Tag: Violence against women

  • Are you waiting until she’s actually killed?

    Angelique Chrisafis at the Guardian tells us Macron went to the national domestic violence hotline to listen in on calls and got to hear a cop refuse to help a woman in danger.

    Wearing headphones, the president sat silently listening in to calls being taken by an experienced hotline operator.

    A distressed 57-year-old woman called in saying her violent husband had threatened to kill her after years of escalating abuse at home and that she had to leave. She was at the local police station. She said she had filed a police complaint but, fearing her husband would murder her, she had asked the police to accompany her home to safely retrieve her possessions before leaving. But the police refused.

    “You’re in the police station? You’re in danger. Your husband is at home. The police can accompany you,” the operator assured the caller.

    The woman said that the police were refusing to do so. Macron looked visibly angered and shook his head, but remained silent.

    “They have to help a person in danger,” the operator insisted and asked to speak to the police officer.

    In a call that lasted 15 minutes, the operator attempted in vain to persuade the gendarme to help, but the officer insisted it wasn’t his place to intervene. Unaware that the president was listening in, the officer said – wrongly – that he would need a judicial order to accompany the woman.

    Macron silently shook his head and wrote a note on a piece of paper, handing it to the operator.

    “It’s the gendarme’s job to protect her when there is a clear risk,” with or without any extra judicial permission, the note said.

    The hotline operator continued to press the officer, at one point saying: “This woman is under threat of death, are you waiting until she’s actually killed?”

    But the officer refused to act.

    Macron was pissed. He asked the operator if that happens often and she said oh yes.

    Let’s hope he does something about it.

  • Be sure always to call it please “breath play”

    And there’s choking. We’re told it’s “kink”; we’re told not to “shame” people for enjoying it; we’re told it’s “rough sex”; we’re told we must be vanilla. And women die.

    A recently married woman turns up dead.

    According to Roberts, Vicky’s death had been a terrible accident, a “sex game gone wrong”. In court, he pleaded not guilty to her murder, claiming they had been having sex on the sofa with a bathrobe cord around Vicky’s neck and she had instructed him, three times, to “pull tighter”. When she slumped to the floor, he thought she was joking and waited for her to sit up and say, “Boo!” When he realised his wife was dead, he sat in the corner and cried.

    He was lying though.

    Fortunately, there was ample evidence to speak for Vicky. The pathology report showed her injuries could not have been inflicted by a dressing gown cord and the force used was excessive. Roberts had snapped a hyoid bone in the front of her neck. He hadn’t called an ambulance. He hid Vicky’s body in the garage and told her family she had left him for another man.

    And there’s more, but there isn’t always that level of evidence.

    Just one month after the trial, another woman – Michelle Stonall – was found strangled with her dog’s lead in Sheldon Country Park, Birmingham. Her killer used the same “sex game” defence. Less than two months after that, Anna Banks, a 25-year-old classroom assistant, was strangled by her boyfriend of four months. Daniel Lancaster claimed that Banks “enjoyed being throttled during intercourse”. He was not found guilty of murder but guilty of manslaughter and given a four-year sentence.

    Since December last year, a group of women have attempted to gather “sex games gone wrong” defence killings under one place – the website We Can’t Consent to This. In the decade since Vicky’s murder, such killings have risen by 90%. Two thirds involve strangulation.

     

    Because it’s a “kink.” Because it’s being normalized as “kink” and what did anyone think would happen?

    Strangulation – fatal and non-fatal – “squeezing”, “neck compression” or, as some call, it “breath-play” – is highly gendered. On average, one woman in the UK is strangled to death by her partner every two weeks, according to Women’s Aid. It is a frequent feature of non-fatal domestic assault, as well as rape and robbery where women are the victims. It is striking how seldom it is seen in crimes against men.

    Striking but not surprising, given the fact that men are stronger than women.

    And now, a new defence has been added to the mix – consent. Fiona Mackenzie, an actuary, set up We Can’t Consent to This following the outcry over the so-called “rough sex killing” of Natalie Connolly, 26, by her millionaire partner John Broadhurst, 40. Despite the victim having 40 separate injuries, including serious internal trauma, a fractured eye socket and bleach on her face, Broadhurst received a sentence of three years, eight months for manslaughter.

    “People were talking about this defence as if it was one isolated incident and I knew it wasn’t,” says Mackenzie. Although English law does not recognise consent to choking – or any physical harm – in the context of consensual sex, the Labour MP Harriet Harman has just announced her intention to have this underlined again in the forthcoming domestic violence bill. “It needs more emphasis because defence teams are increasingly offering it up, maybe because rough sex has crept into the mainstream,” says Mackenzie. “I’ve had so many women get in touch to say they have been horrified on Tinder dates by partners who have choked them during sex. If you’re dating, it’s expected of you and if you don’t go along with it, you’re boring.”

    Here’s an interesting fact: that business of its being expected and being boring if you say no is a major part of the plot of the novel Big Little Lies, but it was completely excised from the tv serial based on the novel, the tv serial that was directed by a man and written by a man. Liane Moriarty, who wrote the novel, is a woman. Funny how that works.

    How did strangulation become so widespread? Autoerotic asphyxia – when someone restricts oxygen to their own brain for the purposes of arousal – isn’t new: there have been documented cases since the early 17th century. But, historically, it has been “niche” and an overwhelmingly male pastime. And the serious risks it has always carried can be seen in the two high-profile examples of the deaths of the MP Stephen Milligan and the actor David Carradine.

    Now, though, it is women being choked – Mackenzie hasn’t found a single case of a man killed by a woman in an alleged “sex game gone wrong”. And sex surveys, advice forums, social media feeds and women’s magazines show the way the practice has become mainstream. “If blindfolds and role play have veered into vanilla territory, there are still plenty of sex moves … like choking,” suggests Women’s Health. “Breath play, the risque new sex practice gripping millennials,” offers Flare. On elitedaily.com, one sex educator was quoted as saying anyone stuck in a sex rut could read up on “how to choke your partner safely”.

    There is no safely. It’s unbelievable and enraging that people are actually advising choking for less vanilla sex. How about just eating a jalapeño or two instead?

    Gail Dines, the feminist thinker and CEO of Culture Reframed, believes strangulation has been normalised via two main routes. “For the men, it’s pornography and for the women, it’s in women’s magazines,” she says. “And both of these media genres legitimise it as a form of ‘play’.” She describes choking as a “number one standard act” on porn sites and says women look to porn to “see what men want and they see choking”.

    Women’s magazines are telling women to get choked. What is this world.

    H/t latsot

  • Kill the rebellious women

    More of the same.

    The country is Argentina.

  • The last person in the line had a gun

    Carole Cadwalladr notes that Theresa May last week belatedly admitted that Russia had turned its fake news firehose on Britain too.

    And then, just a few hours later, I clicked a link on Twitter. It was from Leave.EU’s official account – the Ukip-allied Brexit campaign headed by Nigel Farage. “WATCH @carolecadwalla takes a hit as the Russian conspiracy deepens.”

    Leave.EU is now the subject of two Electoral Commission investigations into potentially illegal sources of funding, the first of which followed an article I wrote in March. They’ve been calling me crazy for months and I thought this would be more of the same. But it wasn’t. The video was a clip from the film Airplane!, in which a “hysterical” woman is told to calm down and then hit, repeatedly, around the head. The woman – my face photoshopped in – was me. And, as the Russian national anthem played, a line of people queued up to take their turn. The last person in the line had a gun.

    So far, so weird. Here was a registered political organisation that had gained the support of millions of law-abiding, well-meaning people, promoting violence against women and threatening a journalist. It was a “joke”. A joke underpinned by violent menace. From an organisation that has also made no secret of its links to the Russian state. Leave.EU’s Twitter account retweets Russia Today and the Russian embassy as a matter of course.

    Two weeks ago, the Russian ambassador to London – Alexander Yakovenko – a key figure named by the FBI as a liaison between Donald Trump’s campaign and the Kremlin – launched an attack on “unscrupulous” MPs and journalists peddling a “fake news agenda”.

    Leave.EU created a meme of his words and tweeted that too. A week later, the press attache to the embassy wrote a letter to this paper, complaining I was a “bad journalist” whose “true colours” had been noted.

    Sinister enough yet?

    Russia simply outright murders journalists.

    Jo Cox was murdered because she opposed Brexit.

    Silencing “bad journalists” and political opponents in Russia isn’t a joke, of course. It’s becoming less of one here too. Facebook facilitates electoral fraud. And Brendan Cox – the widower of Jo Cox– was one of the first to call out the Daily Telegraph for its front page of “Brexit mutineers”. It creates “a context where violence is more likely”, he said, highlighting another Leave.EU tweet which called them a “cancer”.

    That was deleted. But the video of me being beaten stayed up. Twitter – like Facebook – is not a public space. It looks like one and we treat it like one, but it’s a private, corporate entity.

    Twitter doesn’t see videos inciting violence against women as a problem.

    Most people thought Leave.EU’s video was vile. Hundreds of nice, kind, well-meaning strangers offered me messages of support. They reported it. Repeatedly. And still it stayed up.

    It was clearly unacceptable. And yet it was accepted. It remained on a “public” forum – beyond the reach of any law enforcement agency, immune to public opprobrium – for 42 hours. And it did its job: Leave.EU launders extremist content. It tests the ground. It gets unpalatable ideas out into the mainstream – racism, islamophobia, homophobia, death threats to journalists – and it normalises them.

    It did its job: it has coarsened public discourse another inch. It has opened the door for other journalists to be threatened on other stories. It has shown you can make fascistic bullyboy threats. And get away with it.

    Maybe you should be less noisy, a well-meaning colleague suggested. As if I’d committed the journalistic equivalent of wearing a short skirt and asking to get raped. You risk looking biased, he said.

    I’m not biased. I’m furious. I’m boiling with rage. The bullies are winning. Lies are winning. This assault on truth, justice, democracy is winning. And we can’t even see it. That video – created by a British political organisation, facilitated by a global technology platform – will have an impact on other women. On other journalists. It’s another line crossed.

    Twitter stinks.

    H/t Stewart

  • South Africa contemplates a “debate” on rape

    South Africa has its own recent horrific rape-combined-with-mutilation-murder, and there are people who want that too to be a catalyst for outrage and change.

    The gang-rape and murder of a 17-year-old girl in South Africa has triggered expressions of outrage from politicians and calls for Indian-style protests against a culture of sexual violence.

    Anene Booysen was reportedly lured away from her friends and raped by a group of men. She was badly mutilated and left for dead on a building site in the town of Bredasdorp, 80 miles east of Cape Town, and found by a security guard on Saturday morning.

    Hospital staff who fought to save her life were given counselling because of the horrific nature of her injuries, local media said. Before she died, Anene identified her former boyfriend as one of her attackers.

    The former boyfriend certainly makes it interesting. Not stranger rape and murder, not random opportunistic rape and mutilation and murder, but personal, vindictive, possessive, angry rape and mutilation and murder.

    Patrick Craven, spokesman for the Congress of South African Trade Unions, said: “When a very similar incident occurred in India recently, there was a massive outbreak of protest and mass demonstrations in the streets; it was a big story around the world. We must show the world that South Africans are no less angry at such crimes and make an equally loud statement of disgust and protest in the streets.”

    But such a display seems unlikely in a country where rights groups complain that rape has become normalised and lost the power to shock. In 2010-11, 56,272 rapes were recorded in South Africa, an average of 154 a day and more than double the rate in India.

    The same thing is said of DR Congo – rape has become normalized there.

    Lindiwe Mazibuko, parliamentary leader of the opposition Democratic Alliance, said: “It is time to ask the tough questions that for too long we have avoided. We live in a deeply patriarchal and injured society where the rights of women are not respected. Indeed, there is a silent war against the children and women of this country – and we need all South Africans to unite in the fight against it.”

    Mazibuko vowed to table a motion in parliament to debate “the ongoing scourge” and said she would request special public hearings “so that we can begin a national dialogue on South Africa’s rape and sexual violence crisis”.

    Such calls are bemusing to campaigners already working to combat such violence. Dumisani Rebombo, who was 15 when he raped a girl at his school in 1976, is now a gender equality activist. “We don’t need a debate, we need action,” he said. “My take is that more people need to say enough is enough, let’s prevent this in our country. We don’t need more recommendations. We need education. The question of debate is an insult.”

    Really. What is there to “debate”? What is there to have a “dialogue” about? Whether or not rape is bad?

    Maybe Mazibuko just said it clumsily, but clearly Rebombo doesn’t think so. Clearly he thinks South Africa should skip the “debate” and just say Stop.