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.

Good points Dervel.

I signed the petition. Thanks for the link.

Good points Dervel that's what I meant when I said it is the rapist who is degraded.It is the rapist who has brought shame on himself.

What stood out for me was that he raped 2 children under age 14. The ethnicity of the girls was considered to make his crime worse; yet he got 7 years in jail!!

Bullet, whilst I agree the sentence is too low, the conviction was for sexual assault rather than rape.

This case has echoes of the asian grooming rings where social services and the police were labeling these girls as "child prostitutes" and the berating of their parents that went on. I just cannot fathom how these agencies came to this conclusion.

Article by Rahila Gupta here

its disgusting and gives a message that raping certain women its okay.

Whoever got on their high horse about this being about "wotaboutthewhitewomen" has spectacularly missed the point tbh.

This isn't about that. It's about the fact that the judge is acknowledging and validating the concept that certain girls/ women are more valuable (to men) than others because of their sexual status and that therefore, those more valuable girls / women suffer more from their rape.

It is exactly the same concept as saying "if you're married to him, then it's not so bad to be raped as it is by a stranger." It is setting up the level of trauma women and girls are allowed to have about their rape and that level of trauma being decided by men and being decided on the basis of what a woman is worth to them, not to herself.

Is that really not obvious?

It is setting up the level of trauma women and girls are allowed to have about their rape and that level of trauma being decided by men and being decided on the basis of what a woman is worth to them, not to herself.

Very well put.

No Basil It's about that and validating one particular culture's attitudes.

It's not one particular cultures attitude. Most cultures value women on their worth to men

This case was about one particular culture's attitude. You can look at the wider implications if you like but these judges made their decisions applying their interpretation of a particular culture's attitudes.