|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 11:25 PM January 13th, 2005 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
"A jilted woman admitted ripping off her ex-lover's testicle with her hands after he refused to have sex with her." "Monti initially tried to hide the testicle by putting it in her mouth, but released it. Doctors were unable to reattach the organ."
On page 150 of Domestic Violence: The 12 Things You Aren't Supposed to Know Tom James, J.D. writes "The CTS is a survey based measure of domestic violence that was originally developed by Murray Straus over twenty years ago.
On page 156 he continues:
"Between the time the Conflict Tactics Scale was originally constructed and its subsequent revision, the legal definition of rape was broadened and new categories of sex crimes were created that did not necessarily require the penetration of a vagina by a penis. After the concept of sexual assault was thus expanded, the CTS was revised to include measures of sexual assault, defining the term in the broader sense. 682
For the past several years the CTS has included measures of sexual assault and has classified such an assault as a “severe” form of violence. This is as it should be. The CTS should classify an assault on one’s sexual organs as a more “severe” form of violence than things like slapping, pushing, shoving, or calling someone a name. There should be no question but that inserting something (whether it is a penis, a physical object, or something else) into another person’s vagina or anus against that person’s will should be classified as a “severe” form of violence. By the same token, kicking hitting, yanking, or cutting a man’s penis, or testicles should also be considered “severe” forms of sexual abuse. For reasons having only to do with a deeply-rooted tradition of gender bias, however, the latter acts are normally classified--both in the law and in social science research--as “physical,” not “sexual“ assaults. 683
As a result the CTS classifies assaults on male sexual organs as sometimes "mild" and sometimes "severe," whereas all assaults on (or "unwanted" contacts with) female sexual organs are automatically classified as "severe." In this respect, the CTS, as it is currently constructed is actually gender biased in favor of women, not men."
It is ludicrous to think that "unwanted" contact with a female sexual organ could automatically be construed to be as "severe" as what happened to this poor guy, and it is ludicrous to think that this "severe" sexual assault is not considered to be a sexual assault. In America today, “equal protection” and “equal justice” under law are nothing more than insults inflicted on us (on top of our injuries), just because we’re male.
Sincerely, Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:46 PM January 14th, 2005 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
Also notice that *sigh* yet AGAIN "Comedy" is inserted into the story.
The part where a friend hands the guy his testicle and says; "This is yours".
Oh, Ho ho ho ha ha ha, that is SO funny...! (sarcasm)
If a man had just shoved a red hot poker into the valva of a woman, would they have inserted "comedy" into it?? (no pun intended)
I don't just doubt it, I KNOW they wouldn't!
Why is it that every time a man's genitals are injured or mutilated it is some how "funny"? Yet it is tragedy if it is a woman injured in the same way. And notice the more sirious the injury to the male genitals the "funnier" it is.
I still remember the national and local media out-lets having a real 'yuk-fest' over the Bobbit case.
They always play it for laughs.
What the Hell...?!?
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Luek on 01:00 PM January 14th, 2005 EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
I still remember the national and local media out-lets having a real 'yuk-fest' over the Bobbit case
I also remember the Bobbit mutilation incident. Yes, everyone seemed to think it was so damn funny for a man to have his penis cut off by a woman while he was asleep.
I always let it be known to whomever was relating the story that I personally did not find it amusing in the least and considered it a criminal assault which of course it was. And of course the "fix" was in by the defense AND the prosecuting DA during the trial that got the female perpetrator off. They did their bit for advancing the rad fem political agenda...bless their crooked little hearts.
I guess I was a bit ahead of my time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:17 PM January 14th, 2005 EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
That reminds me.
Does anyone else remember the Brazilian womens' group that said that; "if Lorena Bobbit is convicted we will abduct and casterate 100 men."?
I heard that on the national news. But I only heared it once. It was never refered to again.
I think that would fall under the category of "Terrorists".
So much for the feminist assertion that only men are terrorists...,
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 09:17 PM January 14th, 2005 EST (#10)
|
|
|
|
|
If something similar to this had happened to a female, and a man was the perp., the gender feminists would be all over TV and other media screaming that hate crime charges be brought. So why weren't hate crime charges brought against this woman?
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by bigbadwolf3210 on 07:46 AM January 16th, 2005 EST (#11)
|
|
|
|
|
wow, you fellows are a lot more civil than i am...(get ready to hit your sensor button) i'm sorry guys, i wouldn't press charges at all....just let the worthless b*tch out so i can hunt her down and blow her fricken head off her shoulders. this is worse than any straight rape of a woman. if any man raped my daughter or lady friend that is what they would get. i'll make it clear to all who know me that ANYONE who attacks my groin in any way will pay serverly for it. any woman who would attempt this sort of an advance towards me has put herself in the position of a man who is trying to kill me. i am totally against violence but sometimes ya gotta do what ya gotta do. there are certain reasons worthy of jail for me. i am a man of my word and i've been in lockup to prove it. what you have just read in this reply is my own opinion.
bigbadwolf3210
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is strangely believed that Men are never, ever forced to have sex against their will and consent . . . only women are RAPED ! ! !
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by HombreVIII on 08:02 PM January 14th, 2005 EST (#9)
|
|
|
|
|
The reason some people cannot comprehend that is that it takes away women's victimhood. I think there is like a mental block or something preventing some people from seeing the rape of a man by a woman as serious, or even the rape of a man by another man as being as serious as the rape of a woman by a man. I think the rape of a woman by a woman is considered less serious as well, probably a reflection on the phallophobia these people always seem to have.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:33 PM January 14th, 2005 EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
Just thought I'd let everyone know that there is actualy a book out there called;
"101 WAYS TO CASTRATE A MAN".
...it's a JOKE book, though. so see? it's okay. (sarcasm)
Maybe someone should write a book called; "101 WAYS TO RIP OFF A WOMANS" BOOBS". Let's see if THAT one makes it to the "humor" list.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:07 PM January 14th, 2005 EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
You aren't sirious are you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:18 PM January 14th, 2005 EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
>"You aren't sirious are you?"
About what? the book, or that some one should write a book on mutilating women?
If you mean the book; Yes, I'm sirious.
If you mean someone should write an equivilant book about women; then No, I am not sirious. I'm just trying to make a point about the double standard.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by khankrumthebulgar on 06:20 PM January 19th, 2005 EST (#12)
|
|
|
|
|
Nasty little tid bit about Ms. Bobbit. Seems she took a Butcher knife to her Mother also. So much for her not being a violent person. The poster Girl for Male abuse is a violent person.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
Steven Brown writes "... for refusing to have sex with her. Another