Turkish court awaits genital recovery

Submitted by Proud_to_be_a_man on Fri, 2009-09-11 15:10

From the tone of the first sentence of this report, it seems the man would be the one to blame if his penis gets cut off. Excerpt:

'Guys, here's a sharp reminder why you shouldn't make your wife/girlfriend/lover angry when you're dead, stinking drunk.

Yahoo new reports on the case of a Turkish woman whose jail sentence hangs on whether or not her former lover regains full use of his penis. Earlier this year the woman had, in a fit of anger, cut off her drunken lover's penis and thrown it from their apartment window.'

Written by some cretin called Mitch Kowalski.

So, using Mitch's logic, a woman should never make a man angry or he's liable to gouge her vagina out with a craft knife. AND it would be her own fault for making him angry?

I think she should be given a stern jail sentence. A 150 years should do it. With maybe 5 years off for good behaviour?

---

Ed.: Letters to the Editor of the National Post can be submitted here.

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

So she gets a harsher sentence if he does not fully recover use of his penis after she cut it off? And why would it even matter to the act she committed? Assault with a deadly weapon is assault with a deadly weapon. Whether he gets use of it back or not has nothing to do with what she intended to do to him.

Yeah, a US or UK court may do the same thing in this case too, as long as the victim was male, of course. Other way 'round, the sentence would have been passed by now had he assaulted her on her genitals with a knife. He'd be in for a good long time if that were the case.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by mcc99 on Fri, 2009-09-11 17:36

The author of this article seems to believe that men deserve whatever they get. If a man's cock gets cut off, then he must have had it coming. Again we men switch responsibility from the female to the male, even if the perpetrator of a serious violent act is a female. Amazing!

The report says nothing about what the man did to enrage his lover/wife/girlfriend. I believe the author is speculating. But I submit that it should not matter. Under American law, it doesn't matter if you insult someone first. If someone attacks you with a weapon, it's still assault and battery with the intention to cause grievous bodily harm.

Whatever the result of the repair-related medical effort is, that should be irrelevant. Since when is a rapist's sentence a function of whether the woman gets pregnant, or whether she has a mental breakdown afterwards? Men are endlessly looking to let women off the hook, looking for ways to prevent them from having to take responsibility for their actions, and this is just another example of that same attitude.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by redwoodwriter on Fri, 2009-09-11 21:21