I think I am entitled to claim some wisdom in what I wrote about the DSK rape allegation, which was this:
The allegations against Dominique Strauss Kahn are of a different order as they do seem to involve violent assault and non-consensual sex acts. Plainly there is a very serious case to answer, especially given his known highly charged sexual history.
But I have been given pause today by learning that the police have amended their accusation to say that they were one and a half hours mistaken in the time that the rape took place. Given that it was reported pretty well immediately, how can there have been this confusion about when it happened? A ten minute mistake would be natural, but one and a half hours wrong in a period of three hours?
The difference is very significant, because the police were alleging that he raped her, then rushed from the hotel to the airport to flee. They now acknowledge as true the defence statement that he actually went to a lunch engagement quite close to the hotel before going to the airport. Given that his alleged hurried running away was a major factor in not granting him bail, this seems to me inportant. I repeat – how on earth could an investigation make such a very fundamental mistake?
My feelings of unease were then increased by US Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner coming out to lead international demands for DSK’s replacement – as the prosecuting authority, surely it would behove the US government to shut up until he has been found innocent or guilty? Since then I have been listening to Ghanaian radio (I am in Accra) where callers are more or less unanimous that as the woman is from Guinea, in Francophone Africa, the Sarkozy connection is to blame. That fact is certainly a boon for conspiracy theorists.
DSK deserves the benefit of the presumption of innocence for now. We just don’t know what happened yet. The failure to grant him bail appears to me completely unjustifiable – where on earth do they think he will vanish, and how? There seems something peculiarly vindictive in the handling of this – of which his bail appearance without being allowed clean clothes or a shave was a stark symbol.
I have added the emphasis because I had got hold of absolutely the key point. It turns out the woman lied to the police, and in fact had gone back to cleaning rooms after the alleged assault, before reporting it – but then not told the truth about that. it also turns out that the woman – who you may recall we were told at the time was a very quiet religious Muslim – has a long term relationship with an imprisoned drug dealer and had received US $100,000 in recent months, largely from him. It is also the case that she had admitted to a flase claim of gang rape in her political asylum claim, and she has been taped discussing how much money she might make from the case.
Here is part of the prosecutor’s letter to the court:
“Additionally, in two separate interviews with assistant district attorneys assigned to the case, the complainant stated that she had been the victim of a gang rape in the past in her native country and provided details of the attack. During both of these interviews, the victim cried and appeared to be markedly distraught when recounting the incident. In subsequent interviews, she admitted that the gang rape had never occurred.”
Actually, for me the scariest and most evil thing about this entire episode are the warped feminists at the Guardian who conflate the terms “men” and “rapists” as though they were the same thing. As in this:
How do we get men to stop raping lesbians or independent or highly sexual women as a “corrective act” rather than addressing the forces and powers they are truly angry at? How do we get men to understand the impact of rape: how the external bruises are internalised and remain for ever?
The hate speak involved in conflating “Men” and “rapists” in this way is a vital insight into the viciousness of the militant feminist movement.
None of that, of course, makes it impossible that DSK raped her. But I considered it unlikely before, and I consider it still more unlikely now. Fascinating that the Guardian chooses to lead the first of their articles I link to with the ludicrous bluster of her lawyer, rather than the damning facts about her which come right down later.
It is an unfortunate boon to the Daily Express tendency that it turns out this case plays right into so many of the stereotyped categories Black Americans still have to struggle against – lying asylum seekers, convicted drug dealers, out to make crooked money. But in a criminal trial, Strauss Kahn, wealthy white banker though he is, still has as much right to have his story heard as her. That is what the equality of human beings means. And bluntly, from what we know at this moment, his side of the story seems a great deal more believable than hers. That may change as more evidence emerges; but the public bluster of her attorneys to date outlines an extremely weak case.
Talking of which, yet further evidence of stunning illiberalism by the coalition was revealed in Teresa May’s unjustified – in the literal sense of the term – action against Sheikh Saleh. What precisely is Sheikh Saleh alleged to have done that made his visit to the UK so harmful? Is there any evidence of any Lib Dem influence in any direction that can be described as liberal, in any area of government policy? Answers on a postcard please.
It is worth noting that in the two occasions I have stood for parliament, just as independent me with no party behind me, no organisation except this little blog and definitely no Deputy Prime Minister to back me, I have always obtained more votes and a higher percentage vote than the Liberal Democrats did at Inverclyde in the early hours of this morning. Unless the Scottish Lib Dems abandon the hard line unionism they have adopted – which would not have been supported by either Jo Grimond or Russel Johnson, and certainly not Rosebery – they are going to be annihilated.
I read Ensler’s piece before I read yours, Craig, and I’m afraid you really went off the rails here. As you are a self-confessed serial womanizer, perhaps it made you uncomfortable, but it didn’t strike me as being ‘anti-male’ at all. Of course, I’m a wimpy feminist who has been faithfully married to the same woman for 26 years, so what do I know?
Really, one does not need to go with the Nazi noise to track a likely actor with a record of using sexed up charges. Julian Assange could provide personal testimony of such ! So whether it is Mossad or C.I.A. is a race between devils.
Gloria Steinem: How the CIA Used Feminism to Destabilize Society
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Evils%20in%20America/Feminism/gloria_steinem-feminism.htm
Clark, yep, good point. Although ‘Blacks’ in itself is a loaded term whereas I would argue that ‘men’ isn’t. As for Muslims & suicide bombing, it would be pretty hard to write any kind of substantive piece about that in the UK since examples would consist of about 4 Muslims 7 years ago.
I really don’t want to know what people think Natasha Walters, Gloria Steinem, Helena Kennedy, Margaret Atwood, Naomi Wolf, Naomi Klein and the two people who started Greenham Common have in common with Nazis. Perhaps you gentlemen are confusing femininism with misandry.
This, on the other hand, made me want to be a little sick:
“Let’s keep Womanisers out of office”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jul/03/viv-groskop-strauss-kahn-lechery
Extract
“this bestial behaviour is not much fun for the other creatures, the ones who are on the receiving end of the incessant rutting…a plea that the “weakness” be indulged with the maximum discretion and humility if it must be indulged at all. Which ideally it should not.”
On top of the twisted specifics, conflating mutual adult sexual enjoyment with a rape case? Genius.
Craig, I have agreed with most of what you have said in the past but here I agree with you only in one thing: Trust between men and women is one of the most important things. However, this requires that we focus on the truth, about what happened in the hotel and not speculate about the character of the parties involved. And here, it seems, Mr. Strauss-Kahn has the bigger problem: Since his DNA has been found, he has to show how possibly there was consensual sex. Which instant sexual desire should have driven the woman to give a blow job to a man like Strauss-Kahn within the very minute she met him for the first time in her life?
Anne,
No, it is for the prosecution to prove that sex was not consensual. Innocent until proven guilty.
She did not just lie about being raped in her asylum application. She lied on her tax returns to get public housing and avoid tax. She lied about her number of children in social security claims. She has $100,000 in her bank account from undisclosed sources. She discussed with a criminal in prison how to make money from the rape claim.
She is, from all the above, rather fond of money. “Which instant sexual desire should have driven the woman to give a blow job to a man like Strauss-Kahn within the very minute she met him for the first time in her life?” I stronglu suspect the answer is 300 dollars. Incidentally, as he had been spending a great deal of time staying at that hotel and she too had worked there some time, I suspect it was not the first time they had done it – they may both have an incentive to lie about that.
@JimmyGiro
.
> “Feminism is pure evil fascism”
.
Well, you’ve put your case here several times before, but with little traction on each occasion. But hey-ho, perhaps it will catch on. Is that why you call male feminists “manginas”? You’re so sure that most liberals will reject your view, you might as well call them names to spite them prior to the near-certain rejection?
.
I’m interested in a source for your 94% figure. My quick googling indicates that false claim figures in the UK – presumably for male-on-female-rape – sits somewhere between 3% and 8%. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics#False_reporting
.
> “Feminists evil social restructuring”
.
Now there’s an intriguing theory! I may have asked it before, but your re-raising this issue on a separate thread warrants asking it again. Your thesis is that there is a deliberate agreement between women and/or feminists in medical/educational circles to deliberately drug young British males with Ritalin, en masse, in specific furtherance of a pro-women policy?
.
If I have that right, what evidence would you cite? What would be their objective? Is the agreement clandestine? As an anti-feminist, how did you find out about their plan?
I would subject that the widespread use of drugs like ritalin (something about which I have immense concerns) has more to do with the strategies of Big Pharma and a societal refusal to accept that total immersion in digital audio-visual media is likely to damage children’s attention-span, behaviour, etc. than some feminist plot.
“I strongly suspect the answer is 300 dollars”: So then why did she not take her 300 Dollars and went to the police instead?
“It is for the prosecution to prove that sex was not consensual”: Formally right. But – as bad as the character of the witness may be (honestly, I do not believe Strauss-Kahn’s is any better, he may not only be a “womanizer” but also a serial blackmailer and abuser of illegal immigrants) – her story is plausible, while the defense has not come up with any explanation at all.
@Suhayl – interesting. I’d not heard about the link with computer games. I’ve been mildly of the view that ADHD is a response to deep-seated issues in affected children that would ideally be treated with long-term talking therapy, if it were not so expensive.
.
I understand that Big Pharma would love to have all children on plenty of long-term drugs, but surely doctors (in the main) only prescribe on the basis of real need?
@Jon and Suhayl,
.
If it was only the corporations, then why the great disparity between boy and girl victims? The answer is that it is a gender concern; therefore feminist, because that is what feminists do. See also:
http://jimmygiro.blogspot.com/2008/08/educating-ritalin.html
.
“I’m interested in a source for your 94% figure[?]”
.
The feminists complain that only 6% of rape trials result in conviction. Where you taught maths by a woman?
Hey Jimmy. I spy logical flaws in both points:
.
In the first case, more boys could be presenting with ADHD due to a variety of reasons. To extend Suhayl’s suggestion, perhaps it is that more boys play aggressive/war-like/frightening computer games? Sure, they may be playing them in the first place as a result of gender modelling, but I guess that’s unavoidable in today’s world, at least for the time being. (Side note: I am saddened by the potential for films and computer games to desensitise a fresh generation, thanks to recent improvements in graphical realism, to the genuine horrors of war. But this is another issue).
.
So, I’ve given you a single, reasonable counterexample that disproves your automatic feminist connection. Your article assumes what it sets out to prove (“Furthermore, with an ever increasing number of feminist teachers, who have a propensity to regard males with low regard…”) – do you have a reference for those assumptions?
.
Your second point is flawed as well. If 6% of rape cases (what region?) result in conviction, that does not mean that the remaining 94% were false accusations – ridiculous! I would imagine that some of them did not get to trial because the process was too painful for the accuser, and perhaps others fail because the jury are not reasonably convinced that consent was not given. I would nominally wager that the biggest reason for failure is a public prosecutor’s decision not to go to trial, on the basis of insufficient evidence. Also, how about women who are raped but report to Women’s Aid but not the police?
.
So, I’ve given you several counterexamples to disprove your second assumption. I will therefore stick with the Wikipedia stats unless you can offer a proper alternative source.
.
We might agree on one issue, though. Feminists do indeed complain about the low conviction rate for alleged rapes, but I’ve sometimes worried at the language used. I’ve sometimes detected an implication amongst *some* commentators that an increase in the conviction rate would be great even at the expense of getting it wrong. As a feminist and a left-liberal, I think we should make it easier to get justice for rape victims, but as with any crime, we must ensure that people falsely accused get justice as well.
.
“It is all so tiresome to endure the stupidity of people. Little wonder they are losing their liberty, their jobs and incomes, and their country and self-respect.”
.
With DSK’s reputation in tatters and DSK knocked out of the French presidential election and removed from the IMF, where he was beginning to raise questions about the establishment’s use of the IMF to bail out rich bankers on the backs of poor peasants, the “justice system” has done its work.
.
“Those few who actually care about justice, not only for DSK and everyman, but also for the Greek, Spanish, Irish, and Portuguese people, can find comfort in the fact that apparently DSK had come to New York in order to speak with Nobel economist Joe Stiglitz about a more humane and democratic way to resolve the sovereign debt crisis in Europe than the one imposed by the private creditor banks.
.
Obviously, anyone who would consult with Stiglitz is perceived by the rich and powerful as a threat to their interest.
.
However, this obvious fact has made no impression on the left-wing, which has issued its shrill cries that, once again, the money of the rich and powerful has prevailed over law and justice.”
.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=25473
.
.
Paul Craig Roberts was an Asst Sec of the US Treasury under Reagan and a former editor of the Wall St Journal. He has been a critic of both Democratic and Republican administrations.
Jon wrote: “In the first case, more boys could be presenting with ADHD due to a variety of reasons…”
.
‘ADHD’ is a fantasy condition; check out the pick-n-mix list of ‘symptoms’ required for a ‘diagnosis’ of this invented malady. It’s similar to the tosh that useless modern mothers came up with regarding sugar drinks causing ‘hyperactivity’ in their charges. The fact of the matter is, boys are being driven batty by the over-stultifying regimes of paranoid mothers, and the misandry of feminist teachers. Did your niece teach you not to play rough?
.
Jon wrote: “…do you have a reference for those assumptions?”
.
The graphs are their own reference. Did you learn graphical analysis in the Brownies?
.
Jon wrote: “Your second point is flawed as well. If 6% of rape cases (what region?) result in conviction, that does not mean that the remaining 94% were false accusations – ridiculous!”
.
It’s for the UK, and this is the results for those cases brought to court; it does not include the myriad of spiteful slanders that fail to end in court action, due to pre-trial confessions of the accusers. And if these 94% were not judged as false, then they certainly would have resulted in a custodial sentence; i.e. a furtherance to their time already spent in remand, guilty or innocent. Were you taught ethics by the W.I.?
.
Jon wrote: “Also, how about women who are raped but report to Women’s Aid but not the police?”
.
Ban ‘women’s aid’, problem solved.
.
Jon wrote: “So, I’ve given you several counterexamples to disprove your second assumption.”
.
No you haven’t. Were you taught logic by your auntie?
Jon, you asked: “but surely doctors (in the main) only prescribe on the basis of real need?”
.
There is a concerted effort by Big Pharma to distort the scientific and medical literature. You can find plenty about this on Ben Goldacre’s blog Bad Science. There is also “the man in the bow tie” that Suhayl mentioned on an older thread – the administrator who dictates to doctors what constitutes “best practice”.
Jimmy,
.
Females are twice as likely to experience major depression than males, is that a male conspiracy to drug women? What about breast cancer or osteoporosis? Both effect women far more than men. Surely you don’t believe men and women are exactly the same and have exactly the same problems?
.
“Where you taught maths by a woman?”
.
Why does the location matter? Did a man or woman teach you English? But seriously, remarks such as the above really don’t help make your case at all. It makes you look as bad as any of the man hating feminists that bother you so much.
.
All,
.
I am a firm believer in the innocent until proven guilty system of justice. However the issue of rape raises a lot of problems that I don’t think are easily resolved. Most crimes are relatively obvious and there is evidence that can be investigated. Unfortunately in many instances rape simply comes down to a ‘he said, she said’ scenario. The threat of violence or simply overwhelming social/economic power imbalances can be enough to minimise a woman’s physical resistance so that there are no clear indicators of rape. In those cases, are we happy to let a rapist go free simply because he convinced a woman that she would be better off being raped rather than being beaten and raped or even killed. On the flip side, the idea that every claim of rape automatically results in a conviction is also heinous.
.
I do think that both parties in any court case should be anonymous until after the trial has finished. Not only would this protect men against the massive stigma caused by false accusations, but because the power of false accusations would be minimised, it then follows that women have less reason to make false accusations and therefore legitimate claims of rape would be taken more seriously (hopefully).
.
BTW violent video games and films are awesome. I love em to bits and have been watching the most violent horror movies I could find since I was around 10 and I have been shooting Nazis and aliens for just as long. I also can’t remember the last time I hit anyone. Males have evolved with certain violent tendencies, violent video games and films probably provide a good pressure valve for men in these ‘civilised’ times (much like sport). I think video games/films are only negative if you have already been desensitised to what war/violence really means. I was raised in a strongly anti war family and no amount of simulated computer violence has convinced me that war is cool.
JimmyGiro, on your link, you’ve superimposed two graphs and implied causation. Who taught you science?
.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PiratesVsTemp%28en%29.svg
.
I think you should be looking more at the fragmentation of our society, and you should read Aldous Huxley’s “Island”. Parent couples that would otherwise have separated used to be bound by social stigma and difficult divorce laws. Couples split at will now, forcing the question “who gets the children?”. Generally, it’s the mum, and generally, that is probably best (from the limited him/her options), but it leaves boys with limited access to male role-models, and leaves mothers trying to cope with boys with no male backup, as in “Wait until your father gets home!”. A more communal mode of living would provide a better balance.
.
I agree that society is moving towards encouraging more compliance, subservience, and a tick-box mentality. In this, of course, the authoritarian society will make proportionally more use of women, just as that same society will mostly use young men to fight and die on its battlefields.
@JimmyGiro
.
“Where you taught maths by a woman?”
“Did your niece teach you not to play rough?”
.
I don’t understand why you (and Herbie) use these sneering attitudes. Apart from anything else, it does your own ’cause’ no good at all. I have had run-ins with men like you online, and they were by and large obnoxious. I have ALSO had run ins with militant feminists, some who lecture in “Women’s Studies” in US and Canadian universities, and they were *equally* obnoxious. I steer clear of both types as much as possible. It’s not worth the unpleasantness.
“I do think that both parties in any court case should be anonymous until after the trial has finished.”
I’m with you on that CheebaCow.
“There is a concerted effort by Big Pharma to distort the scientific and medical literature.”
.
Absolutely Clark. I could go into a rant about statins (which are currently being given out like smarties here and in the UK, with very grave consequences) but I won’t because I’d bore everyone to tears. But I have the guns out (so to speak) for Big Pharma. My son left the company he was with and went back into research. He couldn’t stand the profit-before-safety culture.
Respect to your son, Dreoilin.
.
This is what we can expect from companies. After all, if one company doesn’t do it, they’ll be beaten by a company that does. The real problem is the lack of governmental regulation. Democracy itself is ill. It’s only through law that a level playing field at a decent level of morality can be created.
Another aspect is how research has shifted from being government sponsored to being paid for by industry. Putting the fox in charge of the chicken-shed.
CheebaCow, awesome post, brilliant, fab, wonderful! I also love horror films, psychological thrillers, etc.
Jon, I wasn’t suggesting video-games specifically, I was meaning simply the total immersion of young children in digital media, the mass cultivation of ever-shorter attention spans, etc. There must be some who are more susceptible than others.
Clark, absolutely.
And Jimmy, as well as the examples CheebaCow gave, for many years, for example, HRT was very aggressively marketed. If boys are targeted by Big Pharma for Ritalin, etc., then women are targeted for a whole load of other things. Big Pharma is interested in Big Profit – it’ll exploit stuff related to sex, but is neutral as far as being ‘sexist’ is concerned (just as transnational capitalism, of which Big Phrama is a part, is generally neutral wrt racism – Indian capitalist fundos serve it just as well as American ones). This simply means it will exploit everyone in the way it deems most likely to generate a quick buck. The scandal of the ‘flu epidemic’ – ‘Epidemic Cold’ – was illustrative. Men, women, girls, boys, all exploited equally. All the stupid dressing-up in masks and gowns, terrifying people, as though it were lassa fever or something. Now, because of this profligate use of Tamiflu, etc., we in fact are more likely to get ‘1919’ again. Big Pharma in cahoots with those making the decisions who were supposed to be neutral but were not – revolving door again.
This is not about race or sex – though they will use both when it suits their purposes – in truth, the bastards are screwing us all.
I share Dreoilin’s concerns wrt statins (and much else). The truth is that although one can say much about population-wide cardiovascular risk wrt such things as the various cholesterol, etc,. ratios, BMI, smoking, etc, etc., that does NOT equate to an individual’s cardiovascular risk; in fact, the more parameters one measures, the worse the potential error. Much is in the genes and in a whole complex of factors we’ve not begun to be able to be able to interpret in an individual person. So the rational for prescribing these things en masse for primary prevention (i.e. before anything bad has happened to the person) is very shaky, to say the least. Trouble is, contrary to The Who’s lyric, we do get fooled, and we get fooled again and again and again.
Clark wrote: “JimmyGiro, on your link, you’ve superimposed two graphs and implied causation. Who taught you science?”
.
Actual words = “The data suggests the hypothesis that boys do not prosper in the realm of feminists.”
.
Try your ‘straw-man’ techniques on the manginas, they’re more susceptible to that bollox.
Craig, despite the alleged victim’s changes of story and damaged credibility, despite the conflicting claims as to whether she raised the alarm immediately or (which is disputed) carried on working for another 90 minutes (a bizarre thing to do if true), the fact remains that there is not one shred of evidence that proves that the acts that occurred that day were consensual.
The alleged victim has always denied that, has stuck to that bit of her story and no one working for DSK has been able to shake her on that point. Sadly for her, that will not stop the case from being dropped.
As always it’s real easy to make excuses for DSK when you and your wife are 3,500 miles away on the other side of the Atlantic. The fact that DSK did not believe he would be held to account so soon, if at all for his alleged actions and therefore carried on his schedule as arranged does not in itself prove that he didn’t rape her.
Ah Jimmy, you’re reverting to usual form. Your triple strategy is to answer off-topic, to patronise, and to ignore. We’ve been here before, but there’s hardly much point to me going through the intellectual arguments if you won’t actually make coherent and relevant responses. But I will try again, notwithstanding.
.
I asked you to reference your double statement about there being an “increasing number of feminist teachers, who have a propensity to regard males with low regard” and your response is “[t]he graphs are their own reference”. This is not good enough. Wikipedia link? Respected text? Study? I will otherwise assume you just made this stuff up. Drawing a graph of something does not, of course, prove what you want it to show.
.
Incidentally – and only anecdotally – I happen to know quite a few teachers, of both genders. The women teachers I know are certainly not activist, or feminist – most are apolitical or reactionary, sadly. I think your view that all female teachers are feminist is just a construction.
.
I put several reasons to you why only 6% of rape cases result in a conviction. But you ignored the good examples from me and CheebaCow, and said “if these 94% were not judged as false, then they certainly would have resulted in a custodial sentence”. Simply not true, for the reasons we gave.
.
You say: “[the figure of 6%] does not include the myriad of spiteful slanders that fail to end in court action”. Reference again, please? How many is a myriad?
.
In response to my showing why rapes may in fact be under-reported, you suggested that Women’s Aid should be banned. This of course missed the point: depending on who compiles the statistics, a rape may be counted (say by an NGO) even though the alleged victim does not then go on to report to the police (despite being encouraged to). The solution is not to ban the NGO, of course, but to explore ways in which an assaulted woman can be encouraged to go to the police. After all, you want rapists to be convicted in a court of law, don’t you?
.
If you’re not satisfied with the standard of my logic, show me where I have not connected propositions satisfactorily. Meanwhile I would have been very lucky to have learnt logic from my auntie, since she is a very smart and perceptive woman. It is interesting to see that you assume women cannot “do logic”, and I think this goes to the heart of your motivation.
Jimmy, you used your patronise/ignore technique on Clark too. Serious answers are required if you want to persuade even one person of the validity of what you say.
.
Even if it’s full of holes, of course. Such as this: “The data suggests the hypothesis that boys do not prosper in the realm of feminists” — a statement based on the unproven assumption that there are (many) feminist teachers in schools. At the moment this is unproven at best, and I am inclined to think it is nonsense.
.
Over to you!
Oh yes, on ADHD. I am happy to believe it is over-diagnosed, but severe hyperactivity disorders do exist. I wouldn’t find it strange if more boys were diagnosed with such a disorder.
.
@Suhayl, thanks for the clarification, and good post generally. Capitalism is indeed willing to exploit gender/race characteristics, but it doesn’t intrinsically hate women or black people. Absolutely.
Jon wrote: “Ah Jimmy, you’re reverting to usual form.”
.
Good. Reverting to the ‘usual’ is called consistency.
No responses at all to the points I made. Have you conceded the argument?
.
You put so much energy into what you say, I would have thought you’d be interested in showing why you do. At the moment I am mystified as to why you put so much stock in beliefs that you cannot, or will not, verify.
None as blind, as will not see. Your deliberate obtuseness Jon, is beyond education.