Archive | Women’s Rights. RSS feed for this section

Newlywed woman kills her husband after 8 days of marriage by shoving him off a cliff from behind, and still only gets a second degree murder charge. Because she totally didn’t mean to kill him, right? Lots of people survive being shoved off cliffs. :/

11 Sep

jordan

Jordan Graham, 22 years of age, had been married to Cody Johnson, 25, for just eight days when he “fell” to his death off a cliff located in Glacier Park, Montana.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/10/us-usa-crime-montana-idUSBRE98904Y20130910

Jordan initially spun a web of pure and utter bullshit, and then eventually admitted that oh, oops, she pushed Cody off the cliff. Because they had been arguing and he beat her mercilessly grabbed her arm. To the surprise of no one, including Cody’s family, Jordan is up on murder charges.

glacier-national-park-montana-350x262

Because the crime happened in a federal park, she is not being charged under Montana statutes, but under federal ones, which distinguish between different types of murder.

First degree murder is when a killing is planned and carried out.

Second degree murder is when someone is killed, but it wasn’t planned.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1111

Jordan lied about what happened, pushed Cody FROM BEHIND and most importantly, she left him there to die. And prosecutors don’t think they can make a first degree charge stick?

occam

Occam’s Razor:  the simplest explanation is likely correct.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam’s_razor

Jordan wooed Cody to the edge of the cliff and when his back was turned, she shoved him over.  She planned it.  Picked a good spot and got him to turn his back.

And then he fell for her all over again.

The way we treat people in the criminal justice system is ground zero in the definition of human rights. Justice is blind.  Any time justice sees skin color or class or ability or gender and applies a harsher penalty to some humans on the basis of one of those factors, that human’s basic rights have been violated.

A conviction for first degree murder in the United States carries the possibility of the death penalty.  I don’t agree with the death penalty precisely because it is not applied to ALL humans fairly and equally.

The people most likely to receive the death penalty?

Black men who kill non-blacks.

chart

And that is bullshit.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/death-penalty-black-and-white-who-lives-who-dies-who-decides

Who is least likely to receive the death penalty?

woman

Women.

One percent of men convicted of murder are sentenced to death, while only one tenth of one percent of women convicted of murder are sentenced to death.

http://stratification.wikispaces.com/Group+4-+Gender+Differences+Within+The+Death+Penalty

In general, both the death sentencing rate and the death row population remain very small for women in comparison to that for men. Actual execution of female offenders is quite rare, with only 571 documented instances as of 12/31/2012, beginning with the first in 1632. These executions constitute about 2.9% of the total of confirmed executions in the United States since 1608.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/women-and-death-penalty

Curious silence from the feminist brigade when it comes to making sure men and women are treated equally before the law, no?  In fact, it’s quite the opposite.  Feminists argue that women should not be in jail, period. In the UK, the Women’s Justice Taskforce is making headway in eliminating women’s prisons altogether.

Roma Hooper, director of Make Justice Work, which campaigns to reform short-term prison sentences, said: “The increasing incarceration of women is a disgraceful situation which must be challenged.”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13666066

Well, that’s one way to eliminate gender disparity in sentencing.  Just make sure women don’t get sentenced at all.

Lest anyone think that such a blatantly discriminatory and sexist policy is beyond the tolerance of the government and the British public, it should be noted that it was only last year that British judges were recommended to issue lighter sentences to women offenders, regardless of their offense. That recommendation was issued by the Equal Treatment Bench Book, published by the Judicial Studies Board (JSB).

Yes, that is correct, the Equal Treatment Bench Book recommended that half the population, based solely on sex, should get lighter sentences for the same crimes than the other half.

http://www.avoiceformen.com/misandry/chivalry/it-is-now-suggested-that-womens-prisons-close/

Gee, what can go wrong with that?  Women will really be able to “Lean In” to their criminal careers in the UK, won’t they?  Those two guys who slaughtered Pt. Rigby in broad daylight only need to get their girlfriends to wield the machetes next time.

lee

http://gawker.com/terror-in-london-soldier-hacked-apart-by-machete-wield-509321352

Oh, but wait, women never commit those kinds of atrocities, right?

lady terror

http://www.smashinglists.com/notorious-female-terrorists-aka-girls-with-guns/

Sweet little ole grannies would never hack an intruder to death with an axe, right?  Maybe granny was well justified, but the idea that women don’t engage in brutal bloodshed when provoked is a joke.

http://www.timeslive.co.za/local/2013/07/14/75-year-old-eastern-cape-woman-hacks-intruder-to-death

The question is “what provoked her”?

Mens rea.  It means “guilty mind”.  Criminal intent.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mens_rea

And that really should be the only thing that factors into deciding if Jordan is guilty of first degree murder.  But it’s not.

Jordan is a woman, and therefore she gets a pass.  It begins with not even facing the harshest penalty.  2nd degree murder?  And it will continue right up to conviction and sentencing.

Male violent offenders receive, on average, an additional 4.49 years on their sentences compared to women, while gender differences for property and drug crime (3.14 and 2.35 years, respectively) are considerably lower.

http://digitalcommons.utep.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1001&context=gang_lee (p. 335)

Why is this? Why do women get the pussy pass?  What is the rationale behind lenient sentencing for women, even when they commit the exact same crime as men?

The Chivalry Thesis posits that women are seen as less morally culpable than men, and are therefore treated delicately and absolved of responsibility.

knight

The Chivalry Thesis posits that gendered stereotypes about both women and men influence sentencing outcomes according to the sex of offenders. Sometimes called paternalism, chivalry asserts that women are stereotyped as fickle and childlike, and therefore not fully responsible for their criminal behavior. Women therefore need to be protected by males who, with all due gallantry, are portrayed as wanting to minimize any pain or suffering women might experience.

http://digitalcommons.utep.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1001&context=gang_lee (p.320)

The Chivalry Thesis predicts that women will receive more lenient sentencing for stereotypically female crimes, like shoplifting. The more “feminine” the crime, the more men will feel the need to protect the poor darling, and make sure her sentence doesn’t cause her any suffering. When women commit manly crimes like murder, the Chivalry Thesis predicts that women will be treated harshly because they are violating gender norms as well as the law.

But that doesn’t seem to be the case.  Women get even more lenient sentencing when their crimes are strongly associated with men and masculinity.

So what is going on?  Why do we, as a culture, sentence women more lightly, assuming we can even be bothered to charge and convict them?

Females arrested for a crime are also significantly more likely to avoid charges and convictions entirely, and twice as likely to avoid incarceration if convicted.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/11/men-women-prison-sentence-length-gender-gap_n_1874742.html

It’s tempting to jump on the “women are helpless and never responsible for anything they do” meme because it is so strongly related to feminist thought.  #rapeculture

But disparity in sentencing has been going on for a very, very long time.

Here’s my theory:  it’s a key part of the Myth of Male Dominance aka “patriarchy”.  A word on “patriarchy”, if I may.  At no point in our collective North American history has it ever been acceptable to kill a woman for no reason OTHER than the fact that she’s a woman with two notable exceptions, one of which is not an exception at all, and one of which is a “right” fiercely protected by feminists.

1.  During slavery, it was acceptable to kill a woman if she happened to be black.  In other words, it was acceptable to kill SLAVES.  Men and women alike.

2. It is acceptable, and remains acceptable to this day, to kill women who are not yet born.

http://judgybitch.com/2013/09/08/a-fetus-isnt-a-person-unless-its-a-female-how-to-have-your-cake-eat-it-too-and-blame-the-whole-mess-on-men/

You have to go all the way back to the Salem Witch Trials to find the wholesale slaughter of women, and even then, a sham trial was enacted.  The principle of justice may have been adulterated beyond recognition, but it still held enough sway to convince adjudicators that a “trial” was required.

salem

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salem_witch_trials

Oh, and a shitload of men were killed in Salem, too.

salem men

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_of_the_Salem_witch_trials

I’ve written about this research before, but it’s such a hidden gem of ignored scholarship that I think it’s worth quoting at length again.

http://judgybitch.com/2013/04/14/there-never-was-a-patriarchy-and-there-isnt-one-now-in-related-news-mr-jb-cant-do-shit-without-running-it-by-me-first/

…although peasant males monopolize positions of authority and are shown public deference by women, thus superficially appearing to be dominant, they wield relatively little real power. Theirs is a largely powerless authority, often accompanied by a felt sense of powerlessness, both in the face of the world at large and of the peasant community itself.

…a non-hierarchical power relationship between the categories “male” and “female” is maintained in peasant society by the acting out of a “myth” of male dominance.

The perpetuation of this “myth” is in the interests of both peasant women and men, because it gives the latter the appearance of power and control over all sectors of village life, while at the same time giving to the former actual power over those sectors of life in the community which may be controlled by villagers. The two sex groups, in effect, operate within partially divergent systems of perceived advantages, values, and prestige, so that the members of each group see themselves as the “winners” in respect to the other.

Neither men nor women believe that the “myth” is an accurate reflection of the actual situation. However, each sex group believes (or appears to believe, so avoiding confrontation) that the opposite sex perceives the myth as reality, with the result that each is actively engaged in maintaining the illusion that males are, in fact, dominant.

Now, the reality is that men still overwhelmingly control the justice system in the United States.

Most police officers are men.

police

In 2007, about 1 in 8 local police officers were women, compared to 1 in 13 in 1987.

http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=71

Most judges are men.

judges

State Final Appellate Jurisdiction Courts: 116 women / 361 total (32%)

State Intermediate Appellate Jurisdiction Courts: 316 women / 977 total (32%)

State General Jurisdiction Courts: 2,768 women / 11,049 total (25%)

State Limited and Special Jurisdiction Courts: 1,596 women / 5,072 total (31%)

State Court Judges in the US: 4,711 women / 17,489 total (27%)

http://www.nawj.org/us_state_court_statistics_2012.asp

Most criminal defense lawyers are men.

lawyer

Today women make up 31 percent of practicing lawyers in the United States and just over 20 percent of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) members.

http://www.nacdl.org/Champion.aspx?id=28960&terms=women

Men are very firmly in control of the judiciary, which is an institution of formalized power.  It’s an area where the myth of male dominance plays out – a trade we all make to disguise the fact that women continue to wield a disproportionate amount of the real power.

Feminism is interested in hanging on to all the traditional, informal power of women, and indeed tries hard to formalize that power into laws where women and men’s power intersect:  child custody, divorce and alimony being prime examples, while attempting to wrest formal power from men.

family court

Feminists want both powers:  formal and informal.

Two problems with that little project:

Where does that leave men?

What do you think the world will look like if feminists succeed in making men socially powerless and then humiliating them to boot? Feminists are nowhere near that goal when it comes to the men who command the formal institutions of power, but they have certainly created a world in which men who don’t have access to those formal institutions – meaning MOST men – have indeed been rendered powerless.

The G8 leaders pose for a group photograph at Lough Erne, Northern Ireland

Second problem?  Feminists have not considered what they will be giving up when the “myth” is shattered.

To put it bluntly, they will be giving up the privileges that have always accompanied women, including the right to lenient treatment when sisters go off the fucking rails and shove their husbands off cliffs.

The reason the judiciary is still enmeshed in treating women more leniently is precisely BECAUSE the judiciary is still in the control of men, with the exception of family courts.

The myth of patriarchy ultimately protects women, even the ones who are very, very unworthy of protection.

But it requires a trade.

Given the fact that peasant women actually wield considerable amounts of power, several anomalies remain: both men and women behave publicly as if males were dominant, while at the same time male peasants seem to be characterized by a felt lack of power. I suggested a model to explain these apparent contradictions, in which male dominance is seen to operate as a myth, while a balance is actually maintained between the informal power of women and the overt power wielded by men. Furthermore, the power of both depends on the persistence of the myth, which itself is maintained by a degree of ignorance on the part of both groups as to how the system actually operates.

Ultimately, it comes down to understanding, and respecting one another.  And understanding that when humans fail, men or women, we embrace the myths of our society so we can all keep functioning.

The most important point to be made is that it is only when we stop looking at male roles and forms of power as the norm and begin to look at female arrangements as equally valid and significant, though perhaps different in form, that we can see how male and female roles are intertwined and so begin to understand how human societies operate.

In the case of lenient sentencing for women who are monsters, powerful men send a message to all the other women that they will not be held accountable for the actions of monstrous sisters.  All of which depends on women being, by and large, not terribly monstrous.

Men sentence other men more harshly because they hold them to a higher standard when it comes to respecting formal power, because formal power IS male power.

Modern, liberal feminism has shattered the myth.  Feminists rage and scream and cry at the power men wield in the formal institutions that govern our world, but refuse to relinquish one iota of their traditional informal power.

protest

Of course there is a price to pay for surrendering formal power in favor of informal power.  It means that our sons, our brothers, our fathers, our nephews, our cousins, our friends can be shoved off a cliff and the murderess will face little to no consequence for that.

In return for that sacrifice, we get the protection of men.

Price is what you pay. Value is what you get.

Warren Buffett

It’s really what it comes down to.  Do you value men or do you not?

It’s seems almost obscene to say that valuing men means you are willing to sacrifice a few to murderous women, but in truth, the only obscene thing is that women are prepared to sacrifice those men without giving up any of their own privileges.

protects

Pick one.  Men protect us.  Or they sentence us.

In equal measure.

death penalty

We cannot have both.

Lots of love,

JB

Should a woman in a bikini expect to be taken seriously? No, dipshit. She should not. Neither should a man in a thong.

22 Aug

Thong alert:  some images may be NSFW

Trigger Warning:  Image of Amanda Marcotte

jessica

This is Jessica Rey.  Among other things, she is a swimsuit designer and her website features the catchphrase “Who Says It Has To Be Itty Bitty?”. Her swimsuits look like this:

rey 1

rey 2

rey 3

They’re so cute!  They’re also mostly sold out.

http://www.reyswimwear.com/

I imagine there are many reasons some women prefer one-piece swimsuits over the itsy bitsy teeny weeny bikini kind, but Jessica has a pretty specific reason for offering women her stylish and more modest designs.  Jessica, you see, appears to believe that women who dislike being treated like gobs of walking meat should perhaps consider not presenting themselves as gobs of, well, walking meat.
laugh

Oh, Jessica, you silly little goose!  I mean really now.  Come on.  That’s too ridiculous! What a riot!  Who believes that?  Who actually thinks there is some sort of relationship between what you wear and how you are perceived?

amanda

Not Amanda Marcotte.  Oh, I know. She doesn’t like thongs and yoga pants, but that was AGES ago!  Thongs are out, bikinis are in!  It’s fashion, people.  These things tend to change, and opinions change with them.

http://judgybitch.com/2013/03/27/%EF%BB%BFladies-you-can-wear-anything-you-like-except-yoga-pants-and-quit-with-the-thongs-you-porny-whores/

Both Jessica and Katelyn Beaty think that if women want to be taken seriously they should consider dressing to reflect that desire.

Here, there is freedom for individual women to practice modesty not primarily to preserve men’s sexual purity, but to preserve their own dignity. To show in outward form the inward truth that they matter to society for their minds, their leadership, their passions, and their talents—talents that have nothing to do with how many heads they can turn. Modesty can become a form of female power.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2013/08/21/modesty_and_female_power_the_one_piece_bathing_suit_isn_t_going_to_get_women.html?wpisrc=flyouts

Rather than debate the efficacy of modesty, which I really don’t care about, let’s talk about how these standards apply to ALL THE HUMANS.  Oh, I can hear you sighing already.  We have to talk about ALL the humans?  Even the boy ones?  Again?

Ugh.

Amanda says:

The mere fact that women’s modesty is constantly being debated is evidence enough that women aren’t yet equal. If we want women “to be taken seriously,” we should, umm, take them seriously, and stop linking dignity to fabric.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2013/08/21/modesty_and_female_power_the_one_piece_bathing_suit_isn_t_going_to_get_women.html?wpisrc=flyouts

Well, props to Amanda for getting at least one thing right.  When it comes to dressing with dignity, women are definitely NOT equal to men.  They are way, way beneath them, and ladies like Amanda would like to keep them there.

Of course, that’s just a generalization.  Men can fail at the whole dignity thing, too, and when they do, feminists will be first in line to mock them.

Pop Quiz for Men: have you ever taken surreptitious shots of women’s assets when you are out and about in public spaces?

ass

You fucking creep.  You’ve probably never been laid.  You live in your mother’s basement, don’t you? You’re a disgusting pervert and you should be arrested for violating…. …. Well, I don’t know what, but SOMETHING!  And one guy actually was.

Thanks to a tip from a group of anonymous Redditors who are sick of seeing the CreepShots community gleefully post teen upskirt photo after teen upskirt photo while telling the “internet morality police” to “fuck off” and stop ruining their fun.

http://jezebel.com/5949379/naming-names-is-this-the-solution-to-combat-reddits-creepshots

Pop Quiz For Jezebel:  Have you ever published shots of men’s assets, taken without their knowledge or consent, either to drool over them or mock them?

jeggings-for-men

http://jezebel.com/photographic-evidence-of-why-men-should-never-wear-jegg-1053182772

hammer

http://jezebel.com/5992630/ten-questions-for-jon-hamms-penis

Ha ha ha! You rock, Jezebel!  That is so funny and edgy and cool and look at those two penises!  I love your double standards! They’re so …. hypocritical?

angry

So let’s talk about appropriate attire, double standards and the art of being taken seriously.  I’ll preface everything I am saying with the caveat that I DON’T REALLY CARE WHAT YOU WEAR, but I do expect you to own your choices.  You don’t get to dress in a deliberately provocative manner and then scream when you provoke a reaction.  Whatever that reaction happens to be.

You want to wear this?

racist-lincoln-tee_design

Go right ahead.  At your all white sorority, it’s probably a screaming riot.  Go out in public, and expect to get your ass whooped, and justifiably so. Boo hoo. Consequences.

There is a very simple reason women are disproportionately treated as sex objects while men are not:  women are far more likely to ACT AND DRESS LIKE SEX OBJECTS. When you dress in a manner that puts your sexuality front and center, expect to be treated as if your sexuality is your defining feature.  YOU ARE THE ONE DEFINING IT.

Sorry, lots of all ALLCAPS screaming today, but whether or not a woman is perceived as being sexual first and foremost depends on what she is wearing and how she presents herself AND THE SAME FUCKING STANDARDS APPLY TO MEN.

Oh hello, doctor!

sexy doctor

Chef Wowza!  How ya doing?

A man in a chefs outfit with a rose in his mouth

Ooh, officer.  Is that a gun in your holster or are you just happy to see me?

cop

You can frame my walls, baby.

sexy-construction-worker

Oh, dude.  No.  Just put it away.

thong

Men can show up at work in any of these outfits.  They are incredibly unlikely to do so, and if they do, you can be pretty sure they will be fired on the spot.  In the dubious event they are actually permitted to do their jobs, who thinks they will be treated with gravity, dignity and respect?

Women who go to work wearing this:

women sleeveless

Will get all the same respect as a man wearing this:

men sleeveless

This mechanic can work on my car:

mechanic

So can this one:

girl mechanic

Both of them will remain in my mind as meat because their chosen attire has requested that I see them as human meat for my viewing pleasure.

This mechanic doesn’t want to viewed as a walking sex toy.

mech 1

Neither does this one:

mech 2

Only one of the four mechanics above is likely to scream and thrash and cry that she is being objectified and denied her humanity and sexualized.

It mystifies me.  It really does.  What is the point of wearing clothing and accessories deliberately designed to enhance your sexuality and then screaming that the only thing anyone ever values you for is your sexuality?

The honest truth is that UNLESS you consciously and knowingly put forth your sexuality as the aspect of yourself you most want people to see and value, they won’t!  Men, for example, notice a woman’s EYES AND SMILE long before they notice her rack.  Unless she’s shoved her puppies into a push-up bra and left her shirt half undone.

secretary

Women, too, will notice a man’s EYES AND SMILES before they check out his height and they will almost never notice his package because men TEND NOT TO DISPLAY THEIR DICKS overtly.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2398812/Men-notice-womans-eyes-smile-breasts-according-research-Murine.html

You can be sure if crotch cleavage ever becomes popular, women’s eyes will be traveling to the crotch area pretty rapidly.

man-cleavage

Crotch cleavage will NOT becoming a trend anytime soon. Know why?  Because it’s ridiculous. Absurd.  Stupid.  It invites people to dismiss the man displaying his MagicJohnson as an idiot.  Someone not really worthy of respect or admiration.  Really?  Your dick?  That’s what you have to offer?  That’s how you want to be defined?

How is it that men seem to get this, while women do not.  If you dress to emphasize your sexuality you are implying that your sexuality is what you have to offer.  Not your skills, or talents or passions or even your conscientiousness.  Put your tits front and center, and you will be valued for your tits AT YOUR OWN REQUEST.

bikini

If you want to wear a bikini at the beach, go right ahead.  Wear it anywhere you like.  But understand that walking around virtually naked is not going to lend any help if your goal is to be taken seriously.  As if you have something to contribute other than your ass.  Assuming of course, you DO have something other than that to offer.

Men at the beach wearing this can expect a certain reaction.

Businessman Promote New Mobile Phone Network on The Serpentine

It’s unlikely to involve respect.  Is there a man alive who doesn’t understand that?  Show up at the office pool party wearing this:

man thong

And you have just blown your career straight to hell.  Unless you’re an underwear model. Or a porn star.  And ladies, show up at the office pool party in a string bikini, and expect the exact same response.

The alternative is NOT a burkha.  Bullshit.  Jessica Rey has provided lots of alternatives.  The world is full of alternatives.  All it takes is for women to understand that what you wear CAN and WILL have an effect on those around you.  Not all those effects will be positive.

Sexuality at work is a powerful thing. No doubt about it.  But ladies, if you are going to wield that sword for your benefit, understand the blade cuts both ways.

http://judgybitch.com/2012/12/06/hey-career-ladies-sex-your-way-to-the-top-and-if-that-doesnt-work-sue-the-bastards-for-sexual-harassment-2/

Now go put some fucking clothes on.

Lots of love,

JB

Two trailer park boys go round the outside, round the outside…

19 Mar

What do you think of this?

cheer

Two cheerleaders in the Bensonville “rape” case were found guilty and will now face imprisonment and a lifetime membership on the Registered List of Sex Offenders. That is a tragedy for the girls, for justice and for the victims of actual rape.  As we go through this case, ask yourself who benefits from this verdict, and why.

http://www.cnn.com/

Most of the facts in this case seem relatively incontrovertible:  a young man, 125 lbs soaking wet, who was not part of the regular social group, went to a cheerleader’s party, in a town mad for cheering as a sport, got trashed out of his mind, voluntarily accompanied two of the most popular cheerleaders to another party, passed out and then got treated like a joke of a man-whore.

passed out

http://judgybitch.com/2012/12/18/a-shit-faced-drunk-girl-a-football-star-and-a-vigilante-feminist-the-makings-of-a-fairy-tale/

In a moment of mind-numbing stupidity, the girls opted to film their “assault” on the boy, which involved pulling down his pants and masturbating him to erection while he was passed out.  Rather than leave him in a ditch somewhere, they dragged him around to different locations, none of which had any adult supervision.

What the fuck, Bensonville?  Where are all the goddamn grown-ups?

The law in Nevada states that ANY non-consensual sexual contact, however slight, constitutes rape.  Let’s start there.  Comparing a stupid, drunk, pom-pom chasing boy-slut who got handled while passed out to an actual rape victim is completely and utterly absurd.

This is rape:

http://www.monitor.co.ug/artsculture/Reviews/What-it-means-to—-Be-a-male-rape-victim/-/691232/1436252/-/12xdrrk/-/index.html

So is this:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/scott-de-buitleir/male-rape-the-resilient-taboo_b_1912887.html

And this:

http://goqnotes.com/296/male-rape-victim-shares-his-story/

Comparing those cases, or any of the other truly brutal rapes to what happened in Bensonville is comparing this:

fender

To this

crash

Anyone who stood around moaning that the slight fender bender they got into at the mall is comparable to a fiery, multiple car crash on the interstate would immediately be dismissed as the most self-absorbed narcissist lacking any kind of empathy or perspective.  We have a word to describe people like that:  we call them assholes.

Now, the boy in Bensonville takes full responsibility for his decision to follow copious amounts of vodka shooters with a whole lot of beer.  He’s not blaming anyone for “making him drink”.  Even so…. just because he was skirt-chasing while drunk doesn’t mean the skirts had the right to humiliate him by taking cock-shots, right?

The most telling thing about this whole case is that multiple people saw the wanna-be-cheer-pimp passed out and dragged about by a couple of bitchy cheerleaders, and make no mistake, those ladies behaved shamefully.  Part of having the adulation and admiration that comes along with being a small town cheerleader is not to abuse that power when the little wanna-bang-a-cheerleader lotharios come a-calling, and those girls failed.

cheer2

Punishment>crime

That boy had no friends at the party, not one person had enough respect for him to step in, he was not part of the social tribe and there is no way in hell he did not know that.  He went to that party to nab himself a cheerleader, and lo and behold, the cheerleaders didn’t really like such an obvious grasp at their glory.

Find yourself another wagon to hitch to, little star.

wagon

The saddest thing is that the girls sobbingly admit that they ruined his life! They are accused of having “no moral code”!  Oh, and the boy had an impeccable one, did he?

RUINED HIS LIFE?!?!

Are you fucking kidding me? The girls are going to jail!  They will be registered sex offenders!  They are convicted criminals! One night of behaving like bitches will follow them the rest of their lives, and HIS LIFE IS RUINED?

jail

His life is not ruined in the slightest.  LittlePimp is free to go about his life, getting as drunk as he likes, chasing after any gorgeous girl he likes, and securing criminal convictions against women who treat him like the skirt-chasing party boy that he is.

drunk

God help the cheerleaders at whatever college campus he ends up on, and no doubt LittlePimp will get back on his feet after suffering a little humiliation and continue on with his life because HE’S RUINED.

The young women in this case will never escape the disgustingly unfair consequences of a night of acting like stuck-up cunts, while the young man will carry on, and probably come to find the night the cheerleaders took pictures of his dick to be pretty hilarious, because that tends to be what guys do.  They get the fuck over this kind of shit, and understand they have some responsibility for what happens to them when they’re drunk.

http://judgybitch.com/2012/10/22/54/

You know what we need?  We need a Drunk Pimp Registry. If sex offenders are registered for the protection of all men, then why not register drunk pimps for the protection of all women?  It’s true that women could protect themselves by not acting like bitches, but combine small-town celebrity with lots of alcohol and no adult supervision, and you WILL get women acting like assholes and men acting like sluts.

When we only punish one side on that equation, we have a serious cultural problem. Women are held to account for their irresponsible decisions made while young and stupid and drunk, but men are not? Most crimes acknowledge explicitly that mitigating circumstances create different categories of crime with correspondingly progressive punishments.  Why is rape different?

The punishment these girls face, which will be in effect for THE REST OF THEIR LIVES is way out of proportion to the “crime”.  The definition of rape in Nevada is so broadly defined that the act of being a bitch is now as serious as the act of fucking a man forcibly and against his will. And if you don’t think there is a material difference between getting handled and getting fucked, you are probably a retard.

Getting drunk and chasing after cheerleaders demonstrates a level of stupidity and disrespect for the humanity of the women in question (who are valued only for their status and beauty), and that disrespect was returned.  But only the girls are held responsible for that.

shame

I say bullshit.  No one got raped in Bensonville.  Someone got humiliated, and he participated willingly and readily in his own humiliation.  Turning stupid decisions made by high-school students into criminal acts with consequences that will follow only ONE party for their rest of their lives is deeply unfair, and when taking cock-shots of a lounge lizard at an alcohol fuelled party is put in the same category as violent sexual assault, the real victims are drowned in a chorus of pathetic mewlings of men who didn’t get to bag the star.

Who thinks that if the young man had woken up the next morning next to the cheerleader, her arms wrapped around him in a loving embrace, he would have considered a few dick shots the price he had to pay to land the big fish?

embrace

Bensonville:  sour fucking grapes.

sour grapes

Not just sour, bitter, too.  But only for the women.

How is that justice? Who is served when those girls are locked up?  Who is protected?  Who wins?  How ironic is it that the adults who were NOT present to lend some sanity to what their own children were up to are now fully involved to make certain only the girls are punished?

People make stupid decisions.  They act like idiots. They treat other people with a lack of respect.  They behave shamefully.  It happens. Holding girls, and only girls responsible, moves justice from being blind to being blatantly sexist. When justice can only see one sex as guilty, it’s time to put out her eyes again.

blind

In what world do you think this would happen?  Show me the girls in jail for this kind of behavior.

Does.

Not.

Happen.

Justice?  I don’t think so.  More like bullshit.

Lots of love,

JB

%d bloggers like this: