sliced a victims throat). However, In the hours leading up to his sentencing he successfully hangs himself in jail. I’m tempted to mention ‘no great loss Batman’ but being the generous sort, I will refrain.
Nonetheless in a classic display of misogynistic machismo solidarity.
Selby was a Gulf War veteran and was buried with full military honours in Oklahoma. The Pentagon policy doesn’t allow for military personnel found guilty of crimes after retirement or discharge.
Congress barred veterans convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death or life in prison from being buried with full military honors. This was in response to Army veteran Timothy McVeigh receiving the death sentence in 1995 for his role in the Oklahoma city bombings.
Veterans convicted of rape or any other violent crime, however, encounter no such restrictions.
We may remember that rape and sexual violence are now classified as distinct crimes under international law which occurred after the mass violation of women and girls in Kosovo and Rwanda. Yet they do not see fit to make this simple leap to every day life. Of course, this highlights the essential essence of many men’s central belief that whether it be in peace time or in conflict, rape is not to be taken seriously, it just happens, it’s not important. Move along now, there’s nothing to see here. Look, we even make pornography about it, it’s a form of entertainment and sexual pleasure. How could we possibly take away this man’s military honour merely because he’s raped women including a 9 year old little girl and attempted to murder one of them. Get your priorities sorted out – please.
What happens to the female psyche when yet again our trust is betrayed and our value is questioned? Do we really wonder how victims of rape doubt themselves, when all around us are men perpetuating female guilt and worthlessness. Illustrated here by a young woman who jumped to her death from a motorway bridge after being raped on a night out, because she blamed herself for the attack.
And now, a convicted rapist receives full male military honour which in effect hands us the certainty – once again – that women, are indeed, insignificant.
Kudos to Polly for the link.
Worth repeating from above:
That’s just it, isn’t it? Rape (of females) is just not considered important nor serious. Nail-on-the-head moment with pornography, primarily men’s entertainment, often features rape or psuedo-rape scenes. Rape is just entertainment, a passtime for males.
Is it any wonder that females rarely receive justice for the crime of rape?
Yes stormy, it’s hardly surprising that an institution such as the military which have historically used rape as a weapon and also use porn as a tool to desensitise their soldiers could come to any other conclusion. Without taking some pretty radical inward analysis which they are reluctant to do – as they get off on it.
All I have to say is where are the Westboro Baptist Church when they could actually do something useful for once…
http://www.anorak.co.uk/anorak-in-new-york/179775.html
I also see on going to the link which reports on one young woman’s subsequent suicide after a man had raped her. The first commentator on this Daily Male article claims this young woman killed herself because ‘of the numerous false claims women make when they report a man/men has raped them.’ So, once again women are held responsible for men’s violence.
Misogyny rules supreme and of course rape is never rape when it is viewed from the male perspective it is just ‘rough sex,’ forced sex, having sex etc. etc. Anything in fact but the truth -men raping women and knowing male-dominant legal, military, government, will all claim but it is not important no one (male) was murdered.
Curiously Jenn I left a comment on that Mail article saying that one reason the young woman may have felt she was to blame for being raped was the media and government attitudes towards rape which say women invite rape by drinking or wearing skimpy clothing and guess what – they haven’t published it!
I gather you are referring to this comment Jenn:
Supposedly from a woman (goddess help her if she really is a female, as she has far more chance of being raped than winning the lottery). Wonder how she will feel when peeps start disbelieving her ‘claims’ of rape if it ever happens to her? She seems fully embedded in the rape myths, and probably only believes the young woman’s ‘claims’ as she was young and pretty, and killed herself just to show she wasn’t making it up. *sigh*
Men have far more reason to lie about rape than women.
OMG Jennifer, I had not read the comments. I’ve just posted a short criticism of ‘Becky’s’ mind blowing philosophy because I cannot believe that some utter moron’s first response was to blame women!
Ack Polly, I’ve been reading about this across at ginmar’s. I mean, seriously, words have not been invented yet to describe these people. I was going to stray into “some folks are only here to make the numbers up“, but hey, I’m even being super generous with that.
Hey, on a brighter note.
Getting rid of that link to the other blog pushed my comment to numero uno!
woo hoo!
It’s okay stormy I ‘got’ you. It didn’t even figure, I guess I know you better than that
I’ve deleted the spam, to be honest I didn’t look at it properly. o.O
The rest of the peeps are going to be most confused at the latter part of this conversation, particularly those who didn’t see the link.
I’m just too lazy to email !
Ah, they will be fine with confusion, I live with perpetual confusion – confusion is your friend.
I was puzzled by the link anyway, but then I’m puzzled by most things.
…but then I’m puzzled by most things.
Yeah, me too. Like peeps who dress in silly outfits and claim it’s sexxay! Most puzzling.
I can’t think who you’re referring to Stormy, but if I was a bus driver I’d stop people who do stuff like that getting on….
…and esp if their name was grah-grah!
Not the strawberry kittens and velvet puppies with mittens grah grah? >:/
We live in world within which rape is “normal”, rape victims are to blame, and rapists are glorified…
It’s so outrageous. I wanna scream!
Ah how is grah grah these days. Him and his chums have been awful quiet – too quiet if you ask me.
as you say, sparks, so much of it goes on in the military it’s not like they are going to let it worry them.
i shall be thinking of strawberry kittens now and sneezing all day – bah!
That’s about it really Maggie and yes SW the military is starting to look more and more of a law unto it’s self.
Yes, I was referring to ‘Becky’s comments’ but then I wasn’t surprised ‘cos rape myths are so widespread and always directed at women. Another myth gaining prominence is one wherein women’s supposed ‘vulnerability’ causes men to commit sexual/physical violence against women. Increasingly I hear the phrase ’she was vulnerable’ when media reports on men violence against women. So, women are to blame 100% either they are ‘vulnerable,’ they were deviant, they dressed provocatively, they were/weren’t sexually active. Perhaps we should put ‘vulnerability and alcohol on trial since these are responsible for men’s sexual violence against women. See Heart’s latest posting for how media is claiming woman victim caused her own murder because she had been ‘vulnerable.’
Yes Jennifer – I’ve just read that over at Heart’s and It seems to be used over here in the UK too. I covered a case a while back where a young girl was considered to be ‘vulnerable’ by the defence (in care etc) as some sort of mitigating factor. However, there are some strange messages in this, for on one hand they are using it as a justification for blaming the victim (because she is vulnerable – what?) but then, where does this leave the abuser who preys on ‘vulnerable’ females. Or am I missing something? It’s as though they are reinventing the word vulnerable. Saying that, it’s male language that we speak anyway, so I suppose they get to redefine it at will.
I missed this.
(emphasis mine)
They just never let.
For in reality what was said was.
I am going to go shoplifting in Harvey Nicks at lunchtime and if I get caught point out in mitigation that it’s their fault. I mean all those pricey designer goods lying around just vulnerable to theft…
As Oscar Wilde said “I couldn’t help it. I can resist everything except temptation”
Oh well – I see that none of our comments were published. Quell surprise.
I’ve noticed that the Male seems to have a feminist filter, though you can get away with quite gay remarks. Or maybe that’s not so surprising given their obsession with faux lesbian celebrities.
>Timothy McVeigh receiving the death sentence in 1977 for his role in the Oklahoma city bombings.
Quite an achievement 18 years before the bombing place in 1995.
Quite an achievement indeed Matt as it was 1995 though the Times also has it wrong at 1997. Anyways he was guilty.
Are menz reduced to trawling femi blogs for typos now? I’ll take that as an acknowledgement that we’re right on everything else then…
As you point out, it looks as though the actual content was indisputable.
That’s a relief.
Are menz reduced to trawling femi blogs for typos now? I’ll take that as an acknowledgement that we’re right on everything else then…
Yes, the smug little clamber to point out typos is certainly telling.
Mwah mwah. Suck it up loooozers. (hey, I thought I’d throw them a bone).
That’s the word I was looking for – smug.
Silly wimminz made a typo!
I wonder if he emailed the Times for their error?
I wonder if he emailed the Times for their error?
Most surely he must have. He is perfect remember?
>Are menz reduced to trawling femi blogs for typos now? I’ll take that as an acknowledgement that we’re right on everything else then…
No … just jumped out at me. If facts are wrong it puts a question mark over the rest of the argument.
>Quite an achievement indeed Matt as it was 1995 though the Times also has it wrong at 1997. Anyways he was guilty.
I didn’t read it in the LA Times, and it’s a pretty obvious error. For the sake of being a subeditor, they quote the death sentance as 1997 – which is accurate.
Polly >Are menz reduced to trawling femi blogs for typos now? I’ll take that as an acknowledgement that we’re right on everything else then…
ROFL. So all argument with your particular variety of feminist is pointless, Polly. I wish you well in your infallibility – Pope Benedict will be jealous. I think you out-compete me on smugness.
>Congress barred veterans convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death or life in prison from being buried with full military honors.
I wonder if it would not be more consistent to remove this measure rather than to add other crimes to it – particularly thinking of the lottery that occurs in death penalty and life sentences in the US legal system.
(See this interview with Clive Stafford-Smithm for example:
http://www.mattwardman.com/go/15.html )
I don’t see how denying the positive aspects of a life helps anyone.
This isn’t anything to do with the fallibility of the death penalty or life sentences. The justice system as it stands is all we have.
I do, it’s called not being honoured when you are a murderer or a rapist, including child rapist. This is what we are saying Matt and you are reinforcing it – heinous crimes against females are not taken seriously.
Nah the pope just thinks he’s right all the time, I know I am that’s the difference. Anyway who the fucking hell’s Matt Wardman – in relation to me getting out of bed.
‘It just jumped out at me’ so why was the ‘centre right’ Mr Wardman, who dislikes ‘ugly political correctness’ and uses the words ‘man’ ‘mankind’ and ‘chairman’ as ‘inclusive’ (of what exactly?) just happening to read sparklematrix (of everything on the whole world wide web) when this fact ‘just jumped out at him’? Did it shout boo? And how exactly does getting the date Timothy McVeigh was executed wrong call the whole argument into question? It’s got bugger all to do with the rest of the argument. Walks like a menz, squawks like a menz…..
Thanks Miss Marple & Polly, indeed.
The date this was passed is irrelevant to the content of the post. Therefore, an irrelevant (to content) numerical typo does not raise any questions.
“Walks like a menz, squawks like a menz…..”
ROTFLMAO
Lordy, that sounds something I would say (and I do amuse myself a lot, certainly more than what would be regarded as healthy and well-adjusted).
Whoops, forgets the obligeeerrity typos for Matt. Zat better now petal? See, I just think of the menz awl the tyme.