Hate Crimes: What about crimes against women?

The tragic and horrific murder of Sophie Lancaster has been in the news again today because the constabulary responsible for investigating the crime (Greater Manchester Police) have added subcultures such as emos, punks and goths to the list of groups affected by hate crimes. This I have no problem with. What I do have an issue with is the list of current hate crimes.

From the article, Lord MacDonald said "People's racial origins, their religion, their sexual orientation, people's dignity in the face of disability - these have been lines in the sand with the law saying, look, these are crimes that threaten social cohesion as a whole and therefore national life." Again I have no problem with this statement, as it is, and have no doubt of its veracity.

He then went on to say "I'm a little cautious about watering down this concept." Clearly he is so worried about watering down this concept he hasn't even considered that crimes against your sex would "threaten social cohesion as a whole and therefore national life." That is crimes against over 50% of the population. The implication by omission that crimes against women doesn't threaten social cohesion (whatever that may mean) is a complete denial of what women experience every single day. Just look at sites such as Everyday Sexism or Hollaback! to see how social cohesion is being disrupted on a daily basis for women everywhere.

So what are the many thousands of rapes reported as? What about the sexual assaults, the domestic abuse/violence, FGM (although no-one has actually been convicted for that in the UK), honour killings, serial killings against women? What are they all counted as? All those crimes are perpetrated against women just because they are women. Why are these crimes not being counted as hate crimes, they surely fit the definition?

Well the reason probably lies in the results if they were counted as hate crimes. It would bust the myth in cloud cuckoo land that women are being treated equally and would highlight that in fact we are still oppressed. The overwhelming problem of male violence against women would then become massively apparent and something would have to be done about it. In addition patterns which are currently denied would also become apparent. Patterns such as controlling and abusive behaviour and how this manifests itself throughout a range of crimes and behaviours. There is also a reluctance to name male violence for what it is. By not including crimes against women, such as rape, as hate crimes then the perpetrators of hate crimes can be hidden behind vaguer language such as "people", "groups" etc. But hate crimes against women could really only be down to the opposite sex i.e. men.

This reluctance to name and see male violence as the problem ties in with the truly desperate and awful deaths of the six children, Jade, John, Jack, Jesse, Jayden, and Duwayne, killed by their father Mick Philpott. His previous behaviour seemed to offer no red flags to social workers. No pattern has been identified in the media or in the courts with other family annihilators even though the similarities are there. The Tories would rather put this down to child benefit than male violence. I mean, how much more sleight of hand, misdirection and just basic lies do we have to put up with?

 

I don't know if Sophie's death was as a result of being a woman or a goth or a combination of both but really lets call a spade a fucking spade. Sophie, Jade, John, Jack, Jesse, Jayden and Duwayne all died at the hands of men. That is the problem. How many thousands of other victims do there have to be before this is dealt with head-on?

Separating art from the artist: Why should we?

Recently there have been two high profile cases of men who have been celebrated and allowed to continue working having committed serious violent crimes against women. In both cases it has been deemed that their work is more important than their crime. Their crimes have either been ignored or not deemed serious enough to interrupt their career.

The BFI had a "two-month retrospective" of Roman Polanski over January and February. Oh joys. On 10 March 1977 Roman Polanski was charged with the rape by use of drugs, perversion, sodomy, lewd and lascivious act upon a child under fourteen. He pleaded guilty to unlawful sexual intercourse but never faced sentencing as he did a runner, to put it bluntly. The BFI didn't even acknowledge the crime in their "retrospective". Conservative with the truth, let's say.

Now, admittedly, I am not an avid "Art" fan. I like some of it, I enjoy watching films, love reading books but I will never be completely immersed in it. Maybe this is why I can't see beyond a man's crimes to appreciate his art, or maybe it is because I am a human being. However, you can see evidence of Polanski's misogyny in his films and his inappropriate fixation on young girls. Chinatown and Tess are particularly problematic in this area, not mention Polanski's relationship with Nastassja Kinski when she was only 15. The attitude and sense of entitlement it takes to rape someone doesn't just appear in isolation. It permeates throughout their life including their work.

I may not be an arts fan but I am a sports fan. On 14th February 2013 Oscar Pistorius killed his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp by shooting her 4 times. This is not in doubt. Following this killing there was a lot of disbelief and misplaced adulation and barely a mention of his victim. This eradication of Reeva and what happened to her has continued now in that Pistorius has been granted leave to compete abroad whilst waiting on bail for his trial (set to be in June). So the judge in South Africa saw fit to prioritise his career above the crime he has been charged with. Again there is a separation of the crime from the work of the man as if the two are not related.

Pistorius showed a glimpse of his sense of entitlement at the London 2012 Paralympics when losing the 200m to Alan Fonteles. Elite sportsmen often have an arrogance and selfishness which gets them to the top. This selfishness is only one step away from feeling entitlement. When all around you tell you how good you are and how you deserve to win, it will have an impact on your mindset. Allowing him to compete whilst waiting for trial is another incident emphasising that he is allowed special and preferential treatment. It does require a sense of entitlement to shoot your girlfriend through a bathroom door, four times.

You can't separate a man and his work. His work is part of him as is his crime. They don't sit in separate compartments. They overlap. Compartmentalising it is very convenient for the men who commit these crimes and for all other men who commit violence, especially against women. Seeing a crime in isolation from the man denies the connection and the pattern that these men follow. It encourages only focussing on the individual and not only the overall problem of male violence. It perpetuates the rape culture we live in, allows male violence to continue and keeps women oppressed. Ignoring men's behaviour when they commit crimes against women and promoting their work really only sends out one message: women and their lives do not matter.

Not only do we we need to name the problem of male violence but punish it and remember what these men did.

Posted with Blogsy

Steubenville and CNN: Perpetuating Rape Culture

I don't normally write about topical things because I am just not that quick off the mark (or at the zoo) and by the time I get round to it several hundred other wonderful feminists have articulated it far better than I could, with my O'Level in English Language. However, this whole incident/issue has just given me the rage. I am an angry feminist. And the more angry feminists that speak out against this shit the better. It is a travesty that there are probably only hundreds of people speaking out about this. It should be millions. Steubenville should not be allowed to happen.

And that is the problem. This is what happens when you live in a rape culture despite those that deny its existence. <warning don't click on that link if you believe men should actually be responsible for their behaviour or you have the critical faculties required to join the dots together>

Rape culture not just men raping women although there is enough of that about. It is the low conviction rate. It is women changing their behaviour to try and avoid rape. It is victim-blaming and shaming. It is idolising perpetrators. It is covering up for perpetrators. It is wanting anonymity for perpetrators. It is the reporting of rape as 'sex scandals'. It is the public regulation of what women wear. It is expecting women's behaviour to be different or of a higher standard than men's. It is the culture that expects a woman to say no otherwise consent is implied. It is where men shouting obscenities, making sexual advances or groping women is seen as something women just have to put up with. It is prioritising a tiny amount of false accusations over the thousands of rapes that occur every year in the UK. It is the pornographic images seen all over the web. It is the culture where men buying women for sex is acceptable. I could carry on ... and on but I am sure you are managing to join the dots by now. The coverage of this rape (and the backlash against the convictions) has ticked so many of those boxes. To be honest the coverage of most rapes normally does.

But CNN have truly managed to surpass themselves with their reporting of the sentencing of the Steubenville rape. The language used about the boys - "promising futures"; "still sound like 16 year old boys"; "difficult to watch [their sentencing]"; "their life fell apart"; "[the boys] lives are destroyed" - was sympathesing with the perpetrators of a crime whilst completely eradicating the victim's experience. It was as if they felt justice hadn't been done. I suspect that we have that in common, although for completely different reasons. How the media report crimes like this is incredibly important. The regretful language used to describe the fact that the boys are now on the sex offenders register gives the impression that they have been hard done by. Their upset at being caught and found guilty (because this wasn't remorse as shown by Mays statement about how the photographs and video should never have been taken - no mention of the rape) has been validated by this coverage. This is like a green light for abusers - validation for their feelings, sympathy for their punishment even sympathy for what they had done like it was all a big mistake. Everything they believe has just been reinforced.

I have two young sons. I have already started teaching them not to rape through respecting their boundaries and their bodies and getting them to respect each other's. This is such a good letter to sons. Yet the society we live in will be fighting back against those teachings all the time. Everywhere they look will be "evidence" that women are there to be raped; their boundaries can be crossed; there is no consequences for rape and if you were unlucky enough to get caught and convicted then you will still get sympathy and understanding.


Shame on you CNN. I hope you are forced to apologise.
Shame on you Trent Mays and Ma'lik Richmond. I wish your sentence was harsher, it is what you deserve.

Posted with Blogsy