jesus fucking christ times 8 million
I would like to direct everyone to this horrible thing that tops pretty much 90% of the horrible things that have sullied my brain for a long while.
In short: A young, married American woman named Jamie Leigh Jones goes to Iraq as a contractor to work for a company called KBR. At some point she is raped by several men, drugged, beaten (to the point where a breast implant ruptures), and then held without consent in some sort of chamber until she agreed to not press charges. Or report what had happened. Or whatever. Lucky for her rapists, laws in Iraq make it perfectly ok for men to rape their co-workers. Yay! Since 2007 Jones has been trying to sue her assailants but unforunately she has lost her case due to various attempts to discredit her.
Go read the articles. I'm just too baffled to really comment like a normal person. For example, people agree she was at least raped. Ok...and probably by more than one person... but maybe not gang raped, so really she's just being a big baby about the whole thing. Right...and I mean look she might have mental problems and probably wasn't even drugged. Just super duper drunk. Which were apparently enough to make the jury and judge question her story and thus say "no" she wasn't "gang raped" which obviously means she shouldn't get any sort of justice from this whole situation.
But I will just say this, because this really makes me want to kick a puppy. Because she might be mentally ill or just super fucking drunk that night, she shouldn't receive justice for what was done to her? Or even if she was just raped by one man, like "just" should even be in that sentence, how does that matter in the slightest? If you kill someone, does the victim's mental health issues or potential drunkenss factor into whether or not you're guilty of murder? Or whether or not your murdering was ok? Or whether or not you should go to jail for that murder? I'm pretty sure people just care if you killed them. Not if the victim was a some sort of floozy. So how is it that rape can be treated so differently when it is so obviously an act of violence? Only using a form of penetration most people find quite pleasureable under normal circumstances? And worse, this was a trial done in the US. We can't even blame the archaic misogyny of the middle east for this. It's all Texas on this one.
God.
Edit: And in case you needed a chaser for that Popov vodka shot of horridness, here is a lovely article written by Hugo Schwyzer on how to talk to little girls about their looks. Although if I may be a little editorial here, I can't remember whether my parents talked about my looks or my intelligence more one way or the other. The comments make it seem like if you emphasize either too much kids get some sort of complex where they feel like they won't be good enough unless their the bestest at that thing. That is obviously something to try and avoid but how do you prevent that? I think I was born with an unhealthy boast of ego but maybe that was just somehow a product of how my parents raised me? Because I don't think they restrained from criticizing me, ever, and I always felt it was constructive, not cruel. They also learned to compliment me, especially after moving to America. You see in Asian culture self-deprication is the default. You always tell yourself how you're not good enough or how you can improve and you never boast about yourself to others. Your own children learn humility first and foremost and to always downplay their own awesomeness. In Chinese culture that's fine. In American culture it breeds low self-esteem and a major inferiority complex. Still, I grew up with both and don't have a crazy complex about either my looks or my academics. But then my parents emphasized more than anything else the importance of failing and moving on. You might not be the prettiest or the smartest but you're damn attractive and damn smart and that's all that matters. Because really, being the best at something won't mean you're a great human being and constantly comparing yourself to others will never help you yourself improve as a person.
In short: A young, married American woman named Jamie Leigh Jones goes to Iraq as a contractor to work for a company called KBR. At some point she is raped by several men, drugged, beaten (to the point where a breast implant ruptures), and then held without consent in some sort of chamber until she agreed to not press charges. Or report what had happened. Or whatever. Lucky for her rapists, laws in Iraq make it perfectly ok for men to rape their co-workers. Yay! Since 2007 Jones has been trying to sue her assailants but unforunately she has lost her case due to various attempts to discredit her.
Go read the articles. I'm just too baffled to really comment like a normal person. For example, people agree she was at least raped. Ok...and probably by more than one person... but maybe not gang raped, so really she's just being a big baby about the whole thing. Right...and I mean look she might have mental problems and probably wasn't even drugged. Just super duper drunk. Which were apparently enough to make the jury and judge question her story and thus say "no" she wasn't "gang raped" which obviously means she shouldn't get any sort of justice from this whole situation.
But I will just say this, because this really makes me want to kick a puppy. Because she might be mentally ill or just super fucking drunk that night, she shouldn't receive justice for what was done to her? Or even if she was just raped by one man, like "just" should even be in that sentence, how does that matter in the slightest? If you kill someone, does the victim's mental health issues or potential drunkenss factor into whether or not you're guilty of murder? Or whether or not your murdering was ok? Or whether or not you should go to jail for that murder? I'm pretty sure people just care if you killed them. Not if the victim was a some sort of floozy. So how is it that rape can be treated so differently when it is so obviously an act of violence? Only using a form of penetration most people find quite pleasureable under normal circumstances? And worse, this was a trial done in the US. We can't even blame the archaic misogyny of the middle east for this. It's all Texas on this one.
God.
Edit: And in case you needed a chaser for that Popov vodka shot of horridness, here is a lovely article written by Hugo Schwyzer on how to talk to little girls about their looks. Although if I may be a little editorial here, I can't remember whether my parents talked about my looks or my intelligence more one way or the other. The comments make it seem like if you emphasize either too much kids get some sort of complex where they feel like they won't be good enough unless their the bestest at that thing. That is obviously something to try and avoid but how do you prevent that? I think I was born with an unhealthy boast of ego but maybe that was just somehow a product of how my parents raised me? Because I don't think they restrained from criticizing me, ever, and I always felt it was constructive, not cruel. They also learned to compliment me, especially after moving to America. You see in Asian culture self-deprication is the default. You always tell yourself how you're not good enough or how you can improve and you never boast about yourself to others. Your own children learn humility first and foremost and to always downplay their own awesomeness. In Chinese culture that's fine. In American culture it breeds low self-esteem and a major inferiority complex. Still, I grew up with both and don't have a crazy complex about either my looks or my academics. But then my parents emphasized more than anything else the importance of failing and moving on. You might not be the prettiest or the smartest but you're damn attractive and damn smart and that's all that matters. Because really, being the best at something won't mean you're a great human being and constantly comparing yourself to others will never help you yourself improve as a person.