Right about now, the Democratic Party is about to finish up the biggest betrayal of its liberal heritage by passing the Bush/Obama tax “compromise”, with most of the comproising occuring on the Democratic side. But…that’s not the main story.
Right about now, the war in Afghanistan is entering the same “unwinnable” stage that the Vietnam War entered during the early 1970′s, in spite of all the drone attacks and paying off of the local forces and all the death and destruction rained on the very Talban that we nurtured during the 1980′s to defeat the Soviets back then. But…no one is caring about that tonight, either.
Right about now, people are doing their final plans to get ready for a hectic Christman holidy weekend. But, still….that is taking a back seat.
And, right about now, the Wikileaks website is continuing to be the target for government censorship and direct intervention for its ability to expose the dark and scuzzy side of diplomacy and torture and war. But…even that has become secondary these days.
Because…all serious news and issues just can’t beat a good old fashioned sex scandal.
Especially, one that can be used to undermine and distract attention from public mayhem and corruption and war crimes.
And in the ongoing case of Julian Assange, mastermind behind Wikileaks, it’s a doozy that can bring out even the worst.
For those who don’t know or have been under a rock this past month, numerous governments have been gunning for Assange’s ass ever since he used his Wikileaks service to reveal several cables and emails depicting numerous shady deals, crimes, and possible war crimes committed by said governments and major corporations. The US govenment is currently attempting to obtain a warrent for his arrest on “espionage” charges for revealing certain cables exposing some quite damaging and damning acts done in the name of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and countries like Germany and Great Britain are planning on doing the same. Assange was, until this afternoon, held on bond in London on espionage charges, but after appeals by British authorities to keep him there failed, he was able to post bail and was temporarily released pending trial.
However, it’s not the espionage or the whistleblowing that is the subject of his latest troubles, but intimate spying of a much more intimate kind.
Assange is also charged in Sweden with one count of “rape”…but it’s a hell of a lot more complicated than that.
A couple of women whom had dated Assange around this time last year came out and accused him of raping them, claming that he had first thriced them into having what started out as consensual sex, but quickly went array when either Assauge’s condom broke or he took it off deliberately. The first complainant claimed that after removing the condom, he had deliberately held her down in order to, shall we say, finish the deed; the second woman simply claimed that he had had unprotected sex without using a condom. Both women had originally approached Assange to have him take a test for STI’s for fear of being infected; but when he refused, they then took advantage of a quite quirky Swedish law which allows women to initiate rape charges against men merely for “lack of consent”. (This is the same Sweden, of course, that developed the “Swedish Model” prototype of anti-prostitution/anti-sex work laws that blame and punish men exclusively for sex crimes and “objectification” of women, and outlows all forms of sex work under the notion that men use such activites to “degrade” and “abuse” women.) Swedish authorities have been trying as well to extradite Assange to face charges there, too.
Unfortunately, the charges here aren’t as clear cut, and there is some legitimate inconsistenties about the accusor’s stories that have cast serious doubt about their stories…well, that and the timing coming with the overall crackdown by govermnents potentially covering their backside assets from too much sunshine exposure. Blogger/sex worker Furry Girl, via her Feminisnt blog, capsualized those doubts:
Here’s the story from what I can tell: “victim one” bragged about bagging Assange, threw a party for him the day after he “raped” her, and only decided she’d been “raped” after finding out she wasn’t his only lover. Earlier this year, her blog also promoted an article about how to exact malicious revenge on the unfaithful. (That series of events apparently could sound suspect only to a woman-hating rape-apologist?) Once two jilted Assange groupies discovered each other, the women who’d previously stayed friendly with Assange even after their “assaults” (while thinking they were his only girl) got upset and decided to go to the police. And, even then, they didn’t go to press rape charges at first, they went to see if they could force Assange to undergo STI testing. After there wasn’t enough evidence to charge him with anything, and then after repeat tries got the charges thrown out of court, one woman escalated her claim and said that, yes, actually, she did recall that he held her down with his bodyweight when they had sex. The rape hysterics have been holding that part up as the new lynchpin in the case. Obviously, only a rapist would be on top of a woman during sex!
Now, you would think that such questioning of such serious rape charges would be the end of the story….but you would be wrong.
In the hallowed halls of what passes for feminist activism here in the US (as is most of the West), the principle of defending those who make accusations of rape is one of the most revered and trusted hallmarks. In most cases, it’s fully justified, considering that most legitimate victims of rape have had their cases dismissed without so much of a wave or even an investigation. However, in the minds of a few feminist activists, this principle has been overinflatted to the view that not only should a victim of rape be believed and respected when she makes her case, but that ANY woman making an accusation of rape must be assumed to be credible, if not absolutely correct, and that the man targetted must be assumed to be guilty as charged without even the notion of verification of evidence, or the right of a trial by jury. Anything less than total acquecense to this principle, so they say, simply leads to being “apologists” for rape and degrading and abusing rape victims all over again.
In short, blind rage at the treatment of legitimate victims of rape have caused well meaning people to assume the notion that any attempt to question a rape accuser is tantimont to “trashing” her and “justifying” her rape, and any attempt to defend the targeted person is simply the work of “rape apologists” who simply are brute enablers of fiends who rape women. “Damn the notion of innocent until proven guilty in a court of law; we KNOW he’s guilty, and Goddess dammit, anyone who disagrees with us is simply protecting him..if not a rapist himself!!!”
And so, a mostly rag-tag group of feminist bloggers, mostly liberal- to radical-feminists, have joined forces to mount a campaign online to “defend” the honor of the accusers of Julian Assange, all but calling him out as a bruteal rapist who is using his celebrity as the founder of Wikileaks as a free “get out of jail free and rape women with impunity” card. Mostly organized across the political spectrom from Amanda Marcotte of Pandagon to Monica Shores to Shelby Knox to Boing Boing editrix Xena Jardin, to various radical feminists, they have posted their rage at Assange at many venues.
But that’s not all…they have now spread their venom to include those who they see as being enablers of Assange and attackers of those heroic accusers of his.
Thier current target happens to be liberal icon/producer/director Michael Moore of Roger And Me and Sicko fame, who has been openly expressing his support for Assange’s efforts as liberating and doing the job that mainstream journalism apparently isn’t doing. That has inflamed the “buat Assange” crowd so much that they have mounted a special Twitter campaign using the hashtag “#MooreAndMe”; where they unleash their venom on Moore for enabling this evil rapist to get away with his crimes.
Actuall, though, Moore now has to share the hot seat now…because none other than Keith Olbermann has aroused the anger of the New Feminist “Lynch Assange” movement.
Olbermann’s crime was to invite Moore to his MSNBC Countdown with Keith Olbermann TV show last Monday and give him five minutes to justify his donation to Assange’s bail fund…and dismiss the rape accusations as “hooey” based on the inconsistencies. Of course, that inflamed them that much more, so much that they bombed KO’s Twitter account with flaming Scud tweets accusing him of being another apologist for rape.
That in itself brought some of Olbermann’s old haters and rivals to attempt to get in on the picking, probably thinking that they would be successful where the last scandal over his political contributions wasn’t. The media website Mediaite, a long time critic of KO, sent a reporter to harrass him with leading questions about why he wasn’t willing to accept wholeheartedly the story of the accusers; KO responded by basically blowing it off as misinterpretation. It got so bad that Olbermann ultimately decided to suspend his Twitter account to get away from the flaming…which, unfortunately, seems to have activated the noise from his opponents even that much more. (He did mention the suspension briefly on his show tonight..but offered no other comment.)
It should be noted that most defenders of Wikileaks and Julian Assange have attempted to steer away from the controversy over “He said, She said.” following Glenn Greenwald’s lead that the importance of what Wikileaks is exposing outweighs any pettiness of the charges, and that the best idea is to wait until the trials begin before passing any judgments about Assauge’s personal actions. And, of course, the charges themselves are serious enough to warrant a full hearing. Nobody is saying that if these charges are indeed true, that Assange shouldn’t be held accountable for his actions; though some do say that even if guilty, that shouldn’t undermine the efforts of Wikileaks; and they even hint that there might even be an alterior motive behind the accusations, pointing to an alleged CIA connection with one of the two accusers.
I’m not going to even assume Assange’s guilt or innocence in this matter…I’ll just wait for the courts to sellle that matter.
What bothers me most about this whole matter, though, is the willingness of the stridency of the protectors of the accusers to damn anyone who even hints of mild critcism as simply “rape apologism”, as if these women should be placed on some high pedestal and treated as if there is no need for a trial. It’s as if they believe that there can be no color or even shades of gray on this issue: you are either for the “victim” or you are for the “rapist”…and if you don’t choose quick enough, then you must be on the side of the “rapist”.
This is one step removed from Tea Party activism…and would be condemned rightfully so as extremism if it was a Tea Bagger right-winger doing this. Problaem is, though, it’s feminists — liberal feminists, radical feminists — doing this in the name of protecting rape victims and attacking rapists, and justifying bliind fath and lynch mob mentality.It’s kind of counterproductive to condemn the other side for acting extremish when you are capable of doing the same exact thing. Extremism in defense of virtue isn’t just a problem with right-wingers, I guess.
I leave it to Furry Girl to make the relevant points, since she does it better than anyone so far. And remember, she is no wallflower when it comes to excating justice to those who are proven guilty…ask Pat Bohanan.
When lefties fanatically spearhead every rape/abuse allegation leveled by anyone, they are creating an environment that enables and even encourages false accusations from angry parties. While it’s a travesty that police and courts tend to not believe people claiming that they have been sexually assaulted, the solution is not to unquestioningly champion anyone who makes the claim. Never believing and always believing allegations are both wrong. Rape and assault are awful, fucked up things, but that doesn’t mean claims shouldn’t be subjected to any fact-checking or skepticism. Murder is awful, too, and even with our badly flawed judicial system, we still generally try and sort out the facts and give the accused their day in court and a chance to defend themselves.
Hysterics will no doubt claim that I’m defending rape or don’t take it seriously. On the contrary: I consider rape and sexual assault accusations to be so serious that they deserve extra consideration and yes, even questioning when it’s warranted. I think we’re obligated to turn a critical eye on potentially fraudulent allegations. As someone who recently sung the praises of vigilante justice, I’m clearly all in favor of exacting harsh physical and social revenge upon rapists, predators, and abusers – but if you’re going to do that to someone, you had better be sure.
What is the workable alternative to having some degree of caution about rape accusations? Is the argument that rape is so terrible that it’s morally justifiable to destroy innocent lives in the pursuit of ferreting out any potential rapists? (The word for that is collateral damage.)
Julian Assange deserves a right to defend himself, have legal representation, question the lack of evidence of wrongdoing, and address lies being spread in the mainstream and liberal press. (Example: he didn’t “flee Sweden to avoid prosecution” as the feminists are claiming – he stuck around some 40 days after the accusations surfaced, trying to see if police wanted to take a statement from him. Assange also willingly turned himself in – hardly the hallmark of a “flight risk trying to avoid going to court”.) I don’t know what transpired between himself and his “victims”, but I do know that thus far, I’m not convinced he did anything more discourteous than failing to tell his Swedish ladyfriends he wasn’t looking to settle down and marry them. Maybe my guess will be proved wrong, who knows. I’ll keep an open mind, and I challenge others to do the same, especially when it comes to such incendiary topics. Google the matter for yourself, pick an array of articles to read (start with this post, perhaps), and form your own opinion based on a metric other than “anyone accused of rape is guilty, because rape is wrong.”
Being around activist types for over 11 years – and witnessing how some bad apples go nuclear on former lovers – I’ve sadly been taught to be suspicious of accusations of sexual impropriety when they involve political people. Don’t blame me for requesting fairness to all parties – vilify the dangerous scoundrels who cry wolf just to get back at an ex, mocking real survivors and make it harder for them to be believed. Just as much as rapists and abusers, fakers are the true villains of this topic.
To repeat: if Julian Assange is guilty of the crimes he committed, then he deserves all the wrath coming to him. But, until he is proven guilty, it would be a good idea for everyone to turn down the volume a bit. And, let’s seperate the man from the organization that is doing plenty of good and is being hit with the full wrath of many states who have plenty to hide. Censure if you will, but when your blind hate causes innocent people to be burned or self censored, it allows the real enemy (state fascism) to win. All of that is not worth a broken condom.
This work, unless otherwise expressly stated, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States License.
Emily on 
Anthony Kennerson on 
Jenny on 
I think the issue here is that a lot of blogs have been throwing about rape myths( It was just surprise sex!, Her accuser works for the FBI!, etc), there's two good commentaries about that right here: http://www.amptoons.com/blog/archives/2010/12/08/… http://kateharding.info/2010/12/16/some-shit-im-s…
I agree the guy needs a fair trial and it's fucking annoying that the government decided to attach the espionage charge to it, but we can't blow off the claims as hooey either nor should we throw around excuses.
Nothin' like a good old witch hunt to get the mob a lynchin'.
Kill the beat! Kill the beast!
More seriously, I think it's worth pointing out that a hand full of soi-disant radical feminists who are more interested in proving what hardliners they are than actually finding out if a crime was committed do not represent every advocate of gender equality any more than the jack-booted jackass that did this…
http://www.boingboing.net/2010/10/26/rand-paul-su…
…represents every small-government conservative. The sad thing is that usually I only see people pigeonholing the folks opposite themselves on the political spectrum, but in this case the mob leaders are applying the "purity test" to their own ranks. It's oh so reassuring to watch the hyper-polarized opinion-espousers amp ever higher at the expense of healthy and informed debate.
Damn rational arguments and full speed ahead!
So we, the public, have to ask ourselves if we really want to go along for the zealots' ride. I, for one, will not follow any leader off a cliff no matter how many lemmings take the plunge. But then I'm kind of partial to thinking before I burn someone at the steak. Silly me.
However, in the minds of a few feminist activists, this principle has been overinflatted to the view that not only should a victim of rape be believed and respected when she makes her case, but that ANY woman making an accusation of rape must be assumed to be credible, if not absolutely correct, and that the man targetted must be assumed to be guilty as charged without even the notion of verification of evidence, or the right of a trial by jury. Anything less than total acquecense to this principle, so they say, simply leads to being “apologists” for rape and degrading and abusing rape victims all over again.
Why haven't you provided links or the names of the feminists who claim this? If there are so few, why not provide evidence? I think it's kind of ironic that you want to see all of this evidence firsthand that these women were assaulted before taking their claim seriously, but YOU don't need any such evidence to believe some self-proclaimed feminist somewhere is making libelous claims about Assange all over the Internet. You take Furry Girl's second hand account (she provides as much proof as you do) at face value without questioning it. Rape accusations are a serious charge, so I take them seriously when someone makes them, especially since our culture allows these victims to be blamed for what happens to them. A false accusation makes it even easier for people to react to legitimate rape allegations with disbelief, again, because we privilege the rights of rapists over their victims, unequivocally based on gender and gender norms. Every woman on Earth knows this, which is why false accusations are very rare. They're also rare because women don't want to go through the humiliating physical exams and questioning, and that's done by the people who are helping them, unless it's going to put the right person in jail. Plus, ignoring their claims can cause serious damage to them and other women. There's a happy medium between dismissing rape allegations and launching a lynch mob. It's taking the allegations seriously, treating the victim with compassion, and calling for a fair trial so that the right person gets caught and brought to justice.