Warning: This post may contain traces of anger that many people have an intolerance to. This post will be a bit long, as in talking about human rights I think I have to show the legalities of international legislation on this issue. Please bare with me though, I think I raise some interesting points I would like responded to. If there are any MRA types that still frequent my blog I would also like your input here. I will start off with the UN declaration of human rights;
Article 1.
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Article 2.
Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.
Article 3.
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
Article 4.
No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.
Article 5.
No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Article 6.
Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.
Article 7.
All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.
Article 8.
Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.
Article 9.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.
Article 10.
Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.
Article 11.
(1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.
(2) No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.
Article 12.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.
Article 13.
(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.
(2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.
Article 14.
(1) Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.
(2) This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
Article 15.
(1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.
Article 16.
(1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
(2) Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
(3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.
Article 17.
(1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.
Article 18.
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.
Article 19.
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
Article 20.
(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
(2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association.
Article 21.
(1) Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.
(2) Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.
(3) The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.
Article 22.
Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.
Article 23.
(1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
(2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.
(3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
(4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.
Article 24.
Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.
Article 25.
(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
(2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.
Article 26.
(1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.
(2) Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.
(3) Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.
Article 27.
(1) Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.
(2) Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.
Article 28.
Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized.
Article 29.
(1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.
(2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.
(3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
Article 30.
Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedom set forth herein.
(sourced from http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/)
To make my argument for the lack of human rights in Australian (which applies well to other nations, such as America) and to show why FRA is not a violation of human rights, so irrelevant as a parellel to the question of the prevalence of sexual abuse I will draw primarily from these five articles;
Article 1.
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Article 3.
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
Article 5.
No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Article 7.
All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.
Article 10.
Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.
In order to demonstrate my point I will take a personal reality and show how it is also a political reality. Firstly I will pose a few questions, Where were my human rights when I was being raped, sexually abused, emotionally abused and stalked? Where was my right to life, liberty and security of person? Where was my right to not be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment? Those rights didn't exist. As a consequence in a society where 1/6 women will be repeatedly sexually abused or raped (I seperate those two things because law does) where is the human rights of that nearly 20% of women? Where are the human rights of all women in society who are subjected to this constant threat which takes the form of further restriction of liberty. Such as freedom to leave ones house after dark without fear of and the very real possibility of assault.
When I was being raped I did not have those rights, I still don't have the rights to full protection from sexual abuse happening again which is demonstrated by its shameful prevalence. One in six women in my society have had their human rights directly violated, how can you reconcile this fact with the statement that women have human rights? In an above human rights article it also states that it is a human right to not be subject to incitement of discrimination. We live in a society which romanticises and constantly justifies sexual abuse in various forms, including saturation of the media. I don't doubt that FRA is wrong or a horrible experience, but it is not a human rights violation, as the UN outlines in its declaration everyone is entitled to a just hearing when accused of criminal activities and that is just what men accused of rape receive.
Even if it was a reality that FRA was a human rights violation. Nobody has been able to show that it happens as often as does sexual abuse. I doubt that one in six men are subjected to repeated FRA accusations. They get a just trial, and I believe I had a trial too, but not a just one. Society has deemed me as a woman, deserving of sexual assault, it has deemed this by encouraging it and normalising it to the widespread extent of today. Even as a person accused of rape human rights are upheld in this way, but I never got anything but an arbitrary decision that resulted in the ideology that I should be raped and consequently degraded and tortured.
I have been raped and sexually abused multiple times starting when I was 11. The oppression of women was made evident to me before I even became one. However despite the fact my human rights have been violated consistently over my lifetime I am not supposed to be angry, not angry with the system that allows these atrocities and not angry with the people who perpetuate it. I am sick of being told that I shouldn't be angry, that I should just get over it. How can I get over something that is still happening to the women around me, and how can I get over something which is likely to occur to me again in the future? I don't think I can without accepting that rape is just "shit happens". If that is the case I refuse to "heal" from my experiences, we need to stand up against this system and prevent this shit from happening anymore.
I don't understand at all how anyone can claim that one in six women don't have their human rights directly violated and how women as a whole aren't subject to a system which enforces this. If anyone can give me some answers on this I would be grateful.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You know, now there are studies saying men are falsely accused of rape 40-60% of the time...I call FUCKING BULLSHIT!!! Not that it doesn't exist, but that much??? Either women are so disillusioned by the patriarchy that any opportunity they get to gain revenge they take, or the more likely, that society (police officers, men, women, juries, judges, etc.)believe a woman's rights are dependent on how she dresses...sick...just sick...
ReplyDeleteI for one had an attempted rape that didn't succeed, when I told my close friend and co-worker (a guy) he said I should report it...I said how can I report it, I don't have evidence, no bruises, no marks, no body fluid, just my word against his...the guy looked at me, shook his head and apologized that it had to be like this...I got away, yes..but if that group of people didn't come into this PUBLIC deli in broad daylight I would've been raped, and maybe dead. I celebrate that I didn't lose myself that day, but there were others that I didn't even realize was rape until my definition of rape expanded into more than what society deems rape, had I known I may not at one point become bitter, women who are bitter are women who don't see the patriarchy, they are living in it and unable to describe WHY...when you find out WHY you start on the path to healing!
@marriedfem
ReplyDelete"You know, now there are studies saying men are falsely accused of rape 40-60% of the time...I call FUCKING BULLSHIT!!!"
I read through the one study that showed that, and it's methodology is so flawed that very few people take it seriously.
"...when you find out WHY you start on the path to healing!"
Yes, they keep telling me to put the blame where it belongs, and it belongs on squarely to the patriarchy.
There are problems in the UN DHR and so I do not consider it an authoritative list of rights, but for the sake of argument will take it as usable.
ReplyDeleteI think those who make false accusations should be prosecuted for doing so. I think there's a strong argument to be made that such accusations are a violation of the rights of the accused - the accuser is directly violating UN DHR Article [12] attacks on honour/reputation (of the accused) and is using the state against the accused to violate UN DHR Articles [3] liberty and [9] arbitrary arrest. If the accused is convicted and improsoned, [4] servitude/slavery and [13] movement are also violated. The accused has [12] legal protection against attacks on honour, [8] the right to effective remedy and as you mentioned [10] right to a just hearing.
Say the police [5] torture information out of a suspect but that suspect gets [10] a fair trial. I am sure you would agree that to say that person did not have his rights violated solely on the basis that the police gave him a fair trial is absurd.
Whether FRAs are rights violations does not depend only on upholding [10] but on whether the FRA causes other rights violations.
"Where are the human rights of all women in society who are subjected to this constant threat which takes the form of further restriction of liberty. Such as freedom to leave ones house after dark without fear of and the very real possibility of assault."
The right you have is freedom from actual assaults - a guarantee that society will attempt to prosecute those who attempt to harm you. You have no right to freedom from fear of/the possibility of assaults.
"When I was being raped I did not have those rights, I still don't have the rights to full protection from sexual abuse happening again which is demonstrated by its shameful prevalence."
Like anything else (murder, theft...) the right to not be sexually assaulted is something which allows society to attempt to prosecute those who violate the rights of others. It does not force society to preventatively protect people.
Prosecution can fail, which is a good thing. Unfortunately it is particularly difficult to prosecute rapes and sexual assaults because of the nature of the crimes so such prosecutions have a higher rate of failure than most.
Caveat: Nothing in this post should be construed to mean that I in any way condone any form of violence against any individual or group of people.
ReplyDeleteLike many feminists, you enthusiastically paint the blackest possible picture when discussing anything to do with rape.
For Example:
You say “…1 in 6 women will be repeatedly sexually abused or raped…” but as usual you don’t actually cite your source of this figure. I assume that you got it from the Australian Centre for the Study of Sexual Assault whose web site says that according to a 1995 survey “…one in six adult women in Australia had experienced sexual assault since the age of 15 years…”. In other words, 1 in 6 women had experienced a sexual assault in their life.
It also says “…In 2005, there were an estimated 44,100 persons (note includes men and women) aged 18 years and over who were victims of at least one sexual assault in the 12 months prior to the survey; a victimisation prevalence rate of 0.3%...”
The site also explains that the definition of sexual assault comes from the Australian Standard Offence Classification – a quick Google search for that, and we can learn that “Sexual Assault” includes “Non assaultative Sexual Offences”. These include, voyeurism, indecent exposure, and so on. “Sexual Assault” also ranges in scale from pinching a women’s butt in a crowed train to full on rape.
So let’s have a look at what these figures actually mean.
1. Firstly we can say that most Australian women (5/6) have never been victims of rape or sexual assault
2. Secondly we can say that most Australian women will never be the victims of sexual assault
3. Thirdly we can say that of those women who do become victims of SA, most will be assaulted only once in their life
4. Given that sexual assault covers a range of acts from the minor to the very serious, we can reasonable conclude that more minor offences are committed than very serious ones. Therefore:
5. Of the 1 in 6 women who do, during the course of their life, become victims of a sexual assault, most will suffer assaults at the most minor end of the scale.
6. In 2005 the likely hood of an individual woman in Australia being sexually assaulted was less than 0.3% (given that the 0.3% figure includes male victims). If you adjust these figures to exclude the women most at risk – prostitutes, homeless, major drug users, etc. You must conclude that the chance of an average Ms Australia being sexually assaulted is pretty remote, and if she is so unfortunate the assault is likely to be reasonably minor.
Seems a pretty far cry from “…1 in 6 women will be repeatedly sexually abused or raped…” to me. And yes I get that 1 in 6 is still way too many even given the observations above.
Moving on:
To claim that women have no human rights in Australia is preposterous. Rights are rights and continue to exist irrespective of whether or not they are being respected. What you are saying is:
“Rape is a violation of a woman’s human rights. Some Australian women are raped. Therefore Australian women have no human rights.”
This is as daft as me saying:
“Murder is a violation of a man’s human rights. Some Australian men are murdered. Therefore Australian men have no human rights.”
Final Point:
Rape is a crime. Crime is a problem in society and many of society’s members become victims of crime. Rape is a particularly egregious crime, but it is a crime perpetrated by individuals, not by the society itself. Your heroine Andrea Dwonkin’s loopy ravings notwithstanding, rape is not an institutionalized crime perpetrated on women by some evil cabal of men bent on keeping women in their place.
I never specified severity of the crime. However I would say everything that you listed can have an emotional impact.
ReplyDelete"rape is not an institutionalized crime perpetrated on women by some evil cabal of men bent on keeping women in their place. "
I agree. I do not however agree that it is not socially constructed. I am not sure I buy into "rape culture" but I will say that society romanticises assault of women, in particular sexual assault. I would also say that is a result of institutional forces that do keep a woman "in her place". Such as the wage gap...which yes still exists in Australia. Viewing women in a subservient role to men means that assault is more acceptable. Which also addresses this;
“Murder is a violation of a man’s human rights. Some Australian men are murdered. Therefore Australian men have no human rights.”
As an additional note I find this absurd
ReplyDelete"but it is a crime perpetrated by individuals, not by the society itself."
Maybe if it was a rarity, but that is in fact not the case in the slightest. Society perpetuates rape. It makes it sexy and other forms of sexual assault that fall short of rape just aren't taken seriously by the police.
“…I never specified severity of the crime. However I would say everything that you listed can have an emotional impact…”
ReplyDeleteNo, but you do use emotive wording to imply that the likelihood and severity of an assault is much greater than in fact it is.
“…I would also say that is a result of institutional forces that do keep a woman "in her place". Such as the wage gap...which yes still exists in Australia…”
I think we should leave the “wage gap” for another day.
“…Maybe if it was a rarity, but that is in fact not the case in the slightest…”
But it is a rarity. Less than .3%. In fact if you account for male victims is more like 0.25%. And most of these will be minor, as already discussed. Hardly an epidemic is it?
“…Society perpetuates rape. It makes it sexy…”
I don’t know what society you live in, but I don’t think that is true at all. How exactly, does society perpetuate rape? How does it make it sexy? “What “institutional forces” are you talking about? There is only one place that I can think of that ever portrays rape in any kind of positive light, and that is in the Mills and Boon style romance novels – written, by and large, by women for women.
"No, but you do use emotive wording to imply that the likelihood and severity of an assault is much greater than in fact it is."
ReplyDeleteSorry I don't agree.
"What “institutional forces” are you talking about?"
I already specified
"There is only one place that I can think of that ever portrays rape in any kind of positive light"
There are lots of places in the media that do so. Dolce and gabbana springs to mind.
"But it is a rarity. Less than .3%. In fact if you account for male victims is more like 0.25%. And most of these will be minor, as already discussed. Hardly an epidemic is it?"
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nationmaster.com/country/as-australia/cri-crime
I would also say that as it is still approximated that there is a large amount of sexual assault AND rape specifically that goes unreported that it would be higher than this 1%. I would say that is quite high for a "rarity" actually.
Additionally I will say that police don't tend to pay attention to sexual assault or rape where they can not see physical harm. Given the estimated high rates of "date rape" and the fact the chance of physical harm is lower who can really put that much stock into these statistics?
ReplyDeleteSo you won't accept stats from official government sources but you will accept them from a random website that does not say where the numbers come from?
ReplyDeleteThe .3% figure comes from a survey, not from police reports. It INCLUDES assaults not reported to the police. So really - not a great epidemic.
I still can't find where you define the "Institutional Forces" that you claim are perpetuating rape - can you run it past me one more time?
Likewise with Dolce & Gabbana - can you give an example of how they portay rape in a positive light?
"So you won't accept stats from official government sources but you will accept them from a random website that does not say where the numbers come from?"
ReplyDeleteWell firstly you didn't source your reference. Secondly I have read lots more studies that put the number much higher than you did. It is difficult to go back through everything and find the correct articles again. If you really want me to I will put aside some holiday time to do so.
"I still can't find where you define the "Institutional Forces"
I didn't "define" but I gave an example. The wage gap. You declined to comment.
Likewise with Dolce & Gabbana - can you give an example of how they portay rape in a positive light?
http://www.cherryflava.com/photos/uncategorized/dolcegabbana03.jpg
Actually I did cite the source: "the Australian Centre for the Study of Sexual Assault whose web site says that according to a 1995 survey ...".
ReplyDeleteThe wage gap is an institutional force?
The D&G image is quite obviously staged and it is a deliberate attempt to shock - it can hardly be called a positive portrayal of rape