facetious is one of my favourite words (all the vowels in order, and if you add -"ly"
even the honorary one...abstemiously is another- a free ticket to the next Okarito hangi if you can name the other other 3!)
Priestly J is sentencing after a verdict with which he disagreed. He’s trying to say the jury got it wrong. He’s trying to justify talk back. Don’t you get it? Priestly was a family lawyer. Counsel for the child. Get with it yo.
Got it, and that is how I read it too.
Are we living in Saudi fucking Arabia?”No, you’re in 2013 NZ. That is almost always the basis of a sex acquittal. A huge problem.
Yes, we need to change our laws and perceptions so that rape (and there are also others e.g assault) can be understood for the huge problem that it is. Sexual connection for adults without mutual consent is rape. Don't get me started on what the cop said recently about a young child being raped, being consentual, that was the culture we are seeing in our Police Force too often, that's another area that needs addressing and quick.
Uncle Bully….well that’s difficult and I don’t have easy answers.
If we make laws that are not open to interpretation as juries can do, I think that's a start. If we make children aware of what is not tolerated as a society instead of saying, "it happens so lock yourself up", that could help to bring about change,. I get you only want what's best for your kids, I get that warnings should be part of that for your kids, as I get that Dylan doesn't feel comfortable being lumped in with "all men are potential rapists" normalising the behaviour of a criminal, and inflicting blame on those that don't fit the category . Trouble is, that's where we have got to in our society. One way or another we need to address our appalling statistics and our laws. Saying "what did you expect...." wont change the fact that a crime has been perpetrated and the law is an ass. It would have been helpful if the Judge had explained that.
Priestley offered “the foolishness of your two victims, venturing out alone at night in a park in a strange city, dressed as they were” as a potential basis for the acquittal.
No, you don’t get it, which is too bad for an old school journalist like you. Priestly J is sentencing after a verdict with which he disagreed. He’s trying to say the jury got it wrong.
Yes, I do realise that was the case. On the other hand, no one made him talk about the “foolishness” of the victims going out after dark dressed as they were. He came up with with that stuff all by himself and he really shouldn’t have.
Sorry for the threadjack, but here's a way women can keep themselves safe from breast cancer: know what it can look like:
Warning: contains pictures of actual breasts. Unlike the NZ ad.
So while that is extremely difficult to regulate, what is known is that you can be safe by taking precautions like not wandering around drunk in the dark.
Ah I see. It’s “extremely difficult to regulate” the stuff that actually accounts for most sexual assault, but you can be safe anyway, just by avoiding a few drinks on a cloudy night.
An indecent assault is not an indecent assault if a jury acquits the accused of indecent assault.
Incorrect. Even with your myopically legalistic take, the jury’s view is only that that person didn’t commit the act of indecent assault, not that there was necessarily no assault. Besides, the point here seems to be that some disagree with the jury’s view – it just begs the question to say the jury must be right.
It’s not without flaw (“You could go visit a professional ball player’s hotel room at two in the morning. Sex? My pussy’s not even in the building!” – m’kay, sorry for more ‘jargon’ but that’s a metric fuckton of problematic) but what’s refreshing is the general absence of slut-shaming, victim-blaming or the idea that silencing someone you dislike with a rape threat is intrinsically hilarious. That the kind of ‘rape joke’ I don’t have time, patience or tolerance for from anyone, ever.
I 1000% agree.
Absolutely not. But that’s like saying you should go walk into the DMZ between North and South Korea for world peace. Go ahead but if you get shot no one will be surprised.
No, Bob. What you keep saying is that the 52 killed (and hundreds injured) in the 7/7 bombings in London should have known better than to make themselves vulnerable by using public transport at rush hour in the first place. They should have protected themselves against the forseeable, right?
Oh for crying out loud Craig! That is a very silly argument. There is no logic to it. I do not want to speak on Bob’s behalf. Bob can correct me if I am wrong. But the point is that Bob, as a father, as any father would, worries about these things. Perhaps it is even an evolutionary ,or genetic trait for fathers, and indeed men in general, to worry more over the safety of the female loved ones. Because females are more vulnerable, are not as strong, while men tend to disregard their own safety, at least to some degree.
There seems to be a general tactic of debate in here. Put words in the mouth of others. It would take a miserable, chauvinistic misogynist bastard to dare suggest that rape victims had brought it on themselves. Once you have established that of your opponent in a debate, the debate is then by definition over and won. I look around, but I cannot see any evidence of this victim-blaming culture that would seem to be so prevalent, if what I have read in here is to be believed. There appears to be disconnect with reality. No wonder Russell gives congratulations for the conversation not blowing into smithereens, as it surely would have in another forum. Hard News is a closed shop, anyone with a dissenting view is quickly dispatched. I wanted to say more on this subject, but I am intimidated by the angry and judgemental feminists. I fear I might unwittingly say something that turns out to be “triggering”, and I do not want to be labelled an insensitive clod!
Hard News is a closed shop, anyone with a dissenting view is quickly dispatched. I wanted to say more on this subject, but I am intimidated by the angry and judgemental feminists. I fear I might unwittingly say something that turns out to be “triggering”, and I do not want to be labelled an insensitive clod!
Or, you know, just don't be an insensitive clod who obtusely insists on repeatedly telling people who've talked about their own experiences of rape, partner abuse and child molestation that any rape victim is asking for it. Anywhere. Ever.
And I don't want to presume to speak for Bob, but if he really thinks Auckland's public spaces are seriously analogous to the Korean Demilitarized Zone, I'd respectfully suggest he should think a little harder about whose fault that is.
Yeah, alright, I'm going to label you as an insensitive clod with your "any father would worry about these things."
Also, if you're worried about words being put in the mouths of others, please don't claim to speak for all fathers. Thanks.
It would take a miserable, chauvinistic misogynist bastard to dare suggest that rape victims had brought it on themselves.
Actually Dean, that’s exactly where we started: with the judge who sought to rationalise the decision of a jury that apparently accepted the victims’ account but refused to convict on the indecent assault charge – and put it down to the “foolishness” of the victims in walking in a certain place and (for god’s sake) being “dressed as they were”.
There is simply no other way to read this than that the victims contributed to their own assault.
FWIW, I walked through Albert Park last night. It’s a logical thoroughfare from Princes St, where there’s plenty of parking, down to Queen St. It’s not dark – it’s actually quite well lit. The idea that the two young tourists somehow should have known not to walk that way is ludicrous. Why can I walk that way and they couldn’t?
But that’s not the point. The point is that their decision to walk in a particular place and wear a particular thing thing is irrelevant. Neither of these things was an invitation of assault.
I am intimidated by the angry and judgemental feminists
If you can't handle our civil politeness, and our not agreeing with you, perhaps you'd like to try another forum.
(Writing that feels a bit rich after my previous post about triggers, but I don't want anyone to feel awful reading what I've got to say.)
Not locking your front door doesn't justify someone taking your TV, etc etc...
No, but you're probably going to get home and kick yourself.
I've read through this discussion several times. It confuses me. Mainly because I guess I partly agree with Jones' headline ("Rape a risk for those who don't act sensibly"), and that makes me feel like I'm either on the wrong side or a bit thick. Maybe I'm too deep in the forest to see the trees. All I know is what's happened in my own life, and that my actions led to some bad things happening. Sure, there's no excuse for the behaviour of the men involved, but if I'd been more careful they just wouldn't have happened.
I've been raped seven times that I know of - I've been told there's one more but I don't remember any of it because I was too drunk, so it doesn't count. (Dad never raped me btw, just did gynae exam things). The first two rapes especially I believe were a direct result of my decision to live a bit dangerously.
The first: I was seventeen, living in a sort of squalid squatting situation with two ex-convicts in Hamilton East (obviously this was against my parents' wishes). There was a party one night in the flat below. I went to the party for a while, (dressed in a short skirt and t-shirt with no bra), and proceeded to get very drunk and stoned. There was an old drunk guy sitting next to me on the sofa who sort of fell asleep on me a couple of times, leaning on my shoulder. I pushed him away and didn't pay much attention. He followed me out to the toilet once and tried to come in but I shut the door on him. Eventually, I staggered drunk back up to our flat to sleep. I woke to the sound of breaking glass, and I assumed people were throwing bottles.(Turned out it was the sound of one of the toilet louvre windows being pulled out and dropped). Then there was someone's silhouette in the doorway, and suddenly the old guy was on me. (He was actually only 42) He had no teeth and the most vivid memory is of his face being sort of flappy and slobbery. I tried to scream like girls do in movies but it came out squeaky and feeble. He told me he'd fucking kill me if I fucking screamed again. He was squeezing my throat, and I thought he might just do it, so I kept quiet and let him do his thing.
If I'd been more careful, that wouldn't have happened.
The second: hanging out again with a different group of predominantly ex-convicts, I went with five of them to someone's place to drink. One had just recently got out of jail and kept going on about how he hadn't had a root in six months. We had booze, dope and potato chips. One guy said "all we need now is a woman". Joe, who I was sort of "seeing", picked me up over his shoulder and I laughed and kicked my feet a bit, thinking he was playing. But he carried me into a bedroom, dropped me on the bed and they all had turns. I managed to move up into my head and not really feel what was going on further down on the bed.
If I'd been more careful that wouldn't have happened either.
I don't want to write about any more rape stuff because it's too tiring. I just don't think telling people "please don't rape" is going to work. It's like telling people "be nice". Some people are caring and lovely and don't need to be told that stuff. The sort of people I just wrote about wouldn't give a fuck no matter what you said. For what it's worth I think kindness is the most important thing in the world. There are some people though who see it as a weakness. Maybe if we could teach those without compassion to grow some... but I don't know if that's even possible.
After the first rape I remember feeling deeply hurt with Mum's reaction. She had always said 'If anyone ever harms a hair on either of you girls' heads, I'll hunt him down to the ends of the earth and kill him" or something to that effect. But I got a sort of "told you something like this would happen ... you made your bed and you'll have to lie in it" thing instead. As punishment I had to sell my pushbike to contribute to the lawyer's fee. It never went to court anyway.
Still confused. I thought writing something might help with that. I don't know that it has.
See what I mean? Putting words in the mouth of others. I am telling rape victims that they asked for it. Therefore I am an insensitive and horrible person, ipso facto everything I say is wrong and horrible. Thanks Craig for confirming exactly what I said. Ah, what a pleasure it is to engage in civil conversations here at Hard News!
…with the judge who ought to rationalise the decision of a jury
Did you mean sought ?
Otherwise he ‘ought’ to do his job within the letter of the law – and there are few (if any) Laws proscribing dress style in the urban environment…
<edit: I see you have sorted that sought, I oughta checked again ;- ) >
Perhaps this is a problem exacerbated by the Judiciary and the Police, not acting as the deterrent they may have been in the past?
See this article on a recent Hagley Park mugging – many in the comments say Police do little about similar crimes…
See what I mean? Putting words in the mouth of others. I am telling rape victims that they asked for it. Therefore I am an insensitive and horrible person, ipso facto everything I say is wrong and horrible.
Given the nature of the things being discussed here, actually, yes, you are being quite insensitive. Get over yourself.
Still confused. I thought writing something might help with that. I don’t know that it has.
I hope you do feel eventually that it has helped, Helen, because the clarity and honesty of what you’ve said is of value to everyone else here.
Oh Helen Marie. I have no words.
Can I just say though? There's a difference between "If I had been more careful, it wouldn't have happened", and "it's my fault". Nothing excuses what those men did to you. Not a thing. And it's not fair to ask you (us, every victim, all women) to never leave the house, or have a drink, or talk to a man, or have a job, or a life at all, in the name of "being careful". (I'm not saying you're doing that, I'm saying that's what rape culture says to us.)
Thanks for talking about some really difficult shit with candour, clarity and respect.
Thanks Craig for confirming exactly what I said. Ah, what a pleasure it is to engage in civil conversations here at Hard News!
I thought I was more than fairly characterizing Bob’s contributions to this thread and that was perfectly clear from the context. I don’t know whether you’re just missing that, or wilfully working your way through the derailing playbook, but I seriously think you might find it useful to grow a layer of skin or two.
I actually find it more of a pleasure to get busted when I make bad arguments, am defective on basic matters of fact, or fall short of the basic standards of civility I expect from others. Oh, and as I’ve discovered, Public Address isn’t a place where the long-form flounce gets much sympathy. Good luck with that, mate. But, hey, if none of that is your bag different strokes for different folks, and I’m sure you’ll find something more to your liking elsewhere on the internet.
I look around, but I cannot see any evidence of this victim-blaming culture that would seem to be so prevalent, if what I have read in here is to be believed. There appears to be disconnect with reality. No wonder Russell gives congratulations for the conversation not blowing into smithereens, as it surely would have in another forum. Hard News is a closed shop, anyone with a dissenting view is quickly dispatched. I wanted to say more on this subject, but I am intimidated by the angry and judgemental feminists.
Well, you know, I do get real angry and judgmental when someone denies the experience of my life, and the lives of almost every woman I know. Soz.
So here you go. Approximately 29 percent of New Zealand women and 9 percent of men experience unwanted and distressing sexual contact over their lifetime. That’s almost a third of women.
Currently, Wellington Rape Crisis is funded by a pizza company. Because apparently protecting and aiding victims of sexual crimes isn’t a thing that’s important.
And, never mind what I, and other women, have personally written in this thread about the things people have said to us, we are told to not walk alone at night. The message isn’t “hello, person attacking women, stop doing that, and we’re going to catch you”. It’s “ladies, stop putting yourselves in harm’s way”.
I’m sure you’ll find something more to your liking elsewhere on the internet.
Oh for crying out loud Craig! That is a very silly argument. There is no logic to it.
To be fair, the silliness in that exchange started with Bob's analogy with the DMC.
... we are told to not walk alone at night.
That message has been put out plenty before too, after some attacks. I note that the incident that started this discussion involved women walking together, through an apparently well lit park. But hey, let's just shift the goal posts so women shouldn't do that either.
Excellent point. And I would again reiterate that, statistically, being at home in the company of people we know, is much more dangerous.