Tammy Wynette had no idea. It’s apparently getting a lot harder, and South Dakota’s abortion bill is only the tip of the proverbial ice berg. I’ve been stowing away links related to women’s issues for the past week or so, and trying to find a way to string them together into something with more context than a link dump. I tried, but honestly there’s a point at which my brain just goes numb trying to take it all in.
Imagine for a minute being jailed for refusing to watch a video of yourself being gang raped. Hard to imagine? It nearly happened to to a woman in Illinois.
A judge decided Wednesday not to force a woman to watch a videotape of two men having sex with her as a 16-year-old, a key piece of evidence in the trial of a man accused of raping her.
On Tuesday, Cook County Circuit Judge Kerry Kennedy had threatened to charge the Naperville woman with contempt of court for refusing to watch the tape, a move that drew outrage from victims’ groups and Gov. Rod Blagojevich.
… The confrontation over the tape came during the sexual assault trial of Adrian Missbrenner, 20, one of four men charged in the alleged attack and one of two who was videotaped having sex with the girl, according to prosecutors. He also is charged with child pornography.
I know there’s some connection between that and the South Dakota bill — which even Bush has the good sense to oppose — when I hear the South Dakota bill and it’s lack of exceptions in cases of rape or incest defended with arguments like this.
This is because, of course, that silly old ban doesn’t take into account the fact that the worth of a child is judged by how it was conceived.
But I lack the skills in theoretical jargon necessary to bring it off. It just seems to come down to the sense that the value of the woman in the stirrups (on in this case, on the video) doesn’t get taken into account. Or maybe it’s just one more way that rape is a gift.
And of course, this is happening in a context in which one persons sicko-marriage contract — written by and given complete control of the wife to the husband, of course — may just be a variation on the recipe for a surrendered wife, or someone’s personal spin on biblical patriarchy (if you toss “god” into the contract a few times).
It’s happening in the context of states like South Dakota acting to ban nearly all legal abortion states like Mississippi hinting at the same on one hand, while on the other 33 states have made obtaining birth control harder and more expensive for some women (poor, young, etc.).
(Hat-tips to BlackFeminism.Org, I Blame the Patriarchy, A Religious Liberal Blog, and Faithful Progressive.)
Well at least she didn’t get pregnant too or they’d chain her to a bed while she delivered.
Well, here’s a connection. Make the connection between the Naperville videotape rape case and anti-choice laws that target minors, particularly cases like the
Michigan
baseball bat abortion case which played out from September 2004 to September 2005. Remember that case? It began with a 16 year-old girl and 16 year-old boy who when the girl got pregnant and they couldn’t get an abortion without telling her parents, and they didn’t wan to go through a judicial bypass procedure. So, with the girl’s consent and encouragement, the boy hits her repeatedly on the outside of her abdomen with a miniature baseball bat and she miscarries a couple weeks later, after, by the way, taking a number of falls during powder-puff football. She is found miscarrying by her mother, who calls a hospital for information and is told to bury the miscarried fetus. A teacher finds out at school a short while later, informs the authorities, and a year-long legal inquisition ensues, ending with the boy (and nearly the girl) pleading no contest to “intentional conduct against a pregnant individual resulting in miscarriage or stillbirth” – and nearly a charge of battery, if not fetal murder. And his sentence — two years probation and 200 hours of community service at a local (anti-choice) pregnancy center.
Both cases involve a self-fulfilling, exponentially- and unsustainably-growing spiral of intervention and legal bureaucratic meddling in what should be cared for by private, no fault, and – only in cases involving clear acts of violence with no conscious consent possible – no legal bypass required help and counseling for the parties involved.
In the Naperville videotape rape case, the issue yesterday wasn’t just that she refused to watch the tape, she also refused to answer *any* questions about the tape yesterday, that was why she was threatened with a contempt charge and the defense threatened to call for a mistrial. After she agreed to answer questions about the tape, the defense dropped for now their threat to call for a mistrial.
I want you to know I don’t blame the girl, I think and I think she likely thinks she made a mistake in drinking and partying with these guys, and I’m sure she’s admitted as much to her family and friends. I think though that it’s her family to some extent and the legal system to an ENORMOUS extent that is pressing her into pursuing the case because of her age (16) at the time of the incident
I don’t think that the girl and her family are motivated for money, mind you, they will likely get no more than money for counseling and legal fees IF they win a civil case, and they’re nowhere near that point. It’s people in the legal system and some so-called victim advocates who make money off of this case. The poor woman in this case — now 20, having spent going on four years of her life dealing with the legal system, challenges, and such, like the young woman in the Orange County Haidl case — would have been far better off if this case had never gone to court, and she was allowed to recover and seek counseling in peace.
I don’t know how it (meaning the alleged rape / sex party) ended, but there are two women testifying that she wanted to have sex with at least Missbrenner, did not show signs of distress afterwards but didn’t want to talk about the incident and didn’t get "ill" until she was told there was a videotape AND her parents found out what happened the next day, like in the Haidl case from California. The girl who her family and she, by proxy, allege she was raped — and she claims no recollection beyond throwing up, despite a tape that shows her having fun, somewhat enjoying the beginning of sexual activity and becoming less responsive near the end — it’s only others and that tape which alleges that she had sex with however many boys, and on that she is going through all this now for going on FOUR YEARS — age 16 to now 20 — that’s done more to harm her than the worst spin you could put on whatever happened on the night of that alleged rape.
I do not in my wildest dreams or nightmares think that she or for the most part her family wants her to go through this HELL for FOUR YEARS of her young adult life for the money. I know enough about how these cases work to know that if she ever does win a civil suit, it will be for very little after all the legal fees and possible reduction of award, etc. I do think though that many people with the legal system want her to at least pursue criminal charges, and want the authority to make her and other older adolescent women do so if they deem so. I do think they stand to make a lot of money off of this. I think that this sort of inquisitorial bureaucracy is self-fulfilling and self-reinforcing, and the more people who are involved with it the harder it is to see that the whole system is terribly and in most of these cases inherently flawed and doing more to harm the victim than to help the victim, much less to help society.
I think this case (and others much like it, like the Haidl case in Orange County, California) is a lot like the
Glen
Ridge
rape case from the mid-90s, or the McMartain preschool case from the early 80s. I’m not saying the allegations are entirely false, only that the criminal legal system is not the best way to deal with this for any of the parties involved, maybe especially for the alleged victim. Counseling and providing psychological and psychiatric support is a better way, and one needn’t (and usually shouldn’t) use the hammer of a criminal case to provide it.
to add to your list of scary links related to women’s issues:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/03/02/catholic.town.ap/index.html
story today about domino’s founder wanting to create a city of god in FL where abortion, birth control, porniography, etc will not be allowed.
I never order from Domino’s Pizza b/c I heard a long time ago of the guy’s donations to anti-choice groups, but this idea of his takes the cake. From the article:
"If Domino’s Pizza founder Thomas S. Monaghan has his way, a new town being built in Florida will be governed according to strict Roman Catholic principles, with no place to get an abortion, pornography or birth control.
The pizza magnate is bankrolling the project with at least $250 million and calls it "God’s will."………
Gov. Jeb Bush, at the site’s groundbreaking earlier this month, lauded the development as a new kind of town where faith and freedom will merge to create a community of like-minded citizens. Bush, a convert to Catholicism, did not speak specifically to the proposed restrictions."
Pingback: Peevish
+JMJ
To be quite fair, the comment of mine you posted wasn’t exactly an argument. I’m sure I could provide one, if you’d like.
Alexandria:
"the criminal legal system is not the best way to deal with this for any of the parties involved, maybe especially for the alleged victim. Counseling and providing psychological and psychiatric support is a better way, and one needn’t (and usually shouldn’t) use the hammer of a criminal case to provide it."
Your faux concern for the victim you so casually trash throughout your post doesn’t fool anyone. The text quoted above says it all: you believe rape should be legalized. Well, you must be dancing a jig tonight because your beloved rapists were aquitted.
PS: Telling some random women you are attracted to one man doesn’t give a group of men the right to rape, sodomize, burn, scawl and spit all over you and videotape the acts when you’re passed out or even semi-passed out. Oh wait, they were aquitted so apparently it does give them the right. Rape is legal: You win!