I’ve been poking fun at the juxtaposition of Islamofascism and Feminism, but this post is not about funny. Tragic, disgusting, infuriating; it’s about that – but unlike feminism, it isn’t a joke.
Tehran, Iran, Jan. 07 – An Iranian court has sentenced a teenage rape victim to death by hanging after she weepingly confessed that she had unintentionally killed a man who had tried to rape both her and her niece.
Read the whole thing. Link rotted, here’s an update (9/15/18).
“Unintentionally!?” That she would say that says a lot about womens’ place in Iran. That after that self-debasement they’re still going to hang her says even more.
Let’s review. A victim of attempted rape has been sentenced to death by an Islamic court for fatally stabbing an attacker who chased her boyfriend away by throwing rocks. The boy”friend” escaped on a motorcycle. The perp, backed by a couple of buddies, attacked her twice. The first time – she cut him. The second time – she killed him.
Under United States law we probably would have reached a different verdict than death by hanging for the victim. I imagine a verdict permanently removing this learning-challenged bastard from the forcible gene distribution pool. It would have been accompanied by applause.
Under Iran’s interpretation of Sharia women can be hung for defending themselves from rape. Giving birth to a daughter out of wedlock is a crime punishable by death under Sharia in Nigeria – and probably in Iran, I can’t be bothered to look. In any case, differences in interpretation of laws established in the 4th Century is a principle that has been called by some “a living constitution.” Unless you’re female. Then it isn’t living.
Death by hanging for defense against rape is not some fading convention of Islam unique to Iran that will be overturned on appeal. The sentence is neither remarkable nor an idle threat – later to be rescinded – issued merely to pacify a few malevolent religious psychotics.
Last week, a court in the city of Rasht, northern Iran, sentenced Delara Darabi to death by hanging charged with murder when she was 17 years old. Darabi has denied the charges.
In August 2004, Iran’s Islamic penal system sentenced a 16-year-old girl, Atefeh Rajabi, to death after a sham trial, in which she was accused of committing “acts incompatible with chastity”.
The teenage victim had no access to a lawyer at any stage and efforts by her family to retain one were to no avail. Atefeh personally defended herself and told the religious judge that he should punish those who force women into adultery, not the victims. She was eventually hanged in public in the northern town of Neka.
Such are women’s rights under “strict” Sharia. That raises a question or two by itself: What would be “moderate”, “or “progessive”, or “reality-based” Sharia – and what stops those doctrines from turning into “strict” Sharia? A Constitution? Inquiring minds want to know. Sharia is the law in several foreign countries and some might prefer not to travel in them.
For an inquiring mind the phrase “deference to foreign law” leads inexorably to Supreme Court Justices Kennedy and Breyer, and especially Justice Ginsberg in this gyno-context, and their shared idea that we should look to foreign law for instruction in interpretation of our own Constitution.
It becomes, then, reasonable to ask the esteemed Justices how they distinguish Sharia from any other foreign law? In their answer they are not allowed to refer to the Constitution of the United States in any way whatsoever, even through the vague innuendo which they might normally apply.
Thinking of feminism, and SCOTUS, and the malicious treatment of women brings us to considering Kim Gandy, President of the National Organization for Women, who has been denouncing threats to women in the strongest of terms. For example, her defense of women in recent days has been complaining that Senate Democrats, like the odious Ted Kennedy, haven’t been tough enough in questioning Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito.
You’d think the impending State sanctioned murder of a young woman in Iran – whose crime was being subject to an attempted rape – would garner some attention from the President of NOW. You would be wrong.
NOW’s website doesn’t mention the plight of any of these Iranian woman, and when you do a search on “Islam” the first hit is The Truth About George W. Bush – Archive.
A search on “Iran” returns, in order, these top four hits:
The Truth About George W. Bush – Archive
The Truth About George – Cronies
The Truth About George W. Bush – Bushisms
And the Ms Disingenuity winner:
Iraqi Women Should Think Twice Before Accepting Constitution
This is why feminism has become a joke, though one that’s not at all funny.
1 thought on “Iran: Killing the Victim”
I live in a large Canadian city in an Arabic dense neighborhood. The younger generation of women that come into the grocery store where I work seem to be for the most part westernised with one exception. The male children accompanying them are the worst little brats I have ever seen, while the girl children are chastised, yelled at and even slapped in public for things their brothers are doing constantly. These little boys talk to their mothers in the most obscene way with no repurcussions whatsoever. Elderly Arabic men and I have come to blows several tines as I will not tolerate bieng treated like one of their own for a second. When I read about rape victi ms bieng murdered, and let’s face it there is no other word for what is happening to these victims- at the hands of ‘men’, it makes me both scared and strangely horrifically excited, because as history has proven time and time again, the most oppressed people rise up and make their voices heard, not to mention putting an end to their oppressors. I truly think that with the courage of a few brave women who stand up for women in murderous slave like countries everywhere who are on a regular basis exposed to things that would curl your hair, things that we will never hear of will one day make a matriarchal socity out of these horrid places, and I will be standing up and cheering. Without these women, there would be no men, abnd how would the world be if we decided who was an unworthy male at birth and disposed of them? We would never commit such an atrocity. But they do. Every day.