by Connie Chastain
It is difficult to read Mr. Harlan's excellent expose, Lambs to the Slaughter: The Hofstra False Rape Case, without a feeling an attack of multiple emotions, virtually all of them negative.
There is, of course, anger or its stronger counterpart, outrage, which a psychologist one told me are understandable and healthy reactions to injustice or unfairness. There is sympathy for the young men, not only for the ordeal they endured, but for the residue that will follow them the rest of their lives. There is impatience shading into disgust for the one-sided assumptions of law enforcement and the media.
But what I feel most is a "How could she...?" bewilderment about the false accuser. There is an element of anger to it, but it's mostly mystification. What could possible cause a presumably intelligent young woman pursuing higher education to indulge in spur-of-the-moment group sex and then call it rape?
Yes, I know the surface reason; she had a boyfriend, and was actually on a date with him when the incident occurred. When he found her in her dorm after the incident and demanded to know what had happened, she claimed she'd been raped. It was to cover up what she must have seen as a shameful sexual episode that she had initiated -- an episode that would have made people think she was "easy," according to her later recantation.
But that still isn't the explanation that will assuage my bewilderment. Mr. Harlan duly notes the claims of feminists that "rape culture" made her do it, a "reason" that doesn't deserve to be dignified with further discussion, and wouldn't provide answers, anyway.
I think the explanation lies in what Harlan calls the "breathtaking misandry" at work in the aftermath of the case.
How could she, how could anyone except a conscienceless sociopath, knowingly imperial innocent people -- even the male kind -- with a falsehood fabricated for such a flimsy reason? It's not because we live in a rape culture, but because we live in a misandry culture -- a culture where altogether too many men and women simply cannot conceptualize the grave injustices perpetrated against men in the name of female equality -- which, in reality, is female empowerment, female supremacy.
There are many reasons why I deeply resent feminism -- its war against religion, its destructive effects on the family, its attempts to fundamentally alter human relationships, its poisoning of society -- but one of the most infuriating is its corruption of law and justice for the sake of getting even with men for their patriarchal sins.
In Harper Lee's masterpiece, To Kill a Mockingbird, the story of a black man falsely accused of raping a white woman in the pre-civil rights South, the protagonist, attorney Atticus Finch, addresses the jury the trial of the accused:
"Thomas Jefferson once said that all men are created equal.... We know all men are not created equal in the sense some people would have us believe... But there is one way in this country in which all men are created equal--there is one human institution that makes a pauper the equal of a Rockefeller, the stupid man the equal of an Einstein, the ignorant man the equal of a college president. That institution, gentlemen, is a court.... Our courts have their faults, as does any human institution, but in this country our courts are the great levelers, and in our courts all men are created equal."
Unfortunately, there are those who would add deliberate corruption to the unavoidable human faults of our courts, in fact, to our whole process of law enforcement and justice, for the sake of a terribly destructive ideology. And the truly horrible thing about misandry culture is that so many people are under its influence unawares and simply do not see the corruption, the destruction, or the danger -- for example, decades-long prison sentences for innocent young men on the mere say-so of a single woman..
One great effort to bring knowledge and sanity to this dilemma is the work of Pierce Harlan, Steven Berkimer and other contributors via this blog. Many thanks for their efforts, and compliments to Pierce for the masterful Hofstra expose.
Posts
8 comments:
Another Excellent piece connie.
If one was to hear a "Gender / Raunch" culture proffessor lecture to their classroom in any American university about how oppressed women have been throughout history, any outside observer would say it looks more like a gay rally than anything to do with womens equality.
"how could anyone except a conscienceless sociopath?"
K Connie, as someone who knows a fair amount about psychology, I could guarantee you that most psychologists would agree that approximately 1% of the population are sociopaths. Now what does that mean?
It means that they simply are incapable or are severely limited in showing any sense of right and wrong, empathy for other's pain, any sense of morality, or basic societal norms. The difference between a serial killer, an anti-social hermit who w/draws from society, OR a teenage girl who would throw young men in jail, is: Not all sociopaths are created equal, and some only act out on what they are capable of getting away w/.
Her behavior is mostly due to a horrible sense of morality, which could be selfishness, or she really could be a genuine psychopath. It's not due to some sociological force that caused her to do this
Concerned Android
Connie:
Have you seen this site?
http://www.ladiesagainstfeminism.com/
I thought I would pass it along...
decades-long prison sentences for innocent young men on the mere say-so of a single woman..
Corruption at its core!
Pierce Harlan, Steven Berkimer, and Connie Chastain.
Keep up the good work guys. Thank you!
Jesus stated expose evil, expose darkness.
Once the rape lie is told a woman can't recant for fear of prosecution.
Based on what I have seen the corrupt authorities will disuade the false accuser from changing her story.
Arod99k - "Based on what I have seen the corrupt authorities will disuade the false accuser from changing her story."
Well, if you read the stories posted here, some 90% of them involve the police getting the liars to recant.
Well, if you read the stories posted here, some 90% of them involve the police getting the liars to recant. Slwerner said
In Response Arod99k said to Slwerner. Slwerner you have no clue of what you are talking about. Please get educated on this subject, before commenting.
District Attorneys who only care about power, numbers, and statistics. District Attorneys who have a win at all cost mentality, so that they can get more funding for next year, regardless of innocence. District Attorney's who are looking at the next promotion, and even the possibility of becoming a judge. The DA will never admit maleficence, even when confronted with irrefutable DNA evidence of innocence. There is a much bigger problem going on. The problem is the doing away with jury trials. There are no more jury trials because most cases are settled in plea bargain agreements. 95% of all criminal accusations are settled in plea agreements. The government will offer the defendant 2 years in a plea deal. If the innocent man refuses, he is then threatened that if he is to loose at trial, he will get 20 years.
The current system rubber stamps criminal charges to any accusation made by anyone. Detectives and prosecutors can be charged with obstruction of justice but they never are. Prosecutors and police withhold, hide, and destroy exculpatory evidence, lie, use trickery, and engage in witness tampering. Detectives engage in tunnel vision and never investigate. Police and prosecutors work harder on cases that play out in the media. Evidence is usually fabricated or lied about, but it is usually admitted. Police arrest on little or no evidence. The accusation is the conviction. A person is usually held on high bail and coerced into confessing through lengthy pre trial detention 2 years being the minimum before a trial, (See Star Chamber).
Post a Comment