A Tale of Two Women

[blue-mangos.livejournal.com]

Two stories are making the rounds of the internet which display the same theme. In the first, a Bangladesh woman cut off the penis of her attempted rapist to take it to the police as proof of the attack. Police say he will be arrested as soon as he is in better condition. This may surprise those among you who assume that since I am a feminist I am a man-hater but my first reaction was that I think she should also be charged, with assault. Then I remembered all the "If a man tries to rape you, shoot him" crowd and thought, really, how is this any different?

In the second, and this is actually an old story, I have no idea why it's being brought up again now, a woman set her daughter's rapist on fire after he taunted her while on a 3 day release from prison. She was held at the time for psychiatric treatment and is my understanding that she was released after a year. Public support was very much on her side, which led to the lenient treatment. Again, I am conflicted on this. While I have no sympathy at all for the rapist, is it really our place to enact judgment, even on the most vile of criminals?

So I ask you, what are your thoughts on these cases? Is violence against our own attackers or those of our loved ones ever the answer? And what punishment should those who do undertake violent self-defense or vigilante acts be given, if any.

Comments

[bex.livejournal.com]

I don't think that the victim of an attempted rape should be charged with assault if the assault occurred as self-defense DURING the rape attempt. In the first story, if he was actively attempting to rape her and she grabbed a knife and cut it off, then so be it. I don't particularly have a problem with that - if you, as a would-be rapist, choose to engage in such risky behavior as trying to force women to have sex with you, I think you should accept that the consequence may be injury or death. If someone is attacking you, I think you have every right to defend yourself however possible and not have to think "Oh, man, I hope this doesn't really hurt him, or I might get in trouble!"

Of course, he argues that it was a revenge-type thing, so who knows what really happened. Hopefully there will be some kind of investigation - I don't know how the court system there works. In addition, even if he DID rape her but she waited until days/weeks after to take revenge, I would agree with you - that's inappropriate. If the rape attempt is over or the rape has been completed, I think at that point you need to turn it over to the legal system. After-the-fact, it's just revenge-seeking, and I'm not on board with that.

Same with the second story. He was taunting her, he's an asshole, part of me is cheering for her -- but not the rational part of me. What she did was inappropriate. That said, some leniency is acceptable, given that her psychiatric state was likely not that wonderful, but she should definitely face some legal consequences for that action, and likely more than a year in a treatment facility.

So. Violence during the attack? Okay. I want people to fight back hard if they're being threatened and not fear punishment themselves. After the fact? Let the legal system handle it. That's why we have a legal system. We can't just have everyone going around taking their own revenge on people after the fact, it would be chaos.

[malasadas.livejournal.com]

This is different because "shoot the rapist" as a principle is referring to the actual assualt itself -- not after the fact as a victim inflicted punishment that is supposed to be handled by the law.

There is a reason why attorneys can challenge people off of juries. If I were being seated for a trial of someone who assualted the rapist of his or her child I would gladly offer my that I cannot put my personal feelings about such a crime aside.

The law and our personal feelings on inherently emotionally charged issues are not required to be perfectly aligned. And when it comes to sentencing judges exist in part to consider those matters..which is why mandatory minimum laws are an affront to justice if not to law.

[policraticus.livejournal.com]

Story one has a strong element of he said/she said. It should be pretty easy to confirm his story, those kind of affairs are rarely 100% secret. If he was really trying to rape her, far from being prosecuted, it seems to me she acted in self defense and should be commended for her courage and determination. However, I might suggest that next time she stick the knife in his eye.

Story two is more troubling. We cannot allow that kind of personal revenge in a civil society, although we might ask how civil is a society that allows a convicted rapist a 3 pass to go home and drink. So, while I sympathize with her emotions, reason forces me to agree that she should be prosecuted. A gentle confinement for a year seems about right. She wasn't allowed to get away with it scot free, but she wasn't punished with the severity that might be thought appropriate for someone else who sets a person on fire in a crowded bar.

Violence against our own attackers is the only answer. That is what self defense means. If you are trying to rape me or harm me I have an absolute right to protect my life and preserve it, even if it costs you your life, or your penis. Vigilante justice cannot be tolerated or civil society breaks down. If we have clear and evenly enforced laws, if victims see that they get justice from the courts, the point will be moot. Extreme cases, like the one in Spain, have to be judged on a case by case basis.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

I think that the impulse to vigilante violence is understandable with individuals very much so, but it is not a wise one to indulge on a large scale. To give vigilantes free reign is to risk anarchy. The law in theory is supposed to punish people for things like this. That being said, given the nature of the crimes, the motivations and actions are certainly understandable.

[blue-mangos.livejournal.com]

Yes, exactly. While I may have gotten a personal thrill out of the story, we can't have everyone running around setting rapists on fire, however nice that may be in the long run.

[blue-mangos.livejournal.com]

Shut it smart mouth, I write what I know. And you best behave, I can make an excellent case for self-defense/vigilante justice against you involving either of these methods...

[blue-mangos.livejournal.com]

Meh. I'm used to it.

A 3rd story about a woman. Eye for an eye.

[root-fu.livejournal.com]

Majid Movahedi is convicted of pouring acid on the face of Ameneh Bahrami (27), a girl with whom he allegedly wished to marry. This happened in 2004.

As a result of the injuries Ameneh lost the sight on one eye and most of the sight on the other eye. Ameneh has been going through several surgical operations on her face and eyes.

In 2008, a court in Tehran sentenced Majid to eye for eye retribution. He was sentenced to lose the sight in both his eyes as well as economic compensation to Ameneh.

Iranian Supreme Court approved the sentence in February 2009. According to the sentence issued by the court, ten drops of acid sulphuric will be dripped into each of Majid’s eyes( by the woman he attacked)!

Warning, contains a picture of what the woman looks like after she had acid thrown in her face. (http://iranhr.net/spip.php?article2069)

Re: A 3rd story about a woman. Eye for an eye.

[raichu100.livejournal.com]

And is she...actually going to go through with that??

[dwer.livejournal.com]

Justice =/= vengeance. Just because someone commits a crime against you does not invalidate that person's rights to not be assaulted.

Self-defense is different.

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

So I ask you, what are your thoughts on these cases?
Human psychology is quite interesting.

Is violence against our own attackers or those of our loved ones ever the answer?
It's always an answer.

And what punishment should those who do undertake violent self-defense or vigilante acts be given, if any.
The usual. Mobsters go to jail for murdering other mobsters. It isn't like we say, "Oh well that isn't really murder since he murdered another bad guy..." I mean, regular people say that, but the Law doesn't see it that way.

[dreadfulpenny81.livejournal.com]

I can't even recount how many times I wanted to do something violent to my abuser. But then I think "What would that achieve?" In the end, that makes ME the bad guy. It sucks that more isn't done for people who are involved in sexual attacks. I feel a lot of sympathy for both families involved in these stories. The worst part is now the roles have been switched and survivor becomes attacker and vice versa.
As a survivor, I couldn't tell you what punishment should be doled out because in all honesty, I'd probably give these women medals. When I told my mother about the latter story, she said, "Good for her" and was felt sorry that the daughter of the mother issued an apology to the rapist's family for her mother's crime. I would hope that the judicial systems in their countries take their personal struggles into account in punishing them for their crimes.

[pastorlenny.livejournal.com]

State-sanctioned castration would be awesome.

[blue-mangos.livejournal.com]

I know right? I would gladly volunteer for the position of rapist castrator.

[harry-beast.livejournal.com]

The victim should have the right of first refusal.

[blue-mangos.livejournal.com]

Point.

[3fgburner.livejournal.com]

Assuming that the Bengali lady did the slicing and dicing during the rape attempt, it's self-defense. If it turns out under investigation that he wasn't trying to rape her, it's assault.

The woman who set her daughter's rapist on fire is a straight-out vigilante assault.

Self-defense is 100% justified. Vigilantism isn't.

[mrsrandomcheese.livejournal.com]

WRT the second case, the man returned to the town and taunted the woman about her daughter's rape. The woman has had mental health problems since the attack, and he callously reminds her of what he did to her daughter? Allow me to give no fucks about him and what happened to him.
You could argue that it's problematic because the victim's wishes herself weren't taken into account here, and now she loses her mother as well. That's a valid argument, and one I haven't decided on myself.
And, to be honest, if someone were attempting to rape me? I would do all the damage I could do to stop him from assaulting me. Whatever I could do. If I could fight him off, I would do. And if that meant me going for his penis, so be it.

At the end of the day, I'm not going to remonstrate acts of violence taken by women to avenge or protect themselves within this culture which really doesn't give a shit about rape victims.

[blue-mangos.livejournal.com]

What I just can't get past is that she put it in a Ziploc bag and took it to the police station as proof. While I think that's freaking awesome and funny as hell, to me it shows thought, that it was not just a spur of the moment attack to fend off a rapist.

And yes, in the second case I don't really care that he was set on fire, he deserved it IMO, but it would be very dangerous for society if this type of justice was allowed.

[oportet.livejournal.com]

If you can justify it in your head, what society and the justice system think won't stop you. If you plan out your vengeance a little better, society and the justice system won't ever have to know.

[kinvore.livejournal.com]

From a karmic viewpoint I'd have no problems with immediate retribution to a rapist. From a legal standpoint not so much, because what would keep someone from abusing this law?

We can never legally sanction vigilante acts, but I think a person should react to an attack as strongly as possible and worry about the legal ramifications later. Sadly they don't often have many options.

[blue-mangos.livejournal.com]

I like the icon, it's ~fancy~. Is it new?

[kinvore.livejournal.com]

Nope, it's actually one of the first ones I've ever made/used. But thanks!

[harry-beast.livejournal.com]

Violence against attackers should be the first line of defense for citizens under attack. If you can defend yourself, go for it. Immediate and decisive action can deter, halt or limit the impact of an attack. Once the immediate danger has passed, the victim should be prepared to justify her actions to ensure that violent response was warranted and proportional to the offense. Only if actions taken in self defense are excessive should punishment of the victim be pursued. When it comes to violent crimes, especially rape, the victim should get the benefit of the doubt regarding self defense.

[il-mio-gufo.livejournal.com]

see...my thing is, what if the defense leads to murder? will the courts say then that the defense was excessive if murder is the result? tricky stuff

[raichu100.livejournal.com]

tbh if the person ends up dying as a result, and the crime was a bad one (attempted rape or murder), then I kind of think the benefit of the doubt should be given to the defender.

[il-mio-gufo.livejournal.com]

thank you

[harry-beast.livejournal.com]

I admit that it is difficult to overcome biases in the legal system. It will require a sustained push by legislators and the public to ensure that lawyers and judges don't punish the victims of crime for acting in their own defense. Social progress is inevitably slow and frustrating, but at some point, we have to fight the good fight.

[il-mio-gufo.livejournal.com]

i wonder if there's ever been presented such a thing as delayed-defense? i'm sure such a phenomena has proved to exist somewhere in humankind's history....maybe in relation to something like shell-shock? i'm sure it could then be adapted to exist in such a situation as rape.

[harry-beast.livejournal.com]

The precedent set by the use of battered woman syndrome as a defense for murder may open the door for some form of delayed response violence against sexual offender. With any luck, it is only a matter of time before the law adapts to realities of modern crimes.

[il-mio-gufo.livejournal.com]

while i do not believe this to be a modern crime, nor a modern response to a crime committed, i do believe that individuals will have varying reaction times.

& with that whole fight-or-flight concept, isn't it possible that an individual might logically weigh out when a fight response would be most successful....if not during the attack, then shortly thereafter.

btw - i can't believe you actually 'get' what i'm saying :O)

[il-mio-gufo.livejournal.com]

well....let's see, if i was raped but didn't manage to successfully kill the guy during his attack on me, then i would most assuredly seek out the perpetrator and kill him at a later date/time/whatever. i think the kill should be lawfully deemed a continuation of my efforts at self-defense and, no, i would not expect to go to jail for this.

[mikeyxw.livejournal.com]

The answer for the first case really depends on what happened, or what can be determined to have happened.

If it turns out that he is telling the truth, she should of course be charged. If it turns out that she is telling the truth, her actions were not only justified but something that should be repeated under similar circumstances. After he recovers, he should be charged.

If the outcome is ambiguous and nobody can really figure out what happened, she certainly got one up.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

my first reaction was that I think she should also be charged, with assault.

If it was self-defense, then it's not assault (fyi, actually battery in this case; assault is essentially attempted battery).

While I have no sympathy at all for the rapist, is it really our place to enact judgment, even on the most vile of criminals?

No, it's not. She can have a little leniency for being provoked, but she's still guilty of killing him without just cause.

[anosognosia.livejournal.com]

If we're going to have a vote on this, is there anyway we could limit the votes to people who have been victims of rape?