Raping Asian girls worse than raping white girls because it 'harms their marriage prospects' :o

[OTheHugeManatee]

Link

A judge has just ruled that a man who raped Asian under-13s should receive a longer sentence, because the victims' families were now worried about their marriage prospects. In other words, damaging these girls' property value in the marriage 'market' actually counted in terms of assessing the damage done by raping them.

I think this is horrific. Not just because virginity should have no bearing on the value of a girl or woman, but also because implicitly it seems to support the notion that underlay the belief of the Rotherham rapists that white girls were 'trash' who could be abused freely because they were already devalued. Like it's OK to rape white girls because they have no trading value.

I get that feminism coexists quite uneasily with cultural diversity, and this is a very difficult area to navigate, but really feel like this needs a feminist response.

If a widowed old woman is raped, can we expect more lenient sentencing because there may be no men around her to be negatively impacted?

Yonic I didn't think impact on the victim up until now included harm caused by her family.
However, I understood that the recent change to the law, which was applied in this case, was because politicians intended the impact to be more reflected in the sentence. Of course, as usual, they didn't think through the consequences

^^ Yonic Raping TWO children deserves at least 20 years, imo plus castration
There should be a bigger gap in sentences between non-violent crime and rape

Signed and shared

YonicScrewdriver it's not really clear what was done to the 9 year old. She wasn't raped, at any rate. Nor was the other child.

I'm not sure if the offences would cover something like the older child performing oral sex on the offender, while the younger child was present. But there was no penetration involved, per the offence descriptions.

This isn't about oh poor little white people. They aren't relevant here
Sorry but they are relevant. This decision is ,amongst all the other things wrong about it, basically reinforcing the idea that certain white girls are just trash.

I have to say I'm a bit with BrandNew. I was uncomfortable about the 'what about white girls' because I don't think is about the victims at all. I don't think Asian victims are being privileged over white victims (they are still being raped for a start). I don't think the impact of the rape on the girl was actually a genuine consideration.

This is all about the men. How they view rape. How they view how worthy a victim is. What the impact of rape is on them. How rape is viewed in relation to them.

It's also about perpetuating racial stereotypes which will only continue to damage Asian women and girls in the long run.

But I also see what BrandNew is saying about the actual impact on the victim too and how the twin oppressions of racism and misogyny impact black victims of crime.

Old shilling, I think you meant to write that you are not sure if the offences would cover oral rape of the 13 year old.

Rape applies to oral, vaginal or anal rape.

Misogyny and racism are very important issues that should be tackled - but is it right to do that by telling some women that their rape, their pain do not matter as much as another woman's?

For me this isn't about 'what about the poor white girls' specifically. It's about the principle of equality in the eyes of the law for rape victims regardless of ethnicity or culture.

Though it is also logical to conclude from this ruling that, if a rape is aggravated by the victim coming from a conservative community in which she is unjustly shamed following her assault, it follows that if a girl comes from a community that appears largely indifferent to who is or isn't fucking her then it's somehow less severe when she is raped.

Which, as I think I've already said, is basically the attitude we saw in Rotherham. So it is relevant IMO.

Oh ignore me. I'm not explaining myself very well at all. I can see BrandNew's point of view. I also wonder if this had been a white girl and the judge had stated some cultural aggravating circumstances in sentencing whether it would have even been noticed.

No I don't think that's right at all op.

This girl has been adversely effected due to some part by her community.

Another girl with a perfectly supportive family and community may suffer mental health problems due to her sexual abuse and that should be fully took into account with sentencing even if another girl didn't have these effects.

Normally I think MN misses the mark in topics of race but here I think the only thing worth pointing out is that it's not just white girls whose rapes are being invalidated, but any girl outside of the muslim community and that's being ignored quite a bit.

The point is though, when ANY woman is raped, the mans feelings are pandered to. In this one case where a sentence arguably punishes the rapist, it's not because the judge sees the emotional damage these rapes have done, that the girls' lives will be marred now by this trauma. No. The girls' worth TO MEN is what he is considering. Nothing to do with their support system (and anyway, I lost almost all my work colleague friends when I reported a sexual assault) but that now they're less valuable to men and he should be punished harsher for that. It's repulsive.

I think you explained yourself fine scallops,

Congenital belief about white privilege is a hard thing for anyone to change.

This reminds me of an article I read on rape in Sweden where a Muslim leader said that it was better to rape native white Swedish women (as opposed to Muslim immigrant women) because they had a support network, weren't ostracised by their families and had probably had sex before. I wasn't sure if it is was right wing propaganda at the time..

It's buying into the idea that there are different levels of worthiness of women which is the idea that fuels rape in the first place.

Do you think that it is OK to change white privilege by telling some women and girls that their rape is not as bad as others? I have a supportive and loving family - so if I get raped, it won't be as bad? How can anyone say that?

No I don't. I believe in the way the system takes into account any impact crime has on a victim. You can't take out this girls cultures ramifications on the effect it would of had. I think signing a petition to downgrade this man's sentence is vile.

Signed and shared. Thank you for starting this petition.

scallops I think you're doing fine explaining yourself. But I don't think this is about trying to privilege any ethnicity.

To me this shouldn't be about pitting groups of women against one another in a competition for who gets the most sympathy for being raped based on their culture or skin colour. It's about challenging the idea that the harm done by rape should be evaluated with any reference at all to what men value about women - particularly the notion that women are 'dirtied' or devalued by having their virginity even against their will.

Rape is fucking barbaric whoever it happens to, whatever their cultural background, and should be punished as such. And equality in the eyes of the law is - or was, in theory - a fundamental principle in this country. I think if those principles are being relativised it should be challenged.

SDTG, do you disagree with the general concept of victim impact playing a part in sentencing? I assume it does so for other non fatal crimes of violence too.

For my part, I am not sure that it's right to cite anything about marriage prospects but for the judge to hear about impact on schooling etc seems fair to take into account (without minimising a crime that happened to another girl who hadn't found her school life affected)

Or do you think the crime and aggravating factors should be the determinant of sentencing?

Genuine question, I think it's a tricky area.

But brandnew no-one wants to downgrade the guy's sentence. IMO he should be imprisoned for considerably longer. The point isn't to diminish his sentence but to challenge the idea that the impact of rape should be relativised according to how upset the victim's father is cultural context, when in fact the impact of rape on a victim just can't be measured like that.

Yonic, the offender wasn't convicted of the offence of rape, that was my point. It was a sexual assault, which carries a lower sentence than the offence of rape.

I know. I was pointing out to you that oral penetration is not sexual assault, it's rape.

I objected to your description of a 13 year old "performing oral sex" on a 30 something man. She is below the age of consent. It isn't sex.