Rape, By The Numbers.
A friend says:
After the school shooting right-wingers were actually saying that teachers should have been armed and that would have prevented the massacre. After the movie theater shooting right-wingers were saying that if the audience had guns with them it could have been prevented. Ever notice that when a black youth gets shot they don’t say that he should have been armed cause he could have prevented it?
I’m anti-state, so I don’t agree with the disarming of the people and allowing the state to have a monopoly of violence, however the point here is that right-wingers control the framing of the debate by making it either pro-gun or anti-gun, when they aren’t actually pro-gun, historically they opposed allowing the Black Panther Party to be armed, and they never speak up for victims of racist murder saying that they should have been armed, so let’s not fall into the pro-gun/anti-gun trap, let’s have a more complex dialog about WHO the right-wing wants armed (police and racist white militia types like the Minute Men) and why we should oppose them and why oppressed people have the RIGHT to self-defense “by any means necessary”.
Understanding ‘Hate’ In The Wake Of The Family Research Council Shooting
Wednesday’s shooting at the Family Research Council was a tragedy, and the wounded security guard and others who put themselves in harm’s way to overpower the shooter are indeed heroes. But how conservatives have responded in the shooting’s wake is incredibly disconcerting, an attempt to appropriate a tragedy to cover up the harm caused by their anti-gay views. As FRC readies its “Religious Liberty Under Fire” campaign, the National Organization for Marriage’s Brian Brown has offeredthe most flagrant response, claiming that the use of the term “hate group” is an invitation to violence:
BROWN: NOM has always condemned all violence and vilification connected to our ongoing national debate about the meaning and definition of marriage. For too long national gay rights groups have intentionally marginalized and ostracized pro-marriage groups and individuals by labeling them as ‘hateful’ and ‘bigoted’ — such harmful and dangerous labels deserve no place in our civil society and NOM renews its call today for gay rights groups and the Southern Poverty Law Center to withdraw such incendiary rhetoric from a debate that involves millions of good Americans.
This distortion of reality demands an understanding of the different ways the word “hate” is used. First, it’s important to point out that yesterday’s shooting should be investigated as a possible hate crime. The Family Research Council is a political organization — not a religious one — but it does couch its beliefs in religion. Religion does not justify the anti-gay positions the group has, nor does its extreme interpretation of Christianity in anyway represent what most Christians believe. If the shooter merely objected to FRC’s anti-gay political beliefs, then it probably was not a hate crime, but if the shooter was specifically targeting FRC for being a Christian or heterosexual organization, then it very well could be. FRC claims to oppose all hate crime laws because they “undermine the freedom of speech,” but any argument (like NOM’s) that uses the shooting to victimize all anti-gay Christians relies on the very same principles at the foundation of hate crime laws.
This is terrible and my heart goes out to the guard and his family.
That said, the way conservatives are latching on to this as “proof” of how “hateful” the left is sickens me.
Here are some comments I’ve read on this story this morning:
Well, left wing hate again. The shooter was upset about “conservative” views and was found with a bag labeled with “CHICK FI LA.” hmm, the left and violence, something so common with these leftist vermin.
“Violent young liberals will vicitmize you just because they are bored.”
“Why does the LGBT promote such hate? I hope Holder prosecutes this case as a hate crime…so much for tolerance!”
I guess the Obama campaign’s negative and divisive rhetoric is having the desired effect.
Could this be the result of over-the-top rhetoric against people of faith by our media, many public officials, and liberal bloggers everywhere?
Got to love them liberals ( internal terrorist ) no doubt. they like pushing their agenda. don’t they? wonder who paid the guy? follow the money..
More intollerance from the left.
The amount of projection going on here is astounding, and I’m really getting sick of hearing about the “violent intolerant left”.
This is in reality a horrible isolated incident, I’m going to be keeping an eye on right wing websites and see how they try to spin this as “typical liberal behavior”.
Submitted by a follower who wishes to remain anonymous - Re: Violence is never the answer:
anonymous:
What these people don’t realize you’re saying is that it isn’t just cis hetero white dudes that say “violence isn’t the answer”… just that it’s easy to say it when you’re probably not going to experience violence and if you do the police will believe you and the attacker will be prosecuted and people will feel sorry for you (even if you deserved it).
It’s not easy to say it when, for example, I know if I am raped that many people will not believe me and more people willl blame me and I will be shamed and my rapist probably won’t be prosecuted and people will feel really sorry that his life was ruined by me.
That makes me less likely to say “violence isn’t the answer” and more likely to, for example, punch a guy in the nose.
The group most often ‘avenged’ for violence committed against them is cis hetero white dudes, so it’s easy for them to say violence isn’t the answer. They’re not the ones who are afraid all the time.
Ok I’ve unfollowed abaldwin360. I really can’t stand his bullshit all over my dashboard anymore.
Here’s a thought: Violence is NEVER the answer.
— Sincerely, an immigrant Colombian girl raised in a low-income family who dropped out of high school. (O y Ingles ni siquiera es mi primer lenguaje :)
Had to do the same thing. His girlfriend is downright awful though, if you ask me.
God forbid a woman have strong opinions and stand up for themselves. Yeah that makes them “awful”.
Fuck off.
I think the lesson learned here is that we’ve given up on trying to be the bigger person.
This is news to me. I was not aware that this was the case, but I won’t make that mistake again.
Nonetheless, I disagree with the premise: you lead by example. I think this is quintessential tenet to not only leadership but humanism as a whole.
Good luck with your staggering lack of poise and self control. Maybe I’m wrong… maybe beating the shit out of people works. I wouldn’t know myself and I’ve never seen evidence to prove this to be a viable option.
Look, all I’m saying is that I can not say that violence is NEVER the answer.
I have been in plenty of situations when I was growing up where it was really the only way to go. It happens.
And as far as my “Staggering lack of self control” - you don’t know me, do you?
I was married to a nightmare of an abusive woman for 13 years and never once laid a hand on her in violence. EVEN WHEN SHE PUNCHED ME IN FRONT OF THE KIDS.
As a matter of fact, as an adult, I’ve punched exactly ONE person in the face, and it was my brother because he wouldn’t stop talking to our mom like she was dirt after I told him a good four times to stop.
You can knock it off with the “Staggering lack of self control” bullshit.
Ok I’ve unfollowed abaldwin360. I really can’t stand his bullshit all over my dashboard anymore.
Here’s a thought: Violence is NEVER the answer.
— Sincerely, an immigrant Colombian girl raised in a low-income family who dropped out of high school. (O y Ingles ni siquiera es mi primer lenguaje :)
Thanks for the heads up.
God forbid someone hears someone else joking that they are going to rape someone so they punch them in the face.
THE IDEA THAT VIOLENCE ISN’T THE ANSWER IS TIED UP IN IDEAS OF WHO CAN USE VIOLENCE. Do you know how many times I’ve heard old white dudes in my life say “If Trayvon had just walked away, he would be alive.” Because Trayvon wasn’t allowed to be violent, even though he was the one being followed and he is the one who is dead. A trans* woman of color who fought back against her assaulter is in jail because she reacted violently against people who wanted to kill her.
The idea that non-violence is always right, that responding through violence is always wrong, is really frustratingly tied up in some ways of thinking that discount the need to fight for your safety and your survival.
As thisgingersnapsback pointed out, that man was making a joke about raping an actual person across the street. This is not just about theoretical violence and pacifism, this is about bodies and safety and the reality that some people occupy spaces where the threat of misogynist, racist, homophobic violence hangs over them. And we’re supposed to sit back and judge and say “violence is never ok?”
I’m calling bullshit.
Thank you!!!
Ok I’ve unfollowed abaldwin360. I really can’t stand his bullshit all over my dashboard anymore.
Here’s a thought: Violence is NEVER the answer.
— Sincerely, an immigrant Colombian girl raised in a low-income family who dropped out of high school. (O y Ingles ni siquiera es mi primer lenguaje :)
Thanks for the heads up.
God forbid someone hears someone else joking that they are going to rape someone so they punch them in the face.
Or she could have told him not to joke about it because it’s offensive and not funny. I don’t see why violence in this case was necessary. Violence doesn’t ever really solve anything, that’s why it’s not an “answer.” It’s still ok in cases of self defense or defending someone else when violence is being used against that person.
I’m not unfollowing because I’m up for debate on this, and because I read the post and from what I could understand (it was a little hard to follow) it seems like you only approve of violence as a last resort as well. Correct me if I’m wrong of course
Yes, violence is a last resort, or an extreme measure, but I can not say it is NEVER the answer.
as far as the woman that punched that guy in the face, here is what happened:
I was walking home to my apartment. Bars had already closed, so the city was fairly quiet. Two guys were walking behind me, both looking to be a bit older than myself. I was only a few steps ahead of them when I heard them making calls to the girl across the street who was obviously intoxicated. She quickened her pace and didn’t respond. One of the guys was obviously put off on this and said, “Fucking cunt, I’d take her into the back alley and show her what I’m made of. She won’t even see it coming”, and then proceeded to laugh.
And then I turned around and punched him in the face.
I really don’t think those guys were in the mood to hear, “That joke isn’t funny.”
Ok I’ve unfollowed abaldwin360. I really can’t stand his bullshit all over my dashboard anymore.
Here’s a thought: Violence is NEVER the answer.
— Sincerely, an immigrant Colombian girl raised in a low-income family who dropped out of high school. (O y Ingles ni siquiera es mi primer lenguaje :)
Thanks for the heads up.
God forbid someone hears someone else joking that they are going to rape someone so they punch them in the face.
Cop Kicks Pregnant Woman In Stomach, Dept. Says He Was Within Policy
Just when you thought the police ran out of ways to disgust you.
Dekalb County police officer Jerad Wheeler was called to a home to settle a domestic dispute involving a pregnant woman named Raven Dozier, her brother and his child and baby’s mother.
As things escalated Wheeler pulled out his taser and used it on Dozier’s brother. She says that’s when she started crying and asking the officer why he used a taser on her brother.
Wheeler must not have been in a talking mood because after he used the taser on him, he then kicked Dozier in the stomach.
“I think he really just didn’t want me asking him any questions, questioning him, and when I did question him is when he kicked me,” she tells Atlanta’s Channel 2 Action News. ”I was upset because I couldn’t believe an officer would kick me, with my child in my stomach.”
NYPD officers caught on tape brutally beating black 19y/o. Cops claimed teen had marijuana, a bag containing crack residue, and that he struck first. Now, surveillance video obtained by New York One shows confrontation was unprovoked - and the charges against the teen are false
In January, four NYPD officers were caught on tape brutally beating 19-year-old Jateik Reed in the Bronx. The officers claimed they stopped Reed after seeing him hold marijuana and a bag containing crack residue, and that Reed struck police first. Now, surveillance video obtained by New York One appears to show that the entire confrontation was unprovoked — and that the charges officers levied against the black youth are false.
Reed did not punch officers as they claimed, and Reed’s hands — but no drugs — are clearly visible in the video. What is not clear, however, is where the drugs police must have submitted to evidence came from. In March, Reed’s attorneys told AlterNet that the not-yet-released footage proved Reed did not hit officers or act suspiciously in any way. But they also said that the officers appear to pick drugs up from the ground.
Reed’s attorney Michael Warren told AlterNet the video “clearly indicates two things.”
“Number one,” he said, “That it was a racially contextual stop, because they weren’t involved with any criminal activity whatsoever.” Jateik Reed told AlterNet the stop-and-frisk turned violent when when he threatened to file a complaint to the Civilian Complaint Review Board.
“They told me they don’t care about a lawsuit,” Reed told AlterNet, “My brother has a complaint against them already, and they keep bugging us.” As AlterNet previously reported, neighbors in the Bronx neighborhood where the beating occurred say they are regularly subjected to stop-and-frisk and otherwise harassed by police.
Second, Warren told AlterNet, the video clearly indicates that the drugs police charged Reed with possessing “are a package that the officer picked up off the ground. If you look at the video, nobody — none of [Jateik’s friends] threw anything on the ground.”
TW: Violence - Caught on tape: Chilling new video of US border patrol beating immigrant to death
A new video shows Anastacio Hernadez-Rojas lying on the ground in the fetal position, circled by at least a dozen federal agents as one repeatedly shocks him with an electric stun gun.
The video was shot by a passer-by and was obtained by the lawyer for the Hernandez-Rojas family as they push on with their wrongful death suit against the US government.
The Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) aired the video and an interview with the woman who shot it as part of a new documentary. In May 2010, Seattle resident Ashley Young was crossing a bridge from Mexico to the United States. In the “Need to Know” report, Young said that she saw the man lying on the ground was handcuffed. She said she did not witness any evidence of Hernandez-Rojas lashing out at the agents, but they are clearly heard yelling in the video for him to stop resisting. He was then tasered five times while calling for help in Spanish.
She also said that a small crowd had gathered on the bridge and some yelled for the agents to stop. But the officers came along to tell the onlookers to keep walking. One officer demanded that witnesses hand over their cell phones or delete the video they had taken, she said, but she kept walking. Young told PBS she “felt like she watched someone be murdered.”
Sen. Scott Brown, R-Mass. takes to the Senate floor to implore his fellow GOP colleagues to re-authorize the Violence Against Women Act, briefly sharing his own story of how his life was affected by domestic violence.
Though I support his opponent, Elizabeth Warren, it’s great to see him standing up to this opposition from his own party. Why won’t the GOP reauthorize it? Because it has protections for GLBTQ people and undocumented immigrants. Seriously.
Oakland Police’s press release: would be right at home in the Syrian Information Ministry
From last night’s press release from the Oakland Police Department:
Q. Did the Police deploy rubber bullets, flash-bag grenades?
A. No, the loud noises that were heard originated from M-80 explosives thrown at Police by protesters.
The San Francisco Chronicle begs to differ:
Protesters scattered in both directions on Broadway as the tear gas canisters and several flash-bang grenades went off. Regrouping, protesters tried to help one another and offered each other eye drops.
Moar disinformation:
Q. Did the Police use tear gas?
A. Yes, the Police used a limited amount of tear gas for a small areas as a defense against protesters who were throwing various objects at Police Officers as they approached the area.
Or at protesters who were helping injured people. Or, for just hanging out in the streets, really. Take it away, IBT:
California police resorted to tear gas as many as five times Tuesday, attempting to force hundreds of Occupy Oakland protesters to disperse.
So was it used to make them disperse, or was it used in self-defense? Were flash-bangs used, or were they not used? The videos certainly seem to show that they were used in copious amounts.
This is nonsense. Interim Police Chief Howard Jordan must resign.
(via bluntlyblue)
