Author: has written 240 posts for this blog.

Return to: Homepage | Blog Index

203 Responses

  1. Katherine
    Katherine October 29, 2012 at 1:01 pm |

    “Now you’ve learned a Very Important Lesson About Friendship,”

    Oh god, that would be the worst My Little Pony episode ever.

    1. William
      William October 29, 2012 at 2:50 pm |

      My Little Pony, Friendship is Magic S6E17 “Know Your Place”: Applejack learns the value of rape apologism and the true meaning of gender.

      1. Brittany
        Brittany November 13, 2012 at 7:34 pm |

        We thought the same thing! Only in my imagining it was Pinky Pie.

        http://twobatteredwomen.blogspot.com/2012/09/my-little-pony-assault-is-magic.html

  2. EG
    EG October 29, 2012 at 1:12 pm |

    Well, the More You Know.

    “If you hadn’t been there, this wouldn’t have happened to you.” Great all-purpose advice. Applicable to all possible situations, really. It’s a lucky for the judge that she can see into the future and thus pick the best possible place to be in every instance.

    1. NC73
      NC73 October 29, 2012 at 2:07 pm |

      “He put his hand up my skirt and touched me.”

      “But it was just as much your fault as his! You were there!”

      “What? No, he…he just approached me and…”

      “And how did he approach you? Because YOU WERE THERE.”

      “Well yeah, I was there, and now I’m here, but I hardly see how that implicates me in this. He did the touching.”

      “Well, what business did you have being there, with him? You knew there were men there, right? Men with hands?”

      “Well of course, but I didn’t do anyth–”

      “Do you not understand me? Of course you did something. You EXISTED. In a place. With other people who exist. And you did it while having – and I can not stress this enough – a VAGINA. Don’t you get it now?”

      “OK, yeah, I see your point.”

      ^^no conversation that has ever happened.

      1. ellie
        ellie October 29, 2012 at 2:13 pm |

        men with hands, pfft.

      2. Dominique
        Dominique November 3, 2012 at 7:56 pm |

        Gold. Must frame and disseminate.

  3. kungfulola
    kungfulola October 29, 2012 at 1:12 pm |

    “When you blame others, you give up your power to change,” Hatch said that her mother used to say.

    I find that an interesting thing to throw in there, because it shows how completely the judge buys the fallacy that all parties in this situation have equal power (and therefore equal responsibility). I bet the judge is one of those people who is allergic to the word “victim”, too.

  4. duck-billed placelot
    duck-billed placelot October 29, 2012 at 1:13 pm |

    This was, clearly, a horrifying example of high-placed victim blaming. The story doesn’t end there, though:

    “I apologize to the victim for any additional anguish my comments may have caused,” the judge wrote in her statement. “It was never my intention to make a situation worse for any victim. I have learned an important lesson and will apply what I have learned to future cases, to ensure that the rights and views of all victims are heard and respected.”

    I thought it was pretty great that there was so much immediate public outcry that the judge had to publicly apologize.

    1. Li
      Li October 29, 2012 at 2:01 pm |

      Well, I’m glad someone got to learn an important lesson…

      1. Bagelsan
        Bagelsan October 30, 2012 at 3:28 pm |

        Maybe the judge should be more careful about what benches she hangs out at; she might learn a lesson!

    2. Freemage
      Freemage November 2, 2012 at 6:10 pm |

      Sadly, while she apologized, she swapped out her Victim-Blaming Bingo Card for a Not-Pology Bingo Card. Note that she never acknowledges that the sentiment behind her comments is, in fact, horrifically wrong-headed and hateful. She merely accepts that, in theory, some people’s feelings might get hurt, and that would be a bad thing.

      Given that worrying about how people (in this case, Officer Molester) ‘feel’ about things is, in large part, how she got into this mess, I’m not sure it’s going to have a positive effect on her jurisprudence.

      1. msgd
        msgd November 4, 2012 at 10:34 pm |

        How can you not think she acknowledge that she was wrong, and how can you question whether it will have a positive effect on her jurisprudence?

        I have learned an important lesson and will apply what I have learned to future cases, to ensure that the rights and views of all victims are heard and respected.

        Isn’t this directly and explicitly acknowledging that her previous position was wrong? She says she has learned a lesson and will change her future rulings because of it. She literally explicitly says what you are complaining she didn’t say. I am confused. What kind of apology do you want?

  5. djiril
    djiril October 29, 2012 at 1:15 pm |

    “When you blame others, you give up your power to change,” Hatch said that her mother used to say.

    Change what? The fact that you have a social life?

    1. William
      William October 29, 2012 at 2:52 pm |

      Ain’t it nice when they finally get down to brass tacks?

  6. Judge tells assault victim that this is what she gets for going to a bar | Love, Ashley

    [...] Source Rate this:Share this:EmailFacebookStumbleUponTwitterDiggLike this:LikeBe the first to like this. This entry was posted on October 29, 2012, in Discuss. Bookmark the permalink. Leave a comment [...]

  7. Ashley
    Ashley October 29, 2012 at 1:20 pm |

    So frustrating. I had to reblog this.

  8. Victoria
    Victoria October 29, 2012 at 1:36 pm |

    When are they going to start telling banks they shouldn’t have had all that money (and advertised they had it! for goodness sakes!) for the bank robbers to steal?

    Or the dude that got mugged that he shouldn’t of been walking on that side walk?

    Or a home owner that they shouldn’t have had such an appealing house for that arsonist to burn it down?

    Why is it only women who are responsible for the crimes committed against them?! (I know why ass-hats think that, it was a rhetorical question)

    1. EG
      EG October 29, 2012 at 1:53 pm |

      My favorite is that when we’re drunk, it’s obviously our fault for being drunk. When he’s drunk…it’s still our fault, for not anticipating the natural actions of drunk men, which they obviously can’t be held responsible for. Basically, if anybody is drinking alcohol anywhere any time…it’s the woman’s fault.

      1. Lolagirl
        Lolagirl October 29, 2012 at 4:00 pm |

        For serious. Men get treated like impetuous children who still haven’t learned the basics of impulse control, while we women are supposed to continue policing them like we are their mommies. Because boys just can’t be expected to ever learn how to control their sexual “urges” even once they become adults.

        1. Partial Human
          Partial Human October 29, 2012 at 4:46 pm |

          Yeah, god forbid we tell rapists/perpetrators of sexual assault “STOP IT, OR YOU GO TO PRISON”

          Easier to tell girls and women “Stop leaving the house you dumb whores, you’re causing trouble for men”.

          it’s lucky I’m physically unable to leave the house, because there’s a hurragecane brewing in me.

  9. Attackfish
    Attackfish October 29, 2012 at 1:51 pm |

    Yes, what the judge did was wrong, but women really do need to be more careful not to bring their vaginas out in public. Or at home. Or near men. Or other anybody. Or, sometimes you think you’re alone, but you’re not, you know what? Why do these women even have vaginas? Wait, not having a vagina is no protection? Take a self defense class or something.

    1. damigiana
      damigiana October 29, 2012 at 4:58 pm |

      At least she should have the elementary sense of leaving her vagina home when going to a bar. I’m sure she’ll be more mindful in the future.

      1. Amelia the Lurker
        Amelia the Lurker October 29, 2012 at 10:35 pm |

        There was a Wanda Sykes routine based on that premise…Youtube “detachable pussy.”

  10. NC73
    NC73 October 29, 2012 at 1:58 pm |

    “Hatch told the victim and the defendant that no one would be happy with the sentence she gave, but that finding an appropriate sentence was her duty.”

    Because a judge’s job is to appease the desires of convicted criminals, right? I mean, really, this is all about compromise. Nobody’s perfect. It’s not like she was there to, you know, pass judgment against anyone or anything.

    Oh, no, wait, sorry, what I mean is she is literally a judge and that was exactly her job. My bad.

    1. Anon21
      Anon21 October 29, 2012 at 4:01 pm |

      Because a judge’s job is to appease the desires of convicted criminals, right? I mean, really, this is all about compromise. Nobody’s perfect. It’s not like she was there to, you know, pass judgment against anyone or anything.

      I think most of the judge’s comments were awful, victim-blaming garbage, and that the sentence she imposed was too light. But I don’t see anything wrong with the statement that finding an appropriate sentence was her duty. The judge’s job is not to “appease the desires of convicted criminals,” but neither is it to impose the sentence that the victim wants. It’s to arrive at a sentence sufficient, but not greater than necessary, to achieve the goals of punishment.

      1. Anon21
        Anon21 October 29, 2012 at 4:19 pm |

        To be clear: the story doesn’t seem to indicate that the victim in this case requested any particular sentence. That remark about not imposing the sentence that the victim wants was meant as a general comment on sentencing, not the sentence in this particular case (which does seem too lenient to me).

        1. umami
          umami October 31, 2012 at 5:18 pm |

          . For example, an offender is presumably going to feel bad (scared, angry, sad) about any sentence of incarceration. But for almost every sex offense (the exceptions I can think of would be something like first-time indecent exposure, depending on circumstances), the just punishment will be a sentence of some incarceration.

          Wow. This is edging on an actual acknowledgement that worrying about whether a sex offender is “happy” with his sentence is a wacky priority to have.

          Perhaps you should have a think about what motivated you to write screeds and screeds and endless fucking screeds to derail the person who originally made that simple point. And then keep writing them even though you said you were going to stop several comments and several hundred words ago.

          And then have a look at the context in which you posted your endless repetitive rambles. And at the multiple angry comments telling you it was an inappropriate context for you to do that. And ask yourself why you kept going.

          And then feel some fucking shame.

          For crying out loud.

        2. umami
          umami October 31, 2012 at 5:21 pm |

          I screwed up the threading… Sorry to have made reading this subthread an even less fun experience!

      2. umami
        umami October 29, 2012 at 4:28 pm |

        It’s the implication that the perpetrator being happy with the sentence is a valid concern for a judge to have. And that it is somehow an equivalent consideration to the victim’s feelings. As if she was there to mediate a dispute with fault on both sides, rather than sentence a criminal who isn’t actually supposed to be happy about it.

        At least, that is why I find the quote unreasonable and ridiculous.

        It’s a bit weird that you focus on and defend the inoffensive part of the quote in your response. There’s a brand of commenter that crops up in here that just seems to be flailing for any possible disagreement. “I can’t deny that this is bad but you’re getting angry about it wrong!”

        Probably good to avoid being that guy.

        1. Partial Human
          Partial Human October 29, 2012 at 5:01 pm |

          +1

          I couldn’t give a flying fuck at an airborne doughnut, about the pwecious feelings of a man who feels he has the god-given right to any woman’s body.

          The fact that it’s yet another cop is just the shit-covered cherry on top of the fail sundae.

        2. NC73
          NC73 October 30, 2012 at 11:20 am |

          It’s the implication that the perpetrator being happy with the sentence is a valid concern for a judge to have. And that it is somehow an equivalent consideration to the victim’s feelings. As if she was there to mediate a dispute with fault on both sides, rather than sentence a criminal who isn’t actually supposed to be happy about it.

          Yes, exactly this. Thank you for saying it so much more eloquently than I was able! *must learn that internet sarcasm does not always pay off*

      3. Anon21
        Anon21 October 29, 2012 at 4:55 pm |

        I don’t want to be any particular guy, but I do have strong feelings that we punish way too much in our society. I don’t really care if you frame it in terms of the convicted offender’s being “happy” with the sentence or not, but I absolutely do think a sentencer should take the offender’s interests into account. If we adopt as a principle that the criminal has no legitimate interest in a shorter length of sentence, it’s easy to justify any sentence at all, so long as it doesn’t impose too much of a burden on the state.

        And yeah, I think a just sentence is a “compromise,” often between the victim’s desire for revenge or for recognition of the harm that’s been inflicted, society’s desire for vengeance and protection from future crimes, and the offender’s desire not to be harmed by excessive punishment. The judge in this case placed way too much emphasis on the offender’s interests, apparently because he was a police officer. To me, that cuts the opposite way: it’s an aggravator. But I don’t think that that indicates that the whole concept of sentencing as a compromise between legitimately differing interests and values is a bad one.

        1. umami
          umami October 29, 2012 at 5:08 pm |

          Ok, so to cut through your no doubt very interesting thoughts about criminal justice in the abstract and focus on the actual quote being discussed: you actually do think that worrying about the offender “being happy” about his sentence and that framing his feelings as being of equal concern to the victim’s feelings is completely reasonable, and that that quote is reasonable.

          And I think that’s completely and self evidently ridiculous, and I do wonder why you chose to defend the inoffensive part of the quote– but okay! Nothing to discuss there.

        2. amblingalong
          amblingalong October 29, 2012 at 5:37 pm |

          Ok, Anon, and I agree with you, but this isn’t really the appropriate place for that argument. Yes, the way we approach incarceration has problems, but when you take a story like this and turn it into a conversation about sentencing, it comes across to a lot of people (I think) as deflecting attention from the bad actors here (the judge, the police officer). It’s like, if in a conversation about the disproportionate incarceration of young black men, you write a post saying “but some young black men are super bad criminals and deserve to be incarcerated!”

          It’s true, perhaps, but in the context of the thread it seems disingenuous. I actually sympathize, because this is a habit I have to work really hard to break- I think it comes from having issues you care deeply about, and wanting to talk about them. But it doesn’t come across that way.

        3. Lolagirl
          Lolagirl October 29, 2012 at 5:39 pm |

          but I do have strong feelings that we punish way too much in our society.

          Nope.

          Do some research before you go spouting off with your pathetic assplaining. The crime of rape is more often than not a crime that goes completely and utterly unpunished. If there is any sort of criminal punishment meted out to the offender, more often than not it leans too much towards leniency for the poor guy who just couldn’t control himself enough to keep it in his pants than it does towards throwing the proverbial book at him.

          Furthermore, how about you spare us your rape apologism and sympathizing with poor widdle rapists being treated so meanly and so unfairly by the justice system? Because so far you sound like you clearly have not one iota of a clue as to what you are talking about and far too much sympathy for rapists.

        4. Anon21
          Anon21 October 29, 2012 at 5:49 pm |

          Look, if there hadn’t been a specific taking of issue with the one reasonable thing the judge actually said, I certainly would not have brought the issue up. I didn’t pop in here to support the Dishonorable Judge Hatch, and this case strongly suggests to me that she’s not fit for the bench. But I feel like in these cases, there can be a tendency to expand the condemnation past the many unreasonable, completely awful, victim-blaming things that were said to the one thing that should be unobjectionable. Having registered my views, I’ll stop pressing the point.

          But no, Lolagirl, I haven’t engaged in “rape apologism” by saying that generally, sentencing should take the interests of offenders into account. If any questioning of any practice related to the sentencing of sex offenders is “rape apologism,” then so too is saying “sex offenders should not be sentenced to death” (or even “no offenders of any kind should be sentenced to death”).

          And while I’m well aware that rape and other sexual crimes are under-punished in the aggregate, you have to distinguish between insufficient enforcement, which is not closely related to sentencing (unless you wholeheartedly endorse general deterrence) and insufficient punishment for those who are caught. As to some categories of sexual crimes, including the kind described in this article, I think it’s probably completely true that many offenders receive sentences that are too lenient. Certainly this scumbag did. And yet, even if you acknowledge that sentences for some sex offenses should be higher, that still doesn’t say that any punishment is justified, or that offenders’ interests should count for nothing.

        5. umami
          umami October 29, 2012 at 5:52 pm |

          Why the consistent confusion of “offender’s interests” with “offender’s feelings?”

          The second is irrelevant. The first is not.

        6. Lolagirl
          Lolagirl October 29, 2012 at 6:13 pm |

          Anon21, you can try and dress your faulty logic with faux intellectualism all day long and it still won’t change how offensive you are being. The second you expend more energy sympathizing with rapists over their victims you are engaging in rape apologism. Because you are still saying we are being too punitive with a group of people who are generally given a pass from both our society and the criminal justice system for their crimes.

          The proper argument here is that we waste the precious time and resources of our criminal justice system chasing after and punishing victimless crimes like drug use. When what we should be doing is channeling those resources into seeing that people like rapists are brought to justice and given appropriate sentences for the particularly heinous crime they have committed.

          The bottom line is that when you refuse to even entertain the principle that one having their bodily autonomy violated in such a horrible is one of the worst crimes one can experience you are being a rape apologist. You can try and intellectualize it all you want, but it doesn’t change what you are doing.

        7. Anon21
          Anon21 October 29, 2012 at 6:21 pm |

          The bottom line is that when you refuse to even entertain the principle that one having their bodily autonomy violated in such a horrible is one of the worst crimes one can experience

          I not only entertain that principle, I agree with it. But that doesn’t tell us what the just amount of punishment is for such a terrible crime. To me, no imprisonment in the case described in the OP is definitely unjustly lenient, but a sentence of, say, 10 years’ imprisonment would be unjustly harsh. You may differ with where you fall on the continuum, but you probably would say there’s a point at which the punishment is too harsh. (Life imprisonment? The death penalty?)

          Acknowledging that such a point exists, and that it exists in part because even sex offenders should not be subject to the worst punishment society is physically capable of inflicting, is not rape apologism.

        8. Lolagirl
          Lolagirl October 29, 2012 at 6:38 pm |

          But that isn’t your initial premise. This is:

          but I absolutely do think a sentencer should take the offender’s interests into account.

          And then you went on to say this:

          But I feel like in these cases, there can be a tendency to expand the condemnation past the many unreasonable, completely awful, victim-blaming things that were said to the one thing that should be unobjectionable.

          For a crime as horrible as rape, no, there is absolutely no reason to stop and think about the rapists feelings where their sentence is concerned. They didn’t stop to think for a second about the feelings of their victim or the trauma they were inflicting upon that victim. So what if the poor rapist is all upset and feels they are being unduly or unjustly punished? Maybe if our society and criminal justice system took the crime of rape as seriously as it should, and maybe if the level of seriousness accorded the crime of rape resulted in rapists being convicted and sentenced, it would provide more of a deterrent for future potential rapists.

          Because until such time as that actually happens rapists will continue to think that they have the right to access and violate the bodies of others with impunity. Also, by continuing to question whether or not rapists are being too severely punished, like it or not, you are contributing to the rape culture that still flourishes here in the good old U.S.

        9. Anon21
          Anon21 October 29, 2012 at 6:48 pm |

          For a crime as horrible as rape, no, there is absolutely no reason to stop and think about the rapists feelings where their sentence is concerned. They didn’t stop to think for a second about the feelings of their victim or the trauma they were inflicting upon that victim.

          I don’t really get the relevance of the second sentence here. Our justice system should aspire to be better than rapists, yes? Even to rapists? I’m not saying you’re advocating eye-for-an-eye justice in cases like this, but that does seem to be the most obvious connection between the two sentences: you did something horrible, and now society will inflict something equivalently horrible on you. That’s not right.

          Maybe if our society and criminal justice system took the crime of rape as seriously as it should, and maybe if the level of seriousness accorded the crime of rape resulted in rapists being convicted and sentenced, it would provide more of a deterrent for future potential rapists.

          Yes, I completely agree. It is shameful that rape and sex crimes enforcement is as shoddy as it is in this day and age. And we need to work on all aspects of the problem (inadequate resources, allowing victims to be put on trial) until the typical outcome of committing a sex crime is conviction and a severe sentence. We’re a long way from there.

          Also, by continuing to question whether or not rapists are being too severely punished

          I just want to reiterate: none of what I’m saying is specific to rape. It’s a point about criminal sentencing in general. But I do believe that rape should be subject to just sentencing practices, even though it’s a uniquely awful crime. Rape’s unique harms absolutely must be factored into any just sentence. But those harms can’t be used to justify discarding basic principles of just sentencing, like taking the interests of the offender into account.

        10. Annaleigh
          Annaleigh October 30, 2012 at 12:51 am |

          Yes, because rapists are so put upon, with most of them never even going to prison and all.

          You really should take amblingalong’s advice, this is the last place we need to hear this shit right now.

        11. William
          William October 30, 2012 at 7:56 am |

          you did something horrible, and now society will inflict something equivalently horrible on you. That’s not right.

          Old fashioned, maybe, but the “marks on the body” theory of justice is no more or less right than our current Prison Industrial Complex and it’s “marks on the soul” theory.
          You’re appealing to a moral authority that just doesn’t exist.

          Look, I agree that we punish too much in our society. The thing is, we punish rape too little in our society. More than that, we don’t really have effective means of punishment. Rehabilitating rapists isn’t something I’m terribly confident about on a basic psychological level, I abhor rape so lex talionis doesn’t seem a viable option, and I don’t really trust the government to kill people so the death penalty is off the table. That leaves long prison sentences designed not to correct the rapist but to take them out of the general population and create a strong disincentive towards recidivism.

          But lets be clear, thats not a moral stance. I’m already demonstrably better than the man who raped me because I’m not a fucking rapist. I don’t need to wring my hands over what it means that I feel what I do towards him. I get that you have a well-reasoned political beef with the PIC, I share it, but what you have to understand is that there are still days I feel guilty for not killing my rapist when I had the chance because I wonder how many more people were raped by my fear and inaction. Thats what rape has left me to live with. You’ll forgive me if I don’t need a fainting couch at the thought that maybe some subhuman fuck might be segregated from his potential victims for longer than is politically correct.

          So take your high minded criticism of the PIC somewhere appropriate, because the context here just fucking reeks of appologism.

        12. Lolagirl
          Lolagirl October 30, 2012 at 8:21 am |

          So take your high minded criticism of the PIC somewhere appropriate, because the context here just fucking reeks of appologism.

          This needs to be repeated until you get it through your head, Anon21.

          Your repeated warnings that the justice system is overly punitive with regard to rapists is like warning everyone to freak out about a Unicorn infestation. You sound utterly ridiculous and disconnected from reality. Save your soapbox routine for a better context, like maybe the next time Feministe addresses the death penalty or drug crimes. Because beating this drum in such a tone deaf manner reeks of apologism regardless of how often you try to deflect and clarify.

        13. Sheelzebub
          Sheelzebub October 30, 2012 at 10:45 am |

          You know, people like you crawl out of the woodwork and start lecturing us (many of whom are rape and sexual assault survivors) about how it’s not right and not fair and cruel to punish criminals in threads about rape and sexual assault.

          Not robbery. Not DUI’s. RAPE AND SEXUAL ASSAULT.

          Especially considering the fact that the woman who was assaulted–like the majority of women who are sexually assaulted–was blamed and erased, your patronizing and sanctimonious lecture is neither needed nor helpful.

          It’s not as if women who are assaulted see much in the way of justice. It’s not as if these conversations aren’t derailed with cries about WHAT ABOUT THE MENZ and RESTORATIVE JUSTICE YOU HARPY MEANIE BUTTS and FORGIVNESS and other dreck.

          Apparently the women–cis and trans–who are assaulted don’t count for shit. Please! Do go on! Ignore what the actual thread is about, ignore the women who are actually brutalized and threatened and harassed and then dismissed by the law and by the fucking peanut gallery populated by buffoons like you.

          I forgot that what’s important here, even on a feminist website, is anyone but women, or say, sexual assault survivors. What was I thinking?

          Do resume pissing all over the comment thread.

        14. Anon21
          Anon21 October 30, 2012 at 11:51 am |

          Apparently the women–cis and trans–who are assaulted don’t count for shit. Please! Do go on! Ignore what the actual thread is about, ignore the women who are actually brutalized and threatened and harassed and then dismissed by the law and by the fucking peanut gallery populated by buffoons like you.

          Actually, what this thread (as opposed to the overall comments section on the article) is about is the idea that sentencing is in no way a compromise, and that an offender’s “feelings” or interests* shouldn’t be factored into a criminal sentence. I responded to what I felt was an oversimplistic condemnation of one thing that this judge said, while at the same time agreeing that all of the other victim-blaming stuff that she said was utter bullshit.

          Taking issue with a particular statement is not derailing. Arguments are not immune from rebuttal because they follow an article on a different topic.

          And yeah, if there was a similar argument made in the comments section of an article on DUI or robbery, I would make the same counterargument. The fact that a lot of articles on Feministe are about sexual assault does not mean that every related discussion focused on something other than sexual assault is a derail. And actually, if you want to more precise, this particular article is about sentencing practices for sexual assault, which makes a discussion about sentencing practices in general highly relevant.

          *I don’t think there’s a really meaningful distinction to make there, in the context of sentencing.

        15. Sheelzebub
          Sheelzebub October 31, 2012 at 10:03 am |

          Actually, what this thread (as opposed to the overall comments section on the article) is about is the idea that sentencing is in no way a compromise, and that an offender’s “feelings” or interests* shouldn’t be factored into a criminal sentence.

          Actually, as has been pointed out, an offender’s feelings are rather different than an offender’s interests. You do seem to disagree, but your assertion there isn’t any meaningful difference doesn’t make it true. Also, the original assertion–that the judge shouldn’t give two hoots about the assaulting cop’s feelings (which are different from his interests, the victim’s interests, and the people’s interests) had fuck all to do with punishing people too harshly–so yes, you are derailing.

          Also, actually, as has been pointed out to you repeatedly, you don’t see much in the way of sentencing or accountability when it comes to sexual assault–not even in this case. He’s walking free and his friends are whining that it’s so unfaaaair and meeeaaan that he can’t use a gun and go hunting anymore for such a little thing like sexually assaulting a woman. So you’ll just have to forgive me if I don’t give two flying fucks about his feelings. His interests, however, were more than served.

          For you to go off on a rant about how terrible it is that we punish people too harshly in regards to a story of yet another man who sexually assaults someone and get zero fucking jail time, it’s disingenuous for you to act as if you weren’t derailing anything that you were merely debating.

          As has been pointed out to you, men’s feelings are given top priority everywhere else. Fuck right off with your derailing, patronizing, and rape apologist bullshit. For all of your assertions that no, of course you think what the judge said was terrible and that rape is not taken seriously, you then engage in behavior that erased and minimized the actual point of the OP (you know, victim-blaming, rape apologism, male entitlement to women’s bodies). I mean, it’s not like we haven’t had to deal with derailers who erase and ignore the actual point of the OP before.

        16. Anon21
          Anon21 October 31, 2012 at 11:53 am |

          The reason I don’t see a meaningful distinction between an offender’s interests and his feelings at sentencing is that they’re likely to track each other very closely. A defendant’s feelings about getting convicted should not be taken into account, because he has no legitimate interest in avoiding conviction if he’s guilty. But at sentencing, an offender has a legitimate interest in not receiving more punishment than is necessary to serve the purposes of sentencing. And since any reduction in punishment will usually make the offender feel better, the interest and the feeling will usually move in the same direction.

          It’s certainly fair to say that the legitimate interest and the feelings aren’t of identical scope. For example, an offender is presumably going to feel bad (scared, angry, sad) about any sentence of incarceration. But for almost every sex offense (the exceptions I can think of would be something like first-time indecent exposure, depending on circumstances), the just punishment will be a sentence of some incarceration.

          Even when incarceration is clearly the appropriate sentence, I think the sentencing judge should never lose sight of the fact that incarceration causes harm, and that part of that harm has to do with the offender’s feelings. But the judge should also never lose sight of the fact that the offender has caused harm, and that the punishment has to reflect the magnitude of that harm without attempting to match it.

          In this case, the judge pretty clearly weighed the offender’s negative feelings about punishment and his interest in avoiding punishment way too heavily, and seemingly failed to consider the victim’s legitimate interests in obtaining justice for the harm done to her. My point throughout has been not to overcorrect: this judge screwed up, but the correction is to weigh the offender’s interests and feelings less, not to ignore them altogether.

  11. Adaquinn
    Adaquinn October 29, 2012 at 1:59 pm |

    As a law enforcement officer you’re held to a higher standard,” Hatch said. “If you didn’t want to be held to a higher standard you shouldn’t have become a law enforcement officer.”

    This is what the judge told the offender. Personally I hold all men to the standard of not putting their hands on other people’s genitalia without permission.

    Maybe I should teach her what my Mom always told me. “Keep your hands to yourself”

    1. EG
      EG October 29, 2012 at 2:09 pm |

      Right? How high a standard is “Don’t touch other people, especially their genitals, without their permission,” for fuck’s sake?

      1. Partial Human
        Partial Human October 29, 2012 at 5:09 pm |

        Apparently, for many men, it’s a Herculean task. An impossible standard, akin to opening a delicious bar of chocolate, and then only having one bite.

        Unpossible!

        Easier to just remind ambulatory cunts women of their responsibility to not lead men astray.

      2. Datdamwuf
        Datdamwuf October 29, 2012 at 10:19 pm |

        that got to me badly too, um higher standard than what?

    2. Carovee
      Carovee October 31, 2012 at 10:05 am |

      Perhaps I misread the linked article but it sounded like she was chastising the officer for drinking and driving at that point, not for groping the victim per se.

  12. igglanova
    igglanova October 29, 2012 at 2:13 pm |

    I was feeling sick enough today, but this might have just pushed me over the edge.

  13. PeggyLuWho
    PeggyLuWho October 29, 2012 at 2:13 pm |

    Yeah, she shouldn’t have been there….so that the creep could assault someone else instead.

    1. EG
      EG October 29, 2012 at 2:23 pm |

      Well, if all women would just stay inside, then they wouldn’t be luring men to assault them. See, men are like Hurricane Sandy, and we need to just stay inside whenever they’re out there. That way, the only way we can be assaulted is by our domestic partners, but that would be our fault for staying there anyway.

      1. Partial Human
        Partial Human October 29, 2012 at 5:13 pm |

        We really should just be sealed into concrete burqas.

        Handy drainage holes in the base for any waste products, ear holes to listen to stuff, and a one-way eye-slit to see out of.

        1. Bagelsan
          Bagelsan October 30, 2012 at 3:35 pm |

          Having any openings in the concrete is just asking for trouble, frankly. Seal it all up!

  14. Kasabian
    Kasabian October 29, 2012 at 2:44 pm |

    God damn, what kind of ridiculous tint do you need to have on your glasses to see this as a “Very Important Lesson About Friendship” ? Don’t make friends with people who have creeper friends? That shit’s kind of hard to regulate… if only there were some way to take people like that out of the social pool, perhaps by requiring them to notify others of their sexual assault history…

  15. Marni
    Marni October 29, 2012 at 3:31 pm |

    When you blame others, you give up your power to change

    This statement is one of the most insidious forms of oppression. Starting in childhood. Girls don’t complain. You don’t complain, you don’t blame others. You are here to SERVE men. You don’t get to even suggest that they modify their behaviour, because you do not exist. You are conditioned to obey. You may think you have changed a great deal to SEE through all this BS, when once you too were blind, but really you are just imagining it. You cannot achieve anything, you are just a girl. If you blame someone, you are breaking THE LAW. OUR LAW. Back in your place, girl. BACK IN YOUR PLACE.

    1. mxe354
      mxe354 October 30, 2012 at 12:08 am |

      Indeed. And that’s not all; that statement is based on the vile notion that it is wrong for victims to acknowledge the fact that they’re victims. A lot of people don’t want to hear about victimhood (often because they themselves don’t want to entertain the possibility that they are also at risk), so they just blindly emphasize “power” and “responsibility.”

      1. ASH
        ASH October 30, 2012 at 8:31 am |

        They also do not want to acknowledge that they may have also victimized.

    2. samanthab
      samanthab October 30, 2012 at 2:30 pm |

      Exactly. Who was blaming others? It’s not like the sexual assault fell from the sky. Asking that a behavior have consequences doesn’t constitute blaming. Not doing one’s job, and telling other people they haven’t earned the right for one to do one’s job properly…bingo, we have blaming.

  16. Laroquod
    Laroquod October 29, 2012 at 3:39 pm |

    I completely agree with your opinion of this ruling but I am extremely unimpressed that you have declared that you will delete any contrary opinions.

    1. tinfoil hattie
      tinfoil hattie October 29, 2012 at 4:02 pm |

      Well, there’s the rest of the whole internet for people to explain how a woman deserves to have a policeman reach under her skirt and fondle her genitals, because said woman was standing in a bar.

    2. Andie
      Andie October 29, 2012 at 4:05 pm |

      Not any contrary opinions.. just the ones THAT HAVE BEEN DONE TO FUCKING DEATH.

      Like the example given in the OP:

      Commenting note: Any comments that yes, what the judge did was wrong, but women really do need to be more careful will be deleted. Don’t do that.

      Done to death. Gets trotted out every damn time there is a rape discussion. We get it. If we go out of doors with a vagina, we’re basically asking to be raped. Wooooooh. *twirls finger*

    3. Partial Human
      Partial Human October 29, 2012 at 5:16 pm |

      Oh noes! Your free speech!

      /cries

      1. moviemaedchen
        moviemaedchen October 29, 2012 at 5:26 pm |

        I know; I am breaking out the tiniest violin as we speak.

        1. Annaleigh
          Annaleigh October 30, 2012 at 12:53 am |

          Why, it’s a whole orchestra of teeny teeny teeny tiny tiny tiny violins! Playing the saddest music there is!

          *sigh*

        2. Tim
          Tim October 30, 2012 at 11:51 am |

          And with modern nanotechnology, violins can be made very, very tiny indeed!

    4. (BFing) Sarah
      (BFing) Sarah November 3, 2012 at 11:01 pm |

      My PEARLS!!! I’ve clutched them so hard my hands have cramped up and now I can’t let gooooooooooooooo!

  17. DonnaL
    DonnaL October 29, 2012 at 3:42 pm |

    Do you not understand me? Of course you did something. You EXISTED. In a place. With other people who exist. And you did it while having – and I can not stress this enough – a VAGINA. Don’t you get it now?”

    I know that there’s an entire genre of “existing while having a vagina” commentary in the feminist blogosphere, but please try to keep in mind that the vulnerability of women to sexual assault by virtue of existing (and to being blamed for it) has very little to do with whether or not they have a vagina. I don’t feel any more vulnerable to either since I’ve had one. In some ways, and to some consequences, I think I’m less vulnerable than I once was.

    1. Adaquinn
      Adaquinn October 29, 2012 at 4:05 pm |

      I think the point was to stress the ridiculousness of the judge’s victim blaming. Not to stress the vulnerability of body parts. I doubt if the victim was a transgendered person the judge’s reaction wouldn’t have been any different. “You were someplace I have deemed unsafe for you to be, dressing in a way that invited violation. Shame on you for being there for the officer to assault.”

      1. moviemaedchen
        moviemaedchen October 29, 2012 at 4:31 pm |

        That may have been the point, but it doesn’t really change the fact that the “existing while having a vagina” rhetoric tends to erase trans women, which is not cool.

      2. Sheelzebub
        Sheelzebub October 30, 2012 at 10:47 am |

        Trans women are assaulted too, and at a higher rate, I believe. If the woman in question was trans, she’d have also been blamed for being trans and freaking the poor sexual assaulter out or some such shit.

        1. moviemaedchen
          moviemaedchen October 30, 2012 at 12:45 pm |

          Yes, exactly.

    2. DonnaL
      DonnaL October 29, 2012 at 4:28 pm |

      I think you missed my point. Never mind. Sorry for the derail.

      But PS: it’s not “transgendered.”

    3. Alara Rogers
      Alara Rogers October 29, 2012 at 4:29 pm |

      Well, when you had a penis, you were inviting violence by being in public with a penis and being insufficiently willing to demonstrate your manliness by molesting women and beating up other men.

      As far as I can see, people with vaginas get blamed for being near people with penises. People with penises get blamed for not being worthy of their penises, worthiness being demonstrated by willingness to commit violence and degrade women. Unless they’re not white. Then people with penises get blamed for being nonwhites with penises, because only white men are allowed to have penises, and being a nonwhite person with a penis makes you a dangerous being who can be shot on sight. Also, being a child with a penis makes you both dangerous *and* a valid target for abuse, except that if you were in a place where you got abused, it is your mother’s fault, not yours. If you have a vagina and you get abused, it is both your fault and your mother’s fault.

      The only people who are safe are white people with penises who are prepared to defend their penises by performing masculinity, which includes abusing women and insufficiently masculine men. If any of those people get harmed while in public, it’s because some criminal harmed them, not because they were doing something inherently dangerous, like being in public. And the only thing a person with a penis can do that they would actually be at fault for would either be insufficient performance of masculinity, or insufficient enforcement of masculinity on their penis-having children.

      So your issue was that you were a woman who had a penis, which by definition made you insufficiently masculine to have your penis and therefore you were fair game if you were in public. Now that you’re a woman with a vagina, you’re fair game because you have a vagina. Men with vaginas are also fair game because they have vaginas, no matter how well they perform masculinity. It’s complicated, but basically, if you have a vagina you have no right to be safe in public, and if you have a penis you have to be willing to demonstrate your worthiness to have that penis, else you have no right to be safe in public, and if you are not white you have no right to be safe in public regardless of what equipment you have.

      1. Jadey
        Jadey October 29, 2012 at 4:52 pm |

        Trans* women are routinely perceived as deceptive rapists-in-disguise who are hiding their penises (whether or not they actually possess one) in order to lure, trap, and violate unsuspecting cis men and women (which sounds pretty “masculine”, in its worst manifestation, to me), and are hated because of it. I disagree therefore that this reaction is necessarily about manliness and penis-worthiness – transphobia and transmisogyny are more complex than that. There’s a deep revulsion aspect as well based on (misguided, stupid, hateful and ignorant) perceptions of who trans women are and what they represent, which I think you are overlooking.

      2. Li
        Li October 29, 2012 at 5:01 pm |

        Alara, you may want to take a step back, because this comment comes off as really really cis-splainy.

        I’d especially note that since neither trans women nor cis women tend to get around with their genitals visible to the general public (unless fashion has dramatically changed in the few hours since I last left the house) genital status may not actually be the best model from which to analyse gender-based vulnerability to violence.

        1. Partial Human
          Partial Human October 29, 2012 at 5:22 pm |

          Exactly what you and Jadey just said.

          It’s a hollow and simplistic analysis with the potential to further misunderstanding and facilitate real harm.

          Li – if fashion ever goes that far, then my concrete burqa will be ordered post-haste.

      3. DonnaL
        DonnaL October 29, 2012 at 5:17 pm |

        Alara, you’re completely missing the fucking point. I wasn’t talking about when I was presenting as a guy. I was talking about when I was already presenting as a woman but hadn’t had GRS yet, and was vulnerable to exactly what any other woman is vulnerable to (as I am now), plus more, including the very special danger of being murdered upon discovery of my “deception.” It had nothing whatsoever to do with being insufficiently masculine. Capisce? Pay attention, for God’s sake.

        Thanks for getting it, Jadey and Li. But it isn’t going to stop the entirely genital-based analysis a lot of people are going into here.

        1. DonnaL
          DonnaL October 29, 2012 at 5:19 pm |

          And, yeah, please don’t try to “explain” to me again what my issue was, or how I was endangered, at any time in my life. Just stop.

        2. DonnaL
          DonnaL October 29, 2012 at 5:20 pm |

          I’m sick of this shit.

        3. Partial Human
          Partial Human October 29, 2012 at 5:28 pm |

          I’m sorry this seems to happen on every post.

          Cisplistic gender essentialism that misses out that actually, trans women are at greater risk.

          I doubt we’ll ever know how many trans women are being victimised like this, because there’s so many disincentives to reporting it.

          Hugs if you want them.

        4. moviemaedchen
          moviemaedchen October 29, 2012 at 5:29 pm |

          Thirding Jadey, Li and DonnaL. Donna, I’m sorry you keep going through this shit here.

        5. DonnaL
          DonnaL October 29, 2012 at 8:48 pm |

          Thanks, Caperton and everyone else. This has been happening way too much, I think. I guess it’s a distraction from anxiety about the windows in my apartment breaking from the howling winds up here overlooking the Hudson in Washington Heights, but it’s not the kind of distraction I enjoy.

        6. Annaleigh
          Annaleigh October 30, 2012 at 12:54 am |

          I’d like co-sign support for you Donna. It’s sickening that you have to deal with this transphobic garbage over and over again.

        7. Partial Human
          Partial Human October 30, 2012 at 1:44 pm |

          I hope your nest is unscathed by the storm.

          I’ll be thinking about you, and hoping that you’re safe and warm.

        8. tinfoil hattie
          tinfoil hattie October 30, 2012 at 6:06 pm |

          I read “walking around having a vagina” in the same sarcastic tone with which I read “driving while black.” Does the latter erase the experience of people of color who are not black, but who are also targeted for violence and/or harassment by authorities?

          I am confused as to how it erases transwomen, if other women talk about having vaginas. Perhaps “walking around perceived as having a vagina” is better? I want women to be able to talk about our lived experiences in every context.

          Transwomen, of course, are doubly punished for being women, and then for not being “the right kind” of women by predators who want to harm all women.

        9. DonnaL
          DonnaL October 30, 2012 at 11:56 pm |

          I read “walking around having a vagina” in the same sarcastic tone with which I read “driving while black.” Does the latter erase the experience of people of color who are not black, but who are also targeted for violence and/or harassment by authorities?

          I am confused as to how it erases transwomen, if other women talk about having vaginas. Perhaps “walking around perceived as having a vagina” is better?

          I vowed to stay out of this kind of conversation from now on given how horribly stressful it is, but unlike some people, you are entitled to a presumption of good faith. So, yes, perceived or, better yet, assumed, would be better. Because it’s walking around while female that makes women vulnerable to sexual assault and victim-blaming. Unless men have X-ray glasses like what they used to advertise in the backs of comic books for the specifically disgusting purpose of seeing through women’s clothing, they don’t actually know what your genitals are. Which is why the analogy to driving while black doesn’t work — being black (or perceived as black regardless of self-identification) is generally “visible” to the world in a way that actually having a vagina isn’t. So, yes, the use of “existing while having a vagina” — vs. while being perceived or assumed to have one — as a way of referring to vulnerability to sexual assault and victim-blaming, does erase trans women (or, at least, trans women who don’t have vaginas, because some of us do).

          Nobody is suggesting that “talking about having vaginas” in general erases trans women; that’s kind of a straw man, I think. There are a number of ways in which having a vagina has made a difference in my life and how I feel about it, entirely separately from the differences wrought by social transition alone, even if I’m not likely to talk about them in public. It’s just this particular instance in which it isn’t really relevant, certainly not in the way that some people have suggested.

        10. DonnaL
          DonnaL October 30, 2012 at 11:57 pm |

          My response to tinfoil hattie is in moderation. Short answer: yes, perceived or, better yet, assumed, would be preferable, I think.

        11. EG
          EG October 31, 2012 at 12:07 am |

          I am confused as to how it erases transwomen, if other women talk about having vaginas.

          It erases trans women because it is using “having a vagina” as shorthand for or as if it were interchangeable with “being a woman.” It’s not having a vagina that makes one vulnerable to these kinds of assaults; it’s being a woman, and that’s not the same thing. The average ass-grabbing dude has no way of knowing if the woman he’s assaulting has a vagina or not; what he knows is that she’s a woman in public, and thus he has the right to grab her.

          If this were a kind of assault/harassment that cis women were subject to but trans women were not, then it would make sense to use “having a vagina” in this way. But that’s not the case. All women are subject to this kind of assholery.

        12. DonnaL
          DonnaL October 31, 2012 at 12:27 pm |

          Hattie, if you’re still interested, my response to your question is out of moderation now, as is EG’s.

        13. IrishUp
          IrishUp November 1, 2012 at 2:00 pm |

          DonnaL – I just wanted to thank you for both your generosity and clarity in your response to TFHs question – especially given the high grody quotient in this particular thread. You articulated nuances and distinctions I was having trouble putting language to in my own thinking.

        14. DonnaL
          DonnaL November 1, 2012 at 10:32 pm |

          Thank you, IrishUp.

      4. amblingalong
        amblingalong October 29, 2012 at 5:28 pm |

        Holy shit, Alara. Please just shut up and listen to the people who actually have lived through this shit instead of trying to explain to people what their own oppression looks like.

        For fuck’s sake, this is just not OK. Donna, other trans* people who’ve been tuning in, I’m sorry you have to keep putting up with this.

    4. Andie
      Andie October 29, 2012 at 6:49 pm |

      Eep.. Just realized I did this with my comment earlier as well. My apologies, DonnaL and anyone else I erased with my comment re: vaginas.

    5. Q Grrl
      Q Grrl October 29, 2012 at 6:52 pm |

      And, yeah, please don’t try to “explain” to me again what my issue was, or how I was endangered, at any time in my life. Just stop.

      Please take your own advice. I get what you are trying to say, but what you actually say is that women’s biology has little to nothing to do with their sexual assault.

      It doesn’t have to be either/or.

      1. EG
        EG October 29, 2012 at 7:07 pm |

        No. She’s saying that women’s genitals have nothing to do with whether or not she is sexually assaulted. It is not the presence or absence of a vagina that is the issue; it is the presentation of oneself as a woman, and womanhood is not the same as possession of a vagina.

        That is not what Donna was “trying” to say. That is what she said, quite successfully. So don’t be a jerk about it.

      2. DonnaL
        DonnaL October 29, 2012 at 7:22 pm |

        Q Grrl, you’re well-known around here for your transphobic comments. And are entitled to absolutely no presumption of good faith. So just fuck off.

    6. igglanova
      igglanova October 29, 2012 at 7:15 pm |

      Thank you for saying this.

      1. igglanova
        igglanova October 29, 2012 at 7:20 pm |

        Ok, the threading makes it a little difficult to tell, but my previous comment was addressed to DonnaL. This ‘while having a vagina’ thing can’t die out soon enough.

  18. Unree
    Unree October 29, 2012 at 4:24 pm |

    Here’s what the judge said:

    “I apologize to the victim for any additional anguish my comments may have caused,” the judge wrote in her statement. “It was never my intention to make a situation worse for any victim. I have learned an important lesson and will apply what I have learned to future cases, to ensure that the rights and views of all victims are heard and respected.”

    She said her comments in court were “poorly communicated.”

    And my paraphrase:
    Oh noes, I’ll have to run for re-election eventually. Better not piss off too many voters. Here’s a statement about how kind, respectful, attentive, and fair I am.

    1. 10G
      10G October 30, 2012 at 9:04 am |

      Yeeeuppp. As one who has a degree in Criminal Justice and has had experience with the system totally failing me in a domestic violence matter, I can attest that judges and L.E. officers tend to like to “get cuddly” with each other (i.e., don’t wanna piss each other off, now!) and too many breaks are handed down in regard to law enforcement officers. That and, according to one of my more liberal profs (who was a liberal WHITE guy), the system is built and run by and FOR WHITE MEN. Mostly so that judges will be ensured re-election and no physical retaliation by said white offenders.

      As for “punishing too much”–excuse me, but my shiny white, big fat heiney!!! We don’t punish appropriately ENOUGH, and MANY white men get break after break after BREAK, while anything that ISN’T white, male, and hetero gets harsh punishments to be “made an example of”. Don’t even THINK of passing that shit around here, homey. Ain’t gonna fly. All that worthless judge did was smack that overgrown brat on the wrist and insult her gender. Get her off that bench!!! Hell yeah, I’m pissed…that and it’s early morning, to me, anyway…;)

  19. pheenobarbidoll
    pheenobarbidoll October 29, 2012 at 5:32 pm |

    Friends and former coworkers have been coming to Evans’s defense, decrying his conviction because people in law enforcement give so much; he’s lost his job; and now, as a convicted felon, he won’t be allowed to go hunting.

    Jesus. So cops give so much that they’re entitled to a little non consenting pussy grope? And to top it off, he can’t go blow the faces off deer anymore! Over a woman!!

    1. moviemaedchen
      moviemaedchen October 29, 2012 at 5:40 pm |

      I know. It’s a fucking tragedy that he be made to face any consequences for his actions at all, right?

      If he wanted to keep his job and not be a convicted felon, he could have, oh I don’t know, chosen not to assault someone. I hear it’s not that hard – many people manage to completely avoid sexually assaulting others! But what the fuck do I know, I’m sure my girly hormones are going to my brain and confusing me again.

    2. Anon21
      Anon21 October 29, 2012 at 6:38 pm |

      I just don’t. even. get. how the fact that he was a police officer, charged with upholding the law and entrusted with the power to use force against others can be seen as anything other than a seriously aggravating factor.

      When a police officer commits a crime, he doesn’t just inflict whatever harm the crime normally entails. He also inflicts the additional harm of letting marginalized, over-policed communities know that cops will just do whatever awful thing they want, not even pretending to comply with the already-loose strictures of the law. And sentencing him to less punishment than a non-police offender compounds that harm, by confirming that yes, police officers really aren’t expected to follow the law. It’s sickening.

      1. Datdamwuf
        Datdamwuf October 29, 2012 at 10:28 pm |

        My thought exactly, as a police officer he didn’t just commit a crime he betrayed a public trust. His punishment should be greater not lessor.

    3. onetinythought
      onetinythought October 29, 2012 at 6:47 pm |

      LOL *snort*

  20. moviemaedchen
    moviemaedchen October 29, 2012 at 5:35 pm |

    And people wonder why sexual assault victims so rarely make reports. Even if you’re one of the very few who not only makes it to court but wins a conviction, you *still* get to see the perp walk away without serious consequences and you get a nice fortifying dose of victim-blaming and slut-shaming to wash that down with. Fucking hell.

  21. pheenobarbidoll
    pheenobarbidoll October 29, 2012 at 5:43 pm |

    And I’ve had that done to me once. In a bar waiting for my husband to come out of the bathroom. When I rounded on the asshole he actually had the nerve to get mad at ME for being mad at HIM. And flat out told me ” you don’t have to be so RUDE about it”.

    I can’t count how many times I’ve had my ass grabbed. And once at a concert, by the time I got through the crowd, my waist length sweater was stretched to my knees from all the ass grabbing and breast grabbing. Another time, the crowd was so tight I couldn’t move, and some jackass behind me spent 20 minutes grabbing my ass so hard he left bruises. All I could do was scream at him to stop. But no one paid attention, so he just kept on.

    I don’t go to concerts anymore.

    1. miga
      miga October 29, 2012 at 7:25 pm |

      I had an icky experience at a concert too, once. I was squished up against a bunch of people and felt an erection in my backside. I decided not to make a big deal out of it because we were literally forced up against each other by the masses and it’s a physiological response, but when he started putting his hands around my waist and pulling me into him I got pissed. When I was finally able to move away he grabbed at my arm but I shook him off and moved where he couldn’t see me.

      But silly me, going to a concert of all places! In a crowd of people at night!

      1. DonnaL
        DonnaL October 29, 2012 at 7:35 pm |

        Something similar happened to me once. Of all places, at a Joan Jett concert in Brooklyn a year or two ago. And from what little I could see, the guy had to be at least 15 or 20 years younger than I was. I guess he couldn’t tell from the back.

        1. pheenobarbidoll
          pheenobarbidoll October 29, 2012 at 10:23 pm |

          I wonder what the judge would have to say about me being groped at the mall and at a fucking grocery store?

          Dangerous people in Dillards?

          Ass grabbing Albertsons?

          Or when I was buying ice at 7-11.

          I even had a jerk put his hand up my shirt on a CHURCH TRIP. The youth directors solution? No more boy girl sitting together on the bus.

          My solution? I broke his nose when we got off that bus.

          (though I probably asked for it. I only joined that church and the choir so I could go to NYC with my BFF. Gods punishment or some shit would be the justification I’m sure)

        2. pheenobarbidoll
          pheenobarbidoll October 29, 2012 at 10:28 pm |

          I also brought weed. And hid Ozzy tapes by using christian rock tape covers. Made out with a boy I just met at some amusement park in Allentown PA.

          So I can only imagine what this judge would have said.

          (And probably traumatized an Amish boy, on accident. But um, that’s a long story.)

        3. Amelia the lurker
          Amelia the lurker October 30, 2012 at 2:46 am |

          tell it tell it

    2. Annaleigh
      Annaleigh October 30, 2012 at 12:45 am |

      There’s a flee market over in the next county that I haven’t bothered to visit in years, partly because there are a lot of entitled and gross men there…there was one occasion where I was 12 and had gone with a friend and her family, and when the crowd was packed, some guy grabbed my ass, I looked to see who was touching me and he just smirked at me. Disgusted just thinking about it.

      1. pheenobarbidoll
        pheenobarbidoll October 30, 2012 at 1:51 pm |

        Yes. Isn’t it wonderful when being a child isn’t even protection from strange men feeling entitled to feel you up?

        Both myself and my BFF are DD in cup size, and have been since we were in our teens. The things grown men would say to us..disgusting. And it’s not like they didn’t know we were in junior high, because we had on our school band shirts (band practice was after school, so we’d walk home with our instruments, wearing our band shirts)and sometimes, would be in front of the school.

        Coming full circle, I now get to see the looks grown men give my daughter. They’re not happy when I call that shit out. They’re fucking lucky I don’t remove their eyes with a fork.

        1. EG
          EG October 30, 2012 at 2:29 pm |

          Yeah. I once yelled at a grown man in the street for leering at my thirteen-year-old sister. And while she had obviously begun puberty, she was just as obviously not an adult.

        2. macavitykitsune
          macavitykitsune October 30, 2012 at 4:41 pm |

          Isn’t it wonderful when being a child isn’t even protection from strange men feeling entitled to feel you up?

          Yeah. Lovely memories. Not that I had to hit puberty to have that happen (repeatedly) but my early and rapid-onset puberty really really helped in making me ridiculously vulnerable.

          Sometimes I wonder what happened in the dim spots in my memory. Then I go “wait, there’s an excellent reason there’s a dim spot in my memory there” and move right on.

  22. speedbudget
    speedbudget October 29, 2012 at 6:07 pm |

    This dude drove after drinking 8 beers in order to get to a bar where he could then sexually assault at least a couple of different people and the judge thinks the problem here is one lady who happened to be out of her house that night?

    Perhaps this is the proper solution to this problem.

  23. Unree
    Unree October 29, 2012 at 6:14 pm |

    pheenobarbidoll, that is so awful.

    A friend of mine is devoted to the Chicago Blackhawks. She loves the game and the team but not the fans: when she walks to her seat, she gets groped. She’s been groped more than once by the same guys; she recognizes them. She complained to United Center manager types and they ignored her. It’s too much of a hassle to buy aisle seats all the time, she said, and she stopped going. (If it matters, she used to go mostly with her husband.) Jeebus. I wonder how many other women are missing in action–concerts, sidewalks, bars, buses– because they know their safety isn’t important enough to matter.

    1. pheenobarbidoll
      pheenobarbidoll October 30, 2012 at 1:54 pm |

      I doubt the number of women who just give up and don’t go to things would surprise me. Between the looks, the gropes and the comments sometimes it’s just easier to stay home.

      1. onetinythought
        onetinythought October 30, 2012 at 7:31 pm |

        Actually, there is relief in sight for me…once you become a middle aged woman you also become an invisible woman.

        Sexual assault survivor (by my high school boyfriend), also groped and grabbed by all manner of “popular” boys in junior high.

        Considered attractive enough in my younger days to often get the catcalls etc and grabs from the menz, while minding my own business.

        Now, I don’t color my hair anymore, rarely wear makeup, and mostly dress in loose clothing…and I walk unscathed.

        I don’t miss that shit one little bit.

        Oh, and the guy that raped me? Said on numerous occasions–”That wasn’t rape!” Obviously, I did not report.

        1. macavitykitsune
          macavitykitsune November 1, 2012 at 7:25 pm |

          Now, I don’t color my hair anymore, rarely wear makeup, and mostly dress in loose clothing…and I walk unscathed.

          Statements like this are exactly why when relatively unattractive people like me get targeted for sexual harassment/abuse, it gets disbelieved because we’re “not pretty so why would they?”

          So seriously. Stop. Age, okay, if you want. Appearance? No.

        2. onetinythought
          onetinythought November 1, 2012 at 8:40 pm |

          I was speaking of my own experiences.

  24. Melody
    Melody October 29, 2012 at 10:29 pm |

    There are lots of times you could use the “but you were there” comment to blame the victim.

    “I got shot!” “but you were there” “I was at SCHOOL” “and somebody drove by and shot you because you were there.” “I can’t go to school without expecting to be shot?” “You can do what you want, but because you were there you got shot you should be vigilant you so you don’t become a victim”

    “He burned down my house! I almost died” “but you were there” “At my HOUSE?” “Yes, if you hadn’t been at your house your life wouldn’t have been in danger” “but but but I LIVE there.” “Well, if you blame others you give up your chance to change.” “this is BS”

    “I lost my ARM” “you were in a car on the road that was always a possibility” “he was DRUNK” “You were there” “I was heading home from work” “Well, I hope you can look at what happen to you and get something positive out of it.” “WHAT?!”

  25. Amelia the lurker
    Amelia the lurker October 30, 2012 at 2:33 am |

    Waiting for Doberman to say something obtuse along the lines of “But don’t women find it EXCITING when men take the INITIATIVE and SURPRISE them?” in 3…2…1…

    1. Annaleigh
      Annaleigh October 30, 2012 at 2:42 am |

      Actually, much to my relief, I think Caperton banned him. If she hadn’t, I’d say “sad but true,” because that’s exactly the sort of thing he’d post…

      1. Amelia the lurker
        Amelia the lurker October 30, 2012 at 2:48 am |

        Oh, finally.

      2. Kerandria
        Kerandria October 30, 2012 at 3:48 am |

        I haven’t been this excited by the banning of an inane frequent commentor since Chiara. Good show, Caperton!

        1. Amelia the lurker
          Amelia the lurker October 30, 2012 at 11:39 am |

          Chiara actually reformed at same point…did she relapse?

        2. Partial Human
          Partial Human October 30, 2012 at 1:58 pm |

          Same here!

          And omg I got a grocery delivery. today, so I can have celebratory cake!

          Oh frabjous day, calloo! Callay!

          And yeah Chiara hadn’t so much “reformed”, she’d just learned to parrot the right phrases.

          Pushed into saying anything more telling than “Chiara wants a cracker!”, revealed the act for what it was. You know when someone underage tries to sneak into a club, and the bouncer asks “What year were you born?”, and the person goes “Erm… 199..2?” Just like that.

        3. Partial Human
          Partial Human October 30, 2012 at 5:41 pm |

          I was f5ing and shaking my head one night, and my partner said “Uhoh. Who’s wrong on the internet tonight?”

          So I told her about the “Truck driver/fashion guy” theory of homosexuality.

          She said “Oh DO fuck off, I’m not stupid. What’s going on?”

          So, I repeated it, and she said “Oh, are you bored and trying that finger-puppet thing?”

          I had to swear it was real, that I wasn’t making up a sock for the lulz, and then she started to laugh like she was drunk. She told everyone she works with!

        4. macavitykitsune
          macavitykitsune October 30, 2012 at 6:04 pm |

          Completely OT, PH, but our wives should totally form a Feministe Reader By Proxy club, lol. The last gem I told mine was doberman’s WTF comment about “every sperm is different” etc, and she had pretty much the same reaction!

        5. Partial Human
          Partial Human October 30, 2012 at 7:59 pm |

          Totally mac! If I say “Oh, you’ll NEVER guess what?”

          She just sighs, and says “Internet? Oh dear… OK, go on then”

          Tsk. Bloody offliners, who think internet is for shopping and YouTube.

        6. macavitykitsune
          macavitykitsune October 31, 2012 at 10:19 am |

          Lol…mine’s not an offliner, she just doesn’t have troll-debating patience.She thinks I spend too much time on the internet snarling at trolls.
          …which I do, so fair enough.

        7. macavitykitsune
          macavitykitsune October 31, 2012 at 10:48 am |

          Most of the time he’s obliging. Sometimes he’s full-on entertained.

          What was his reaction to Chiara? *morbid fascination*

          (She really was just so…fucking WEIRD.)

  26. Kaija24
    Kaija24 October 30, 2012 at 5:25 am |

    Reminds of all of high school…lots of adults playing grab ass with the girls who weren’t assertive enough to deal with it (yet). And every time someone complained, the answer was “You shouldn’t have been there” (at the parade, at the concert, at the picnic, at the festival, on the bus to school-sponsored events where “initiations” involving coercion and assault occurred in the back as the adults in the front pretended not to know what was going on) or “OMG UNDERAGE DRINKING” if it was a party (no mention of how creepy it was that adult men would attend high school parties). Everyone learned to watch out for your friends and keep your mouth shut because whenever something bad happened, it would be YOUR FAULT for simply existing/being there.

    This kind of story makes me angry for days. And it’s hard to explain that anger to people who can’t understand why one little story is so upsetting/why I can’t just ignore it…it’s NEVER just that one incident, it’s the totality of life while that weighs one down.

  27. Fat Steve
    Fat Steve October 30, 2012 at 8:09 am |

    Clearly what the victim in this case should have done is throw a few grenades in the bar prior to entering, then wipe out any survivors with head shots from a semi-automatic.

    Then and only then could she be assured of having a drink unmolested.

    1. TomSims
      TomSims October 30, 2012 at 9:02 am |

      “Clearly what the victim in this case should have done is throw a few grenades in the bar prior to entering, then wipe out any survivors with head shots from a semi-automatic.

      Then and only then could she be assured of having a drink unmolested.”

      Sarcasm aside, the reality is that bars are full of ass grabbing drunks. It is what it is. I do find it interesting that the judge in this case is a woman. For a male judge to talk like that is par for the course. But a female judge? WTF?

      1. Lolagirl
        Lolagirl October 30, 2012 at 9:24 am |

        I’m not excusing what the judge did or said here, because it was reprehensible. But the legal profession is still one in which sexism is rampant and women must play by the rules set in place by men in order to succeed or get ahead. That means not acknowledging your being a woman in any way that may be perceived as a weakness. And make no mistake, being a woman while being a lawyer is still considered a huge strike against you by most male lawyers.

        1. Henry
          Henry October 31, 2012 at 2:35 am |

          you are excusing, and let’s not make excuses for this judge. she believed what she was saying, she was not paying lip service to what she has to say to keep her job. She spent a considerable amount of time trashing the victim. that’s not “playing by the rules set by men to get ahead or succeed”…what it is is that she’s been raised with these beliefs, passed from her parent’s generation to her (as she quoted her mom’s advice) and she is subjecting crime victims to them.

          The whole thing reeks…for once you have a jury and a prosecutor’s office both committed to going after sex criminals, no matter who they are, and at the end you get the judge victim blaming…

        2. macavitykitsune
          macavitykitsune October 31, 2012 at 10:14 am |

          But the legal profession is still one in which sexism is rampant and women must play by the rules set in place by men in order to succeed or get ahead.

          Okay, you need to step back and see that there’s a difference between “sanctioned by men’s rules” and “required by men’s rules”.

          Were her remarks sanctioned by the kyriarchy? Sure! Were they required, as in NOT shaming and hurting that victim would have damaged the judge’s career? No. As evidenced by the fact that plenty of judges hand down similar sentences, but not all of them hand out bizarre children’s cartoon-style madlibs on Learn Important Lessons From Your Rapist, Bitch and don’t then apologise until it becomes national news.

          No. Fuck no. Please don’t turn the judge into some helpless victim of the patriarchy here, thanks. It’s fucking insulting to the actual victim of rape in question.

        3. Lolagirl
          Lolagirl October 31, 2012 at 10:56 am |

          No. Fuck no. Please don’t turn the judge into some helpless victim of the patriarchy here, thanks. It’s fucking insulting to the actual victim of rape in question.

          Woah!

          That’s not at all what I’m saying. This judge is clearly being a sexist jerk, in a profession that reinforces sexism as standard operating procedure. But she’s making the choice to do so, instead of pushing back at these bullshit sexist notions like she should be. Judges are supposed to mete out justice, not play games or punish victims.

          Look, I got pushed around a lot when I was still practicing by sexist co-workers, partners, and colleagues. It’s a big part of the reason I don’t wish to re-enter the profession in the future. The sexist expectations are stifling at times, and it’s still so terribly entrenched that I got very exhausted dealing with it every damn day. I know I should be working to be part of the solution, but I got so burned out that I get the hives just thinking about it.

      2. EG
        EG October 30, 2012 at 9:49 am |

        the reality is that bars are full of ass grabbing drunks. It is what it is.

        What it is is patriarchal entitlement bullshit.

      3. macavitykitsune
        macavitykitsune October 30, 2012 at 9:57 am |

        Sarcasm aside, the reality is that bars are full of ass grabbing drunks. It is what it is.

        Oh, it is, is it? How nice for you that you can just accept that reality and move on without ever having your life impaired in any way.

        1. TomSims
          TomSims October 30, 2012 at 3:14 pm |

          “Oh, it is, is it? How nice for you that you can just accept that reality and move on without ever having your life impaired in any way.”

          Well like the old saying “Life is never fair” I agree there are many tings in life that suck. However, whenever I start to feel sorry for myself, I visit a Children’s Hospital and visit with children with terminal cancer and their parents.

        2. EG
          EG October 30, 2012 at 3:40 pm |

          However, whenever I start to feel sorry for myself, I visit a Children’s Hospital and visit with children with terminal cancer and their parents.

          Yeah, Mac. How dare you complain about a little non-consensual grab-ass? There are children with cancer out there. Unless your problem is as bad as children with cancer, suck it up.

        3. Bagelsan
          Bagelsan October 30, 2012 at 3:43 pm |

          Shut UP about rape, macavity, don’t you know some kids have CANCER. GOD.

        4. macavitykitsune
          macavitykitsune October 30, 2012 at 4:35 pm |

          However, whenever I start to feel sorry for myself, I visit a Children’s Hospital and visit with children with terminal cancer and their parents.

          And if you get cancer, I suppose you only have yourself to blame. Don’t you know that cancer wards are filled with people who have cancer? Going there is tantamount to suicide.

        5. macavitykitsune
          macavitykitsune October 30, 2012 at 4:39 pm |

          Also, I’m not sorry for anybody, I’m pissed off for everybody. And AT complacent, cowardly, disingenuous, malicious two-bit lackeys like you, who whinge and gripe and whimper about everything the second it matters to you (what’s that? people aren’t being NICE enough to veterans? You’re all over that, I see?) and accuse everybody else of feeling sorry for themselves (what, people are raping women in bars? those c***s can’t just politely shut up and expect to be raped, so whiny, amirite?).

      4. Past my expiration date
        Past my expiration date October 30, 2012 at 10:50 am |

        Tom Sims, please explain the distinction between “the reality is that bars are full of ass grabbing drunks. It is what it is.” and “yes, what the judge did was wrong, but women really do need to be more careful”? You know, that thing that Caperton said “don’t do that” about.

        1. macavitykitsune
          macavitykitsune October 30, 2012 at 11:00 am |

          Yes, but Tom Sims is special, don’tcha know. He has special Anti-Bad-Interpretation-Fairy-Dust that he sprinkles all over his comments that make them magically immune to negative response.

          Or something.

        2. TomSims
          TomSims October 30, 2012 at 3:08 pm |

          ““yes, what the judge did was wrong, but women really do need to be more careful”? You know, that thing that Caperton said “don’t do that” about.”

          I never said I agreed with the judge or disagreed with Caperton. I quit drinking many years ago, but during my drinking years, spent many hours in bars. So I do know what bars are all about. I am not advising anyone to not go to bars or giving any other advice. I am simply telling the complete truth. If anyone is in denial, it’s their problem.

          No woman should be sexually assaulted anywhere at any time for any reason. Period. As long as there are men, women will be sexually assaulted. That’s just reality.

        3. Bagelsan
          Bagelsan October 30, 2012 at 3:45 pm |

          As long as there are men, women will be sexually assaulted. That’s just reality.

          I must not live in reality, because I’ve never been sexually assaulted by the men I know. I guess they’re not real men?

        4. moviemaedchen
          moviemaedchen October 30, 2012 at 3:51 pm |

          As long as there are men who feel entitled to women’s bodies, women will be sexually assaulted. That’s just reality.

          There. Fixed that for ya.

        5. igglanova
          igglanova October 30, 2012 at 3:52 pm |

          As long as there are men, women will be sexually assaulted. That’s just reality.

          Citation needed.

        6. Andie
          Andie October 30, 2012 at 3:55 pm |

          As long as there are men, women will be sexually assaulted. That’s just reality.

          Well shit. I guess this whole discussion is pointless then, isn’t it?

          No use in trying to change ‘reality’. It is what it is. So why are we even discussing this?

          TomSim, no one is in denial that this kind of shit happens. In fact, if you read the thread, many of the women posting on the thread have told their own stories of being assaulted for appearing female in public.

          So no one is denying that this kind of shit happens. I think we’re pretty fucking aware that it happens.

          It’s all well and good to say ‘It is what it is’ if what it is is not happening to YOU.

        7. moviemaedchen
          moviemaedchen October 30, 2012 at 3:55 pm |

          Gah, html fail.

          My point: there’s nothing inherent to men that makes them assault women (or anyone else). It’s learned entitlement and the culturally-taught dehumanization and objectification of women. Fixing those things would go a long way towards reducing the incidence of sexual assault. Appropriately punishing rapists and scum like this cop is one part of that fix. Shrugging and saying “that’s just how it is, it won’t change” contributes to a culture of victim-blaming and enables the same shit to continue.

          Also, let’s not forget that men assaulting women is not the only kind of assault, though of course it is the most relevant one here.

        8. macavitykitsune
          macavitykitsune October 30, 2012 at 4:45 pm |

          I quit drinking many years ago, but during my drinking years, spent many hours in bars. So I do know what bars are all about.

          I feel a sudden need to hand out sympathy cards to every woman who ever shared an enclosed space with you.

          . If anyone is in denial, it’s their problem.

          Oh, right, so I can never expect more than to be raped in college/bars/buses/pools/anywhere else men might be, so I just….should shut up and take it, clearly, since saying it’s wrong is apparently the same as feeling sorry for myself. Thank you kindly, Mr Mansplainy McCreeperson.

        9. TomSims
          TomSims October 31, 2012 at 3:58 am |

          @caperton “As long as there are men who feel entitled to women’s bodies, women will be sexually assaulted. That’s just reality.”

          No I wouldn’t say you should expect it, but you should be aware of the possibility. There is never a 100% guarantee of safety for women in the world we live in. And I never said ALL women get groped by ALL men in EVERY bar, but it does happen often.

          And every man convicted of sexual assault should get a long prison term and men convicted of rape should get lethal injection. There should be better sex education in our schools K thru 12. All movies depicting violence toward women should be banned. All BDSM movies, clubs, books, etc should be banned and violators prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

        10. TomSims
          TomSims October 31, 2012 at 4:02 am |

          @caperton I pasted the wrong quote in my reply. This is the one I meant to use. My apologies.

          “So what’s the point of saying it (particularly considering that it’s not entirely accurate)? Yes, bars generally have drunk people. Gymnastics meets have flexible people. Ski slopes have snow. Snickers bars have peanuts in them, except when they don’t. Why bother stating the obvious unless you have some underlying point to make–i.e., bars are full of gropey drunks, thus you can expect to get groped if you’re stupid enough to go to a bar?

        11. TomSims
          TomSims October 31, 2012 at 4:23 am |

          @bagelsan “I must not live in reality, because I’ve never been sexually assaulted by the men I know. I guess they’re not real men?”

          I’m happy to hear that. None of the women and girls in my family have been sexually assaulted either. But it appears from this thread many women have and to me that is unacceptable. I agree with caperton, that there has to be much more severe penalties given to men who sexually assault women.

        12. Li
          Li October 31, 2012 at 7:46 am |

          No I wouldn’t say you should expect it, but you should be aware of the possibility. There is never a 100% guarantee of safety for women in the world we live in. And I never said ALL women get groped by ALL men in EVERY bar, but it does happen often.

          Which women have you met that are not aware that sometimes men are predators? Because I do not think that there is actually a large problem with women’s level of knowledge that sexual violence exists, especially not the women in this space right here, who are already women who are interested in talking about cultures around sexual violence. Ergo, there is no need for you to continue to explain that sexual violence exists. It’s been noticed, thanks.

        13. EG
          EG October 31, 2012 at 9:22 am |

          No I wouldn’t say you should expect it, but you should be aware of the possibility. There is never a 100% guarantee of safety for women in the world we live in. And I never said ALL women get groped by ALL men in EVERY bar, but it does happen often.

          Gee, you don’t say? As a woman living in the world, I had no idea that I was at risk for sexual assault by men. I was completely unaware that I had no guarantee of safety. Thanks so much for pointing that out, dude!

          Classic mansplaining.

        14. macavitykitsune
          macavitykitsune October 31, 2012 at 10:03 am |

          None of the women and girls in my family have been sexually assaulted either.

          That you know of. Have you asked them? Because honestly, the fact that you said this:

          There is never a 100% guarantee of safety for women in the world we live in

          which implies that the women don’t know that, leads me to think they wouldn’t tell you anyway. I was sexually abused for ten years (that I remember; I can’t even remember a first incident, so fuck only knows what I’ve repressed) on and off, before my parents found out. And that because I told them. So.

          Also

          There should be better sex education in our schools K thru 12. All movies depicting violence toward women should be banned. All BDSM movies, clubs, books, etc should be banned and violators prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

          One of these things is not like the others….one of these things just doesn’t belong….

          (sorry, derail, but I have Feelings about BDSM being classed with sexualised violence and abstinence education.)

        15. mxe354
          mxe354 October 31, 2012 at 11:18 am |

          As long as there are men, women will be sexually assaulted. That’s just reality.

          As long as society supports assailants, opposes victims, and espouses the notion that women’s bodies are public property, women will be sexually assaulted. Fortunately, rape culture is something we can get rid of. Rape culture is not the reality.

        16. TomSims
          TomSims November 2, 2012 at 11:37 am |

          @macavitykitsune

          Thanks for sharing your story. You made me think. I have read that these assaults are way underreported. I hope none of the girls and women in family have been assaulted and hope they never are.

    2. pheenobarbidoll
      pheenobarbidoll October 30, 2012 at 11:17 am |

      Clearly what the victim in this case should have done is throw a few grenades in the bar prior to entering, then wipe out any survivors with head shots from a semi-automatic.

      Well I found my new entrance!

      1. Andie
        Andie October 30, 2012 at 5:10 pm |

        I just pictured that.. Complete with two surviving bar patrons standing off to the going “gotta admit… She makes one hell of an entrance!”

  28. Fat Steve
    Fat Steve October 30, 2012 at 8:20 am |

    I wonder if the same thing happened to the judge while at work….would she be placated by someone saying ‘well you have to expect that sort of thing at a criminal court, after all, it’s filled with criminals.’?

  29. Angie unduplicated
    Angie unduplicated October 30, 2012 at 10:08 am |

    If the woman had worn her Lodge cast-iron undies, the ass-grabbers and finger-fuckers would have called her a prick-teaser, and the judge would have accused her of being deficient in fashion sense.
    Lovedthe Wanda Sykes link.

  30. matlun
    matlun October 30, 2012 at 11:18 am |

    I have a somewhat OT question about the sentencing here. I noted that he did not actually have to pay any sort of recompense to the victim. Is that normal?

    Would that have to be handled in a separate civil case in the US system?

    1. EG
      EG October 30, 2012 at 11:31 am |

      Yeah, my understanding is that any kind of payment from him to her would have to involve a separate civil suit.

    2. Anon21
      Anon21 October 30, 2012 at 11:56 am |

      There are actually a lot of state laws providing for restitution to crime victims as part of a criminal sentence I don’t know if Arizona has such a statute or not. I will say that it seems like restitution isn’t as embedded in sentencing practice in the U.S. as it is in some other systems; it’s not really part of our cultural schema for what happens at the end of a criminal trial.

  31. Gerry Dorrian
    Gerry Dorrian October 30, 2012 at 1:47 pm |

    Unbelievable! That judge must live in a sort of misogynist la-la-land. Next he’ll be saying women shouldn’t go out their front door in case a drunk bloke is passing by!

    1. Rhoanna
      Rhoanna October 30, 2012 at 2:32 pm |

      *She. The judge is a woman. She’s got plenty of internalized misogyny, though.

    2. Marni
      Marni October 30, 2012 at 2:37 pm |

      In male dominated fields, this is completely standard behaviour. Misogyny is rife and it never gets called out.

    3. Henry
      Henry October 31, 2012 at 2:46 am |

      I’m glad it was called out by the prosecutor’s office in this case, and the judge has been forced to issue an apology. High time this shit stopped at all levels of the justice system.

      1. ophelia
        ophelia November 5, 2012 at 3:33 pm |

        It wasn’t just the prosecutor. It was a HUGE community response. Yes, his dickwad friends are whining about how he’s missing elk season FOREVER, but you should check out the AZ Daily Sun. The vast majority of comments on Judge Hatch call for her to step down, are supportive toward the victim, and decry the actions of the offender. It was really impressive, actually.

  32. ginmar
    ginmar October 30, 2012 at 5:37 pm |

    Is there some reason the rapist apologist is not banned yet?

  33. ginmar
    ginmar October 30, 2012 at 7:59 pm |

    When a guy like this mansplaining troll says that there will always be rape, I’m reminded of all the research that shoeeews that rapists want you to believe that most or all men like and commit rspe.

    And every some asshole gives this victim-blaming “advice”, they’re saying to rapists, “Here you go, boys! She’s all yours! Go ahead!”

    THAT is the only message this “advice” gives.

  34. Marksman2010
    Marksman2010 October 31, 2012 at 8:46 am |

    He has special Anti-Bad-Interpretation-Fairy-Dust that he sprinkles all over his comments that make them magically immune to negative response.

    That stuff must be on blue-light special.

  35. Rape Apology Bingo! « emma wolf
    Rape Apology Bingo! « emma wolf October 31, 2012 at 1:31 pm |

    [...] I haven’t done a feminist rant in a while, so here is just a picture I did inspired by the post on Feministe.com about the Arizona judge hoping the victim of a sexual assault learned a valuable lesson about friendship. [...]

  36. Ellinor
    Ellinor November 1, 2012 at 10:42 am |

    “If you wouldn’t have been there that night, none of this would have happened to you,”

    oh okey let’s start doing that in murder trials.
    “well if the victim hadn’t been to that gas station that night, then the victim would’ve still been alive so ya know what, defendant is released”

  37. The Grown Up Girl
    The Grown Up Girl November 1, 2012 at 6:16 pm |

    This is just horrible. When are people going to learn that we can only change rape culture (which, let’s face it, is the way our society lives) if we teach men not to rape and sexually assault. IT IS NOT A WOMAN’S FAULT.

  38. Attackfish
    Attackfish November 3, 2012 at 4:46 pm |

    I just wanted to say, did anybody read the comments on the Daily Ssun article? They’re a thing of beauty! Barely any victim blaming and rape apologism, and the people who tried got jumped on. *smishes Daily Sun readers*

  39. Kiki
    Kiki November 5, 2012 at 11:09 am |

    So, besides the initial that’s-so-dumb-because-that-woman-can’t-exactly-help-existing-and-having-a-vagina reaction I had to this, one thing I thought about this was, what about all the people who managed enough self control while drinking to NOT randomly touch others’ genitals? To be clear, my strongest reaction was sympathy for both this woman and all other sexual assualt victims, but the idea that some people (men) are so primitive that others (women) should really just learn to arrange their life around avoiding harassment is definitely one of the most ludicrous I’ve ever heard.
    If one of my friends walked into a bar, had a few drinks, started an argument and got punched in the face, I MIGHT have said, “That’s awful, and I don’t think people have the right to assault eachother, BUT maybe you should reconsider your view if you have that offensive a viewpoint” but that is the closest I can imagine myself coming to the whole “Weeeeelllllll, you kinda were conceived and grew and eventually VOLUNTARILY walked RIGHT INTO THE SCENE OF THE CRIME” defense. I certainly don’t sympathize with sex offenders, or anyone that thinks they have the right to anyone else’s body.

  40. Fat Steve
    Fat Steve November 5, 2012 at 11:34 am |

    I should point out that, while being revolted by the judge’s comments, personally, having been the victim of assault on more than one occasion, I kind of do follow the judge’s mother’s advice. I have found it to be an important coping mechanism to take ownership of the situation and basically adopting the view that everything that happens to me is my doing. It works for me. But I would never dream of implying that all victims should handle things the way I do. Similarly, I don’t imagine anyone around here criticizing the judge’s remarks, would insist that my internal way of handling things is somehow wrong. Nor would I assume that anyone else has the same internal workings as I do.

    1. samanthab
      samanthab November 5, 2012 at 6:29 pm |

      Hmm…yeah, I’ve been raped, and I agree that taking ownership of the trauma did allow me to move past it. However, I don’t know that I’d say that taking ownership and following the judge’s mother’s advice are one and the same. I have every right in the world to blame a rapist for being a rapist. That doesn’t prohibit me from taking ownership. I’m sorry that you don’t see a distinction there.

      1. TomSims
        TomSims November 6, 2012 at 5:27 am |

        “I have every right in the world to blame a rapist for being a rapist. That doesn’t prohibit me from taking ownership. I’m sorry that you don’t see a distinction there.”

        I agree with you 100%

  41. Equality Link Love (13/11/2012) « Becky's Kaleidoscope

    [...] “I think we have a new one for the bingo card. “It wouldn’t have happened if you weren’t in a bar,” “make lemonade out of lemons,” and “of course the victim isn’t to blame BUT” are classics, and “other people might be drunker than you” is a nice end-around to the fact that the victim wasn’t, herself, drunk. “Now you’ve learned a Very Important Lesson About Friendship,” however, is a new one.” Judge tells assault victim that this is what she gets for going to a bar - Feministe [...]

  42. Kasabian
    Kasabian November 21, 2012 at 1:25 pm |

    Quick signal boost; there’s a petition right now calling for the governer who appointed this judge to condemn her actions / re-evaluate her appointment.

    http://act.watchdog.net/petitions/1352?n=3895302.x9TgZb

Comments are closed.

The commenting period has expired for this post. If you wish to re-open the discussion, please do so in the latest Open Thread.