Thread: Message getting through

Now if only we can get the justice system to recognize that women can abuse their spouses and/or children too.

From the article:

In sentencing submissions yesterday, Christopher Watson, the woman's lawyer, said while the boys would have suffered harm, ''the damage incurred by them is unlikely to be as significant as if it was a male perpetrator on a female because of the actual nature of the act''.

This is typical yet I grow more infuriated every time I see it.

What is this saying Rohara, that boys experience rape differently than girls? Are we somehow inherently more capable of being abused and not feeling the ravages it brings upon young boys. This is bullshit, this lawyer should be on the receiving end of his own logic. How blatantly misandric this statement!!

Quote from nickb275

What is this saying Rohara, that boys experience rape differently than girls? Are we somehow inherently more capable of being abused and not feeling the ravages it brings upon young boys. This is bullshit, this lawyer should be on the receiving end of his own logic. How blatantly misandric this statement!!

I've seen this argument, that women experience rape differently due to biology (evolutionary reasons). Men don't get pregnant after all.
If I were to go along with this argument, I want women to realize the tremendous emotional damage that paternity fraud does to men.

Sure, men may experience rape differently - but does that automatically mean women who rape get a pass?

Ratbu tries to suggest that the hypocrisy of women's rape-pass is acceptable because girls are sexually dumb and boys are sexually clever (personally, misandric as it may appear, I'd say it's the other way around; I think girls understand sex and it's repercussions better at an earlier age, and boys catch up a couple or so years after).

I was always led to believe that girls develop sexual feelings earlier, too.

Hear ye, hear ye, oh beloved SISTERHOOD!

News back from the war-front!
In the never-ending war with the terrifying and evil PATRIARCHY, it seems as though our own weapon of choice, LEGALWEAP, has been employed by our PATRIARCHAL enemies against us! There is truly no limit to how low these disgusting animals can stoop in order to win! For your own safety, and to continue the ongoing survival of our beloved SISTERHOOD, Equality Commissars shall be dispatched to your houses in order to give you mandatory training in the proper usage of LEGALWEAP, and also to make sure that PATRIARCHAL influence is at an acceptable level. Violators will be sent to Feminist Reeducation Seminars. We appreciate all contributions to the war-effort; ours is an enemy that never sleeps!

LONG LIVE THE SISTERHOOD.

Good for Kara Shead! She had the guts to speak out!

Christopher Watson, the woman's lawyer, said while the boys would have suffered harm, ''the damage incurred by them is unlikely to be as significant as if it was a male perpetrator on a female because of the actual nature of the act''.

Its code talk. It means boys don't matter as much as girls. The lawyer is probably a feminist lackey.

During the trial, Judge Garling found the woman was suffering from bipolar disorder at the time, but she knew her actions were legally and morally wrong.

And like Rohara said, This is typical yet I grow more infuriated every time I see it.

The message falls on deaf ears, unfortunately.

School house mistress jailed for sexually abusing boys

March 24, 2011 - 10:53AM

School house mistress jailed for sexually abusing boys

A school house mistress who sexually abused six boys is to be jailed for at least five years.

In the NSW District Court today, Judge Anthony Garling handed down the minimum term while sentencing the 41-year-old woman to a maximum eight-year term.

The judge in December found the woman, who cannot be named for legal reasons, guilty of 21 sex offences involving boys, aged 11 or 12, who attended the NSW school where she worked.

The 2009 offences included 18 counts of sexual intercourse, involving fellacio (sic) and penial-vaginal (sic) penetration.

The judge rejected the woman's defence of mental illness, but found she was suffering from a bipolar disorder at the time.

So, despite having her claims of mental illness dismissed, even though saying she had one ( ????) (does the Judge have one, too?) she gets the MINIMUM term and CANNOT ??? be named.

Hah!

And an uneducated, cub-reporter who cannot spell gets to cover the trial.

I would imagine she cannot be named for fear of the many boy's names coming up possibly. Not so hard to get home-class lists nowadays.