When the men go out, they’re killed. The women are only raped.’”

Women’s suffering emphasized, men’s suffering ignored. An evolutionary mechanism?

Women have a special talent to paint themselves as victims and engage men as "white knights" to help them in that endeavor. The even higher level suffering and plight of men is just getting ignored. Human-Stupidity suspects that this manipulation skill is due to evolutionary built in mechanisms that women learned in the gender war, to counter men’s superior strength. It is to be noted that the limiting factor for child production (and thus inclusive fitness) is the number of women’s wombs, not the number of men. As Angry Harry puts it: men are dispensable.

Women are always the victims. In rallies, women "take back the knight" at safe campuses, requesting safety for women no matter how drunk. Nobody mentions that statistically men are more frequently victims of violence and homicide. Women stress rape culture, re-defining rape to include ever more minute transgressions like 5 second rape (failure to instantly stop consensual sex).

Women, engaging the help of men, manage to raise public awareness about rape while ignoring prison rape. Prison rape is extremely violent, and often entails years of sexual slavery and repeated rape. Prisoners who "consent" to years of sex to avoid violence don’t even count as rape victims.

Media focus on rapes and other female miseries while ignoring male executions, worked-to-death laborers, tortured prisoners, and nine-year-old boy soldiers trained to kill and be killed.

An excerpt from Tim’s new book Loving Men, Respecting Women: The Future of Gender Politics

‘When the men go out, they’re killed. The women are only raped.’”

A case in point is provided in an editorial by Nicholas D. Kristof, published June 5, 2005 in the New York Times under the heading, “A Policy of Rape.” Says Kristof, “More than two years after the genocide in Darfur began, the women of Kalma Camp—a teeming squatter’s camp of 110,000 people driven from their burned villages—still face the risk of gang rape every single day as they go out looking for firewood.” Now, of course, this is an abomination that demands attention. It is also an abomination that receives attention. My concern with this article comes from what’s missing—at least up until the very end. “I’m still chilled by the matter-of-fact explanation I received as to why it is women who collect firewood, even though they’re the ones who are raped,” says Kristof. “‘It’s simple,’ one woman here explained. ‘When the men go out, they’re killed. The women are only raped.’”

Inside Story – The silent victims of rape | Al Jazeera Video

The United Nations, even in security council resolutions, explicitly excludes men and boys when they talk about sexual violence against women and girls. The United Nations spokeswomen squirmed herself out of the topic, distracting but not recognizing the United Nation bias against male victims.

The above movie focuses on male rape. it still ignores other types of violence that is selectively anti-male.  It mentions that 20% of male combatants got raped, vs. 30% of women. It does not mention how many men got killed, nor that there probably are not many female combatants.

Well, that new information changes things a bit, doesn’t it? So why then could this editorial not be titled “A Policy of Murder”? Why is all its emphasis on the rape of women and none of its emphasis on the murder of men? Why is this revelation thrown away as a tagline at the end of the article and offered only as “an indication of how utterly we are failing the people of Darfur” rather than as an indication of how utterly we are failing to direct equal compassion and attention toward the atrocities inflicted upon men?

“this policy of rape flourishes only because it is ignored” while the death of men simply does not matter

Adam Jones, author/editor of Gendercide and Genocide (2004), has studied these issues in depth. Genocide may be defined as the attempt to exterminate a given population. Gendercide is the selective mass killing of one gender. As Jones makes clear, the gender of choice for extermination is nearly always the male gender. In part, males are selected because males are more easily assumed to pose a threat, but also because males may be slaughtered without over-burdening the slaughterers with guilt and trauma. Moreover, you can slaughter males and provoke only minimal world outrage. In fact, the media will focus mainly on hardships faced by the women deprived of men. [...]

“One of the best indicators of the special vulnerability of men and boys is the frequency with which relatives and friends sought to disguise them in women’s clothing,” asserts Jones. “The African Rights report ‘Death, Despair and Defiance’ cites a number of examples of such procedures, which are reminiscent of similar practices followed in the Bosnian and Kosovan conflicts of the 1990s.”[5] Clearly, if females were specially targeted, males would not be donning female clothing. Yet, as the media reaction to Rwandan atrocities makes plain, women will be presented as the victims almost no matter what the truth. Jones continues: source

• Feminist rape laws don’t apply to male prison rape victims
• "Rape is rape is rape" is a lie, Joe Biden! 20 different types of rape!
• Republicans re-re-define rape: to the original definition rape had for 2000 years before re-definition 30 years ago
• Victim dupes man into raping her. How can you rape without knowing you are raping?
• Definition of "Rape": When a "Rape" is not a Rape! The Abuse of the word "Rape" & the Perversion of Language
• Way over 50% of rape accusations are false. 7.4% blatantly enough to prosecute (Bavarian Police research report)
• What’s so terrible about rape? Rape is not as bad as it used to be!

Why discrimination against males, exaggerating female suffering to the extremes?

Human-Stupidity strived to look behind the facts. we want to understand WHY things are as they are. Why is mail hurt, male suffering and male victimization actively ignored to the point of falsifying statistics. How come that a "Violence against Women act" was not shot down as unconstitutionally sexist by the supreme court.

Why can Hillary Clinton get away with saying that women are the main victims of war, because their husbands and brothers die in war? Not to even mention that there are credible sources that Hillary Clinton battered Bill Clinton in the White House, of course, unpunished.

Even in China, special protection for women, ignoring men

Well, you’ve absolutely got to admit Female Victimization in Bosnia, or Arabia, or China, or whatever . . . right?” People look at me then as if to say: Either he admits MP/FV or his credibility is totally shot. Well, I could be wrong but the best evidence I know of does not support the MP/FV paradigm anywhere at all. My research indicates that matrisensus influence is always a match for patriarchal influence, and brutal places are brutal to both sexes. China? Over a ten-year period, 59,543 men and no women died in coal mining accidents alone![19] Male slaves trafficked into China find prosecuting their slavemasters particularly difficult because Chinese law only protects women from being trafficked in as slaves.[20]

You can go to a brutal place, catalogue only the brutality toward women, and on that basis conclude that women are the victims, but if you don’t research conditions for men, if you don’t compare the female victimization against male victimization, your conclusion is logically bankrupt. Even worse, our perceptions of gender reality are further distorted when the only comparison that is regularly made is the comparison between conditions experienced by the average woman vs. conditions experienced by the elite male. source

Footnote [20]       See, Kang Yi, “Some human traffickers may walk away in ‘slave’ case,” June 15, 2007, www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2007-06/15/content_895414.htm. “‘Those traffickers who lure migrant workers, mainly adult males, to do forced labor will not be convicted as the criminal code only covers those who traffic women and children,’ Guan Zhongzhi, a lawyer with Zhonghuan Law Firm told chinadaily.com.cn. The legal loophole has put male victims in an awkward position when fighting against their traffickers in the court of law.”

• Al Gore, Nobel prize winner (peace) and ex-Vice-President of the USA, falsely accused of rape
• Julian Assange, (of Wikileaks fame) accused by feminists of broken condom "rape". The entire might of the USA could not derail him, but 2 women could get him imprisoned.
• Dominique Strauss-Kahn, IMF chief and French Presidential Candidate lost the leadership of the International Monetary Fund and likely the presidency of France. His arrest caused an instant decline of the Euro. Hedge funds could have made billions overnight. His successor at the IMF has a very different policy regarding the Euro bailout which potentially involves more then a Trillion (one million million) Euros. The future of the Euro, the currencies of entire nations probably were changed by the accusation of a habitual liar who already had lied about prior rapes
• Oscar Pistorius, paralympic world record holder in 100, 200 and 400-metre events: "South Africa’s legless Blade Runner has been charged with assault after a woman claimed he bruised her leg at a party. Double amputee Oscar Pistorius spent Saturday night in jail after being accused of assaulting the 19-year-old woman". The charges were soon dropped..
• Franco Porzio, Olympic champion in Water Polo, was accused by his second wife. His first wife came to his defense.
• Jörg Kachelmann, Germany’s prominent famous TV weatherman spent months in jail upon the mere unproven accusation of an ex-girlfriend. He remained in jail even after she had been caught with various lies.
• Theo Theophanous,an Australian Labor minister, lost his high government job, his reputation and much of his savings. His accuser had waited for 10 years and was shown to be notoriously unreliable. But the character assassination had already taken its toll.
• Moshe Katsav, ex president of Israel, got a 7 plus 2 year prison sentence, because "The judges said they found the rape victim’s testimony “completely credible” and Mr. Katsav’s “false.” [NYT] Time [H]. As usual, accusations were not leveled immediately after the alleged crime, when it was still possible to find proof.
  • We can not affirm that Katzav is innocent. But like Strauss-Kahn, it looks that he is a powerful womanizer but not necessarily a rapist
  • If he really forcibly raped the woman, he deserves the jail time. Even more so because then he was incredibly stupid.
    • a) Rich powerful men have so many options to get sex with admirers (groupies) or affordable prostitutes.
    • b) And if he was really guilty , why would he be so incredibly stupid to renege on a plea bargain that would have saved him prison time?
• Mel Gibson,Hollywood actor,  accused by his girl friend and defended by his ex-wife
• Bill Clinton, US  president.  whose presidency was marred by the Paula Jones harassment accusations.
  • So what if he really made some indecent proposal to Paula Jones?  Weakness as a weapon: The Sexual Harassment Industry makes a point that maybe women should be empowered to withstand innuendo, cat calls, objectifying gaze.
  • The Paula Jones case led to the inquiries into Clinton’s private sex live, which led to the Lewinsky scandal. It was unfortunate that he lied, but most men and women lie about love affairs, and it should not have been anyone’s business who he has sex (or blow jobs) with
  • Monica Lewinsky rarely gets credited for having stood by her man and tried her best to protect Bill Clinton.
  • Sexually more liberated Brazilians could not understand why Clinton suffered so much harassment.
  • Brazilians also could not understand why the most powerful man on earth could not score a more attractive girl friend then Monica Lewinsky.
  • Long gone were the times, where the most powerful man on earth (John F. Kennedy) could have a secret tryst  with the most desired woman on earth (Marilyn Monroe) 1 2 3 ABC
  • In Brazil there was a minor scandal when the country’s president was photographed with a carnival princess and Playboy Cover who had no panties on. "An adorable girl," the President dreamily mused to reporters a couple of days later.  … Later "the Globo television network broadcast a recording of the President cooing, "I am in love with you," to Miss Ramos over the telephone"
• Christian von Boetticher, 40, designated leader of the conservative Christian Democratic Union in Schleswig-Holstein,  who was set to lead Chancellor Angela Merkel’s party in its fight to retain power the north German state next May, has resigned after intense internal party pressure over his consensual and perfectly legal love affair with a 16-year-old girl. The girl did not even accuse him.
  • Compare: Michel Temer (70), new Vice-President of Brazil was 63 when he married Marcela Temer at age 20
• The 20 Most Scandalous Sexual-Harassment Cases of All Time

Parts of this article were translated from the Italian I trofei di caccia del femminismo: le teste dei maschi infangati o distrutti da accuse di Donne.

• In a normal non-rape context, the receiving person might be asked to return the money. But never would he be jailed for robbery for accepting money from a lightly drunk stranger. Much less if she complained 6 months after the fact.

  This post is not meant to ridicule true victims of forcible rape. It is meant as a reminder that, unlike in muggers, those accused of rape are not guaranteed constitutional rights of due process.

  Alleged rapists are jailed based on unproven alccusations. Like Strauss-Kahn. This leads to suffering for the falsely accused. It also leads to waste of police time, and decreases the credibility of true victims of rape. It also encourages false accusations, see http://falserapesociety.blogspot.com/

Officer: You are very brave for coming forward. If you were drunk and driving, you would be arrested, but since you were just drunk and stupid, you’re a poor helpless victim. What monster could have done this to you?

Woman: His name is Joe Smith.

Officer: Well, we will go to his place of employment and very loudly announce that he is under arrest for such a terrible crime. He will probably lose his job just due to the accusation. If he is well known, even though he has not yet been tried, we will plaster his face over all newspapers and news channels. Luckily our society is one which no longer believes that “innocent until proven guilty” hogwash, we now have a “let’s hang him just to be safe” approach to crime. He will probably receive death threats, abuse from strangers in public, and may even be forced to move over this allegation.

Woman: Wow, that is great for revenge. What about the trial?

Officer: Even though we have no evidence other than your accusation, we will charge him, as no further evidence is needed thanks to new laws. If he takes it to trial, he will probably spend 15 years in prison, and will be the brunt of abuse of other inmates. Most likely however, the 15 year sentence will scare him enough that he will plead out. He will be in prison for 4-10 years, then when he get out and be on a public registry. If he has children he may never see them again. He will forever be ridiculed by the public and in a sense be a pariah.

Woman: And if after he has spent 7 years in prison, you find out I lied?

Officer: The DA will probably not even file charges, unless there is clear proof you knowingly and maliciously falsely accused the person. This is almost impossible, because you filed charges 6 months after the crime.  If there is absolutely convincing proof, or your confession, you will have to pay a $150 fine. If you have bad luck, we will sentence you to a year probation. We will try to keep it quiet, otherwise other mugging victims may not come forward. He may or may not be released. It helps us if he’s not because now our D.A. and police department can run around and show everyone that we’re doing a great job getting another violent, misanthropic criminal off of the street. It’s win win for everyone, and if he complains about how his life is ruined, he should just man up and get over it.

Woman: Oh no! But what happens if I want to report another mugging after you find out I have been lying?

Officer: Thanks to mugging shield laws, it can never be brought up at trial, you can put as many men in prison as you like.

Woman: Well, if that’s the case, then I want to report another mugging. Bob Johnson, the cab driver, had mugged me a few nights ago. I know that he had me arrested because I had taken the ride and didn’t have any money to pay him, but it was really because he mugged me.

Officer: We will drop all charges against you and arrest Bob Johnson immediately.

Woman: A year ago I reported a (real) robbery. I had been walking around in a bad neighborhood, flashing my money around and someone threatened me with a knife and took my money. Police officer Miller took my report and actually brought the case to trial. But Miller also also told me that it is unwise to walk around drunk flashing cash at night in a bad neighborhood. That is victim blaming.  What sort of world is this where a woman can’t even run around drunk flashing all of his cash and become a victim of unwanted attention?

Officer: We will bring disciplinary charges against officer Miller. He will be dismissed and officially publicly reprimanded by the governor and ridiculed by the press. Rights groups will also initiate “Reclaim the night” money-slut walks in gang area @2am. You don’t deserve to be told to leave our cash and Rolex at home, and don’t have to stay sober, to avoid being victimized.

• This is in reference to the poor police officer who sparked the slut walks. He had recommended, as a precaution against rape, that women should use common sense and not walk around drunk in provocative clothing.

Statutory mugging (invalid consent)

Woman: Now I remember, 25 years ago, when I was 15, I bought a used bicycle from a neighborhood boy, John. I gave him 50 dollars for it. Can I also report him for mugging?

Officer: Of course, 15 year olds can not consent to buying bicycles. Therefore your consent is invalid and it was mugging. We will have him arrested immediately. If you can not convince a jury of the facts, then he will be released from jail after 6 months. Otherwise he will get 10 years or more.

Woman: After 3 months, still 15 years old, I sold the bike, at a profit, to another neighborhood boy, Frank, also 15 years old. Can Frank accuse me of mugging?

Officer: Don’t worry. You can accuse Frank of bike robbery. As a minor you are unable to consent to selling a bicycle. Men are always to blame. In California, there are no Romeo and Juliet laws that would exempt minors from engaging in minor exchanges and business dealings. You might get a small fine (because you are a woman), but he will go to prison for 10 years.

Woman: The same penalty as the guy who robbed me at knife point?

Officer: There is no difference if the neighborhood boy bought a bicycle from you or if he took it away from you forcibly.  This has been confirmed by our Vice President Joe Biden. Receiving money given voluntarily by a tipsy woman, selling a bicycle to a minor, or robbing at knife point, are all the same crime and carry the same penalty. There are even activists who think that physicians who perform emergency procedures in insensitive ways should be imprisoned.

All these laws are to make sure that not one single mugger goes unpunished. It is also to encourage reporting of muggings, even after 47 years. One in two women will be mugged in her life time. One in four will be mugged in college, the most dangerous place to be mugged.

The Obama administration requires Colleges to prosecute men accused of mugging and convict them by the preponderance of evidence criterion. This has reduced the underreporting of muggings.

As an unexpected side effect, it also reduced false rape accusations. It is actually easier and less embarrassing now to file a false mugging accusation to get even.

Woman: What if I just bought the man a drink, while I was drunk myself?

Officer: You were taken advantage of. It does not matter what dollar amount. Both the man who accepted the drink and the bartender are guilty of mugging.

Mugging pictures

Woman: My uncle Joe once filmed me, at 6 years of age, buying a tricycle in the toy store

Officer: You were robbed of your pocket money by an toy store sales person? A 6 year old can not consent to paying a tricycle. Worse, the crime was recorded on film? This is production of child mugging pornography. The punishment for production, possession or distribution of such photos is higher then the punishment for mugging itself.

This is to protect children from the child mugging photo industry, a multi billion illicit business that victimizes millions of children.

Baby’s  consent to unhealthy food

Woman: My mother was an alcoholic when she was pregnant with me. This is why I have nervous problems and suffer from seizures.

Officer: Well, you did not complain. So you consented to your mother’s alcohol habits while you were in the womb.

Woman: During the first 8 years of my life, my mother gave me only hamburgers and french fries and never let me play outside. This is why I weigh 300 pounds, have diabetes and had 3 heart attacks.

Officer: Did you fight your mother? Refuse the fries? Obviously you consented, when you were 4 years old, so there is no legal problem.

Credits

This is a modified version of A much more accurate rape analogy which  was (negatively) inspired by this and this. The red text is solely ours, the black text is taken from the valued reddit post.

• Have we handed lone rape accusers too much power to destroy the presumptively innocent?  Power to change the course of world politics! The politics of the World Monetary Fund. French Presidential elections, the future or Europe and the Euro currency. All influenced by a lone woman’s accusations. For an initial arrest it does not matter how dishonest or mentally unstable the accuser (alleged victim) might be.

Let us remember the thousands of men that are less lucky then Dominique Strauss-Kahn.

For every Strauss-Kahn, there are dozens of men that don’t escape unjust persecution

One in two rape accusations are false. Like Strauss-Kahn, thousands of men are presumed guilty, jailed and smeared without due process. They can not afford to spend millions of dollars for bail, a dream team of lawyers, detectives, and their own guards for domestic prison as Dominique Strauss-Kahn did. We only hear of the few lucky ones that escape. The Jörg Kachelmann rape case in Germany similarly ruined a successful public man’s career, had a man spend months in jail, because of unproven uncorroborated accusations by a woman, who also was caught red-handed lying about important facts.

"Of course, if she is a liar, that still does not mean she was raped. " Yes, but in that case, she’d better bring a long a tape recording proving the act of rape against her clear resistance. In our legal system, where men accused of sexual offenses are presumed guilty until proven innocent, they have to provide proof of their innocence. In the famous Hofstra false rape case the male victims of false rape accusations were only freed after providing video recording that showed that the sex act was totally consensual and very different then described in the false accusations.

• Get a lawyer before courting: 34 precautions before risking sex with a woman

For every acquitted man, there are dozens of unjustly imprisoned victims of false rape accusations.

Now consider this, how many men take video recordings of their sex acts so that they can later prove the consensual nature of their sex acts? Can you imagine: for every man that can prove his innocence, how many men stay in jail and go to prison, upon unproven, wrong allegations of sexual misconduct? Remember: One in two rape accusations are false.

No wonder, that with such medieval legal practice

• Rapists-proven-innocent are majority (57%) of prisoners released by Innocence Project

Videotaping sex acts seems a necessary precaution against false accusations. But secretly videotaping sex acts is not only a moral problem, it also entails absurd legal problem like the illegality of videotaping a sex act with a 16 year old (where the age of consent is 16 or under but the videotaping is illegal child pornography).  Our children have it even worse:

• Peter Berkowitz’s writes about loss of due process for college men. Title IX, a the non-discrimination law, amazingly is the basis for such discrimination against boys and men, by order of the Obama administration. Colleges must apply the "preponderance of evidence" rule when administratively dealing with rape accusations. By these rules, any sympathetic judge or jury could convict Strauss-Kahn, if s/he thought that there was a 50.0001% chance that the accusation was true.

• "The nature and number of the complainant’s falsehoods leave us unable to credit her version of events beyond a reasonable doubt, whatever the truth may be about the encounter between the complainant and the defendant," the document states. "If we do not believe her beyond a reasonable doubt, we cannot ask a jury to do so." DA aims to drop sexual assault charges against Strauss-Kahn. In other words, by the preponderance of evidence criterion, the District Attorney would clearly have continued pursuing the case.

Fresh from the press a similar case.

A GIRL of seven at the centre of a custody battle was coached by her mum to make fake claims that her father was a paedophile.

Former jockey Victoria Haigh, 41, also launched a public campaign against her wholly innocent ex-partner David Tune, a senior High Court judge said yesterday. 
Racehorse trainer Vicky Haigh coached her daughter to falsely claim her dad was a paedophile, High Court rules |The Mirror

We don’t see mention of a multi-year prison term for the scheming woman that destroyed a child’s innocence to imprison an innocent man. These lies are extremely destructive, destroy lives of men and children, and still the guilty women remain unpunished or punished with a slap on the wrist. Impunity encourages women to level false accusations.

• The Strauss-Kahn case: Have we handed lone rape accusers too much power to destroy the presumptively innocent?

• Way over 50% of rape accusations are false. 7.4% blatantly enough to prosecute (Bavarian Police research report)

Dominique Strauss-Kahn was publicly crucified. He resurrected as a martyr for the 50% of the alleged rapists that are falsely.

A martyr whose suffering has been showed publicly, in the world press. And whose redemption is but a small sample of the huge number of men that suffer from the unjust inhumane laws made in the last half century. In the misguided effort to protect rape victims, due process has been massacred and exposes men to inquisition-like danger of getting imprisoned upon any unfounded anonymous complaint.

Men’s rights advocates have to take advantage notoriety of the situation to shed light on the plight of lesser men, less famous men with less financial and moral backing.

50% of rape accusations are false; Dominique Strauss-Kahn was crucified and resurrected

Dominique Strauss-Kahn escaped the false rape inquisition.

50% of rape accusations are false. Dominique Strauss-Kahn escaped the false rape inquisition. Due process and presumption of innocence need to be re-instated. The feminist laws of the last 50 years that destroyed due process and presumption of innocence have to be undone and constitutional human rights for men must be reinstated.

Tens of thousands of men are in similar situations: good men, unjustly accused by vengeful, greedy, or mentally disturbed women get instantly arrested, their life destroyed. Most don’t have the financial means to hire a dream team of lawyers and pay millions of bail.

Feminists actively falsify statistics and manipulatively abuse language 

And the press just regurgitates the myths, uncritically.

• "Less then two percent of rape accusations are false". Debunked here
  • The False Rape Society: Lying about the prevalence of false rape
  • ‘Rape culture,’ feminist claims minimizing false rape prevalence
  • One in two rape accusations are false

Furthermore feminists manipulatively abuse language: they re-definine terms that had been clearly defind for millennia, like "rape", "consent", "child", "abuse", leading to absurdities like 17 year old "children", 20 or 24 types of rape:

• Victim dupes man into raping her. How can you rape without knowing you are raping?
• Yes means No! Forcibly raping a 17 year old is the same rape as consensual love making

Sexual moralists blame the falsely accused victim

All this hides the agenda of the sexual moralists. Even when the accusations are proven wrong, the victim is blamed. He deserves the false accusations. Strauss-Kahn is a womanizer. Why did he have sex with a maid he never met before? He deserves all that happened to him. Serves him a lesson. These are the same people that welcome AIDS as a punishment of God to curtail sexual liberation.

In the Hofstra false rape case, why did the boys engage in group sex with the woman? They deserve their time in jail, exposure as rapists on national and international TV, a little beating by the boys in jail, the fear of spending 20 years in prison. That is the proper punishment for engaging in a consensual gang bang.

In the Jörg Kachelmann rape case, why did Kachelmann have several girl friends and lovers? And he hid not disclose to them the that he had other lovers. He told them some lies? He deserves time in jail, his career ruined.

The only compelling explanations are the hypotheses of the Antifeminist (feminism is a sexual trade union to keep men captive to aging feminists) and of Robert Kurzban (not only feminists, but beta males, and even hypocritical alpha males gain from moralistically restricting other men’s sexual options).

True or fake [accusations]?

Sexual abuse / The vice department has set the goal, to bring each sexual abuser behind bars. But not all accusations turn out to be real abuse.

"We carefully pursue every single accusation, so absolutely no case will get left out", stresses Leo Lehrbaum, chief of the group "vice" of the state criminal police in lower Austria.

Every day he is confronted with varying tragical forms of sexual abuse and knows, how much the victims  suffer from the consequences, even decades later. Many only dare to file complaints to the executive branch years after it happened. "We try, of course, to clear up everything, but many cases already prescribed, so that the perpetrator can no more be charged in court" Lehrbaum knows.

This is why he advises: "Always file a complaint immediately. The less time has passed, the better the chances to catch the perpetrator, due to traces of DNA.". Women and children should not be afraid, because everyone has the right to be interviewed by a female police officer.

Nevertheless, independent of all real abuse cases, he has noted a disconcerting development, during his investigations.
"On average, four out of five complaints to police turn out to be pure invention".

Psychological problems or fear of pregnancy

The youngest one that faked such a crime, was only 12 years old. During puberty and adolescence such fabrications are especially frequent. Motives vary. Lehrbaum: "In some cases there are profound psychological problems, that need to be analyzed by an expert".  Often it is simply a "cry" to call attention, because there are problems in school, with parents or at work. Here he appeals to the parents, to take more time to talk with their children and not to abandon them, saying "I have no time right now, let’s talk tomorrow".

He is even more concerned about cases where young women pretend to have been raped, to get even with an acquaintance, because they were rejected or because a relationship did not proceed the way she wished it would.

"Often such accusations are a white lies, because after a party or disco visit – and usually under heavy influence of alcohol – unplanned and unprotected intercourse has occurred,  and now they are concerned about a possible pregnancy or other personal consequences", said the detective officer.

He is particular saddened when in divorce or custody disputes, the fake abuse accusation is used as a means to an end. "In the course of the inquiry, if we speak in detail about the incident, it turns out very soon that the accuser gets entangled in contradictory statements, and they admit that the whole has yet taken place or not in this form . They often come to their senses and realize that the entire story was very improper, "says Lehrbaum.

The accusers frequently are unaware, that their "fantasy" is a serious crime.  "A complaint against an unknown perpetrator is a simulation of a crime, punishable with up to 6 months in jail, and a complaint against a particular person is libel,  punishable with up to 5 years in jail", admonishes Lehrbaum to be more responsible with both accusations and sexuality.

This money-slut walk is in response to a police recommendation, not to carry large amounts of cash. We object to such victim blaming. The money is ours. We can carry it wherever we want. No matter if we are drunk or not.

These money-slut walkers are simple fighting for their right show off their money	These ‘slut walk’ women are simply fighting for their right to be dirty
Its my hot money, I do what I want Men and women march through East Los Angeles high crime neighborhood during the money-slut walk, which organizers described as a demonstration against those who blame the victims of robberies.	Women march through downtown Boston during the ‘SlutWalk’ in Boston, which organizers described as a demonstration against those who blame the victims of sex crimes
True liberation is men or women carrying the cash they want and abandon credit cards and modesty	True liberation is women wearing what they like and abandoning the Hoover.

Read with open mind. Read first, judge later. Question your moral convictions.

We were brought up with feminist credo, reinforced by politically correct colleges. It took us effort to overcome our brain washing. It required reading articles and books to see the mistakes, the misleading wrong logic, the cruel consequences of feminist and religious dogma. We were not born nor indoctrinated to be "anti-feminists" (a label we can accept), nor "rape apologists" or "misogynists" (labels that we will reject as unjustified).

We have been warned of the dangers of challenging the central tenet of feminist rape culture belief

We are afraid most people will read this with closed mind. Knee jerk reactions and inner convictions warp people’s logic so as to confirm their long held belief. We are attacking rape, the central tenet of feminism, even holier then harassment.

This is far worse then Galileo Galilei’s disrespect of some peripheral topic in the Bible regarding planetary motion. It is like doubting God’s existence.

We have been warned that this irreverent post might lead to vigilante persecution of the authors, with trumped-up false accusations, with Interpol hunting us down for our dangerous politically incorrect ideas.

We have an irrational and probably unwarranted trust that dissenting people could discuss this article on its merit and try to disprove it with arguments and logic. Unfortunately, logic can be very manipulative and confusing because of misleading and confusing terminology (see (3) above).

Men are violently averse to rape, even more so then women

We are very aware then most good men are extremely averse to rape,  "All men are rapists" is as unwarranted and unjust as saying "all women are gold digging cheating paternity fraudsters".

Men, as a class, loathe and detest rape more than women do.[...]

[President] Roosevelt declared without equivocation (and without explanation) that rape is a crime "even worse than murder" that deserves the death penalty.
That might strike modern readers as astonishing, but during the oral argument of the Kennedy v. Louisiana, 2008 U.S. LEXIS 5262 (June 25, 2008), Justice Ginsburg offered an explanation. Ginsburg noted that the historical imposition of the death penalty in rape cases stems from a tradition "when a woman was regarded as as good as dead once she was raped; and the crime was thought to be an offense against her husband or her father as much as it was to her." Treating rape as akin to murder, and thus warranting the death penalty, did "no kindness to women" she noted.
The "legal" executions of men for rape, and the illegal lynchings for rape that President Theodore Roosevelt decried, were carried out almost exclusively by men. Against men. Indeed, as we relate on this site, the killings, the beatings, and virtually all the other physical atrocities perpetrated against men falsely accused of rape are carried out by men.   The False Rape Society: There is no ‘rape culture.’ Period.

This is probably why man-hating feminists use female superior verbal manipulation skills to ever expand the definitions of "rape" and "non-consent", to con women-loving good men into joining the lynch mob against consenting-but-drunk-girl-rapists, consenting-underage-girl-rapists, and, falsely-accused-but-presumed-guilty-rapists. From there it is only one step to lynch the mean "rape apologist" authors at Human-Stupidity.com.

[Roosevelt] also warned: "’The mob which lynches a negro charged with rape will in a little while lynch a white man suspected of crime.’

Roosevelt could have never imagined that nowadays US colleges and the US legal system itself lynch white or black men alike.

1) Rape consequences are not what they used to be

Rape was terrible: reproductive and social impact of rape

Why rape was as serious a crime as murder

In the distant past, virginity at marriage was the only guarantee for a husband to be sure that the offspring was his. There was no DNA testing. There also was no birth control, nor abortion. A raped virgin woman lost all her value on the marriage market, and, virgin or not, was at great risk to bear a child from her rapist.

In some cultures, rape victims get shunned, stoned or killed. Real victim blaming! Because the woman lost her virginity, her marriageability was destroyed. She lost her "freshness seal". No decent man would marry her. Even less so if she actually became pregnant. One salvation would be a shotgun marriage, where the girl’s family would force the rapist to marry the "damaged good", the raped girl.

Shocking? These were drastic solutions to solve a terrible problem.

This is a similar moral dilemma a lioness has after a new lion took over the pride and killed all her cubs. A lioness with the moral principles, who would reject the only suitor and remain chaste would have no offspring. So a lioness does everything to protect her cubs from being killed. But, once they are killed she becomes fertile and consorts with a killer off her babies.

Rape was life destructing. The entire reproductive value, reproductive success, female mate choice were destroyed by rape. Devastating. Rape was really comparable to murder.

If the woman was already married, then similar damage would be done. The husband would lose his paternal certainty. The next baby could be the rapists’. Terrible for a husband, and thus terrible for the woman.

This explains why, historically, rape has been considered an extremely serious grave offense, similar to murder.

Evolutionary biology of rape

Rape ("forced copulation")  is frequent in ducks, geese, bottlenose dolphins and chimpanzees.

Duck being violently raped | YouTube

More video: Duck Breeding Behavior of Unpaired Males

Human females seem to have adaptations against rape (Darwin’s Rape Whistle). Consult Sociobiology of rape for more literature.

Rape, terrible no more:  modern technological progress alleviates most consequences of rape

Like virginity, rape should be taken less seriously today: abortion, DNA testing eases the consequences of rape

We do not claim that rape is inoffensive and harmless. Rather, our point is that the advent of birth control, abortion, and DNA testing changed the consequences (described above) of sexual behavior. Just as virginity became almost irrelevant, rape has lost most of its terrible life changing consequences:

• Rape does no more make a women unmarriageable
• Rape does no more force a woman to give birth to an unwanted baby fathered by the rapist (there is always abortion)
• Rape does no more leave the actual or future husband unsure about paternity, if he is the father (DNA testing) nor put a husband at special risk of having a wife pregnant from a rapist (abortion, birth control)

Rape perceived as terrible due to irrational rape hysteria

Of course, constant feminist brainwashing, how terrible rape is, takes its toll. Constantly suggesting victims how terrible their ordeal was, becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy: Victim: Courts did more harm than Polanski – Sexual harassment is in the eye of the beholder. No fright, no distress

Rape ceased to be as serious as murder

Rape is certainly still a crime and is a very unpleasant experience. But it does no more deserve the special distinction as an extremely serious crime, comparable only to murder.

Now that technology has taken away the reproductive and social consequences of rape (as described above), rape alone, in itself, has no long term physical consequences. (For the purpose of our discussion here: if there are injuries during rape, then we define these injuries are separate crimes in addition to the rape. If the penetration caused injuries, then the injury still is a separate crime.)

Rape: less serious consequences then face-disfiguring injuries

Penetrative rape certainly has less serious consequences then penetration with a knife, or a bullet, anywhere in the body

Rape seems to have less serious long term consequences then burns in the face, punches that break front teeth or cause multiple breaks in facial bones

Without the reproductive and social consequences of rape described above, then b

Being a rape victim seems to be comparable to crimes like

• dunked into a toilet,
• violently held or tied down,
• Being choked out in a fight,
• force-fed disgusting items.

Such crimes are perpetrated against men and women all the time by bullies and other criminals.

Feminist illogic

We will not go as far as to claim that heterosexual rape is a positive experience, though that argument could be made by logical deductions from (false) feminist premise that both genders are equal:

by the feminist argument that female sexuality is the same as that of males. Any man who truly believed that would be unsympathetic towards a woman who had been raped, because the chances are that he would regard the idea of being raped by women as a positive fantasy. Glenn Wilson on Rape

2) Rape prevalence is not what it used to be

US rape statistics show that after a maximum in 1992, the frequency of forcible rape declined in spite of increased population. There never was as much rape as feminist propaganda would want to make us believe:

• One-in-Four’ Rape Lie demolished: it is "One-in-One-Thousand-Eight-Hundred-Seventy-Seven"
• Rape underreporting lie

There also is the entire false rape accusation industry. False rape accusations always existed but multiplied because feminist laws made rape accusations so much easier and postulated the lie that "women don’t lie about rape".

Rape allegations frequently serve as a cover-up for mistakes or misdeeds. Girls who drink themselves into a alcoholic stupor blame Date-rape drug drink spiking. Forensics show that most claims of Rohypnol spiking are false.

3) Rape is not what it used to be

Rape is a type of sexual assault usually involving sexual intercourse, which is initiated by one or more persons against another person without that person’s consent. Wikipedia

50 years ago the words consent and rape still had their original meanings.

Nowadays we have various types of non-consent and 20 types of rape, leading to funny logical paradoxes

• Victim dupes man into raping her. How can you rape without knowing you are raping?
• Republicans re-re-define rape: to the original definition rape had for 2000 years before re-definition 30 years ago
• Definition of "Rape": When a "Rape" is not a Rape!

Feminists are adamant that all types of rape are the same, be it the tipsy-girl-consented-but-retracted-next-morning-rape, the 5-second-rape or forcibly-dragged-into-the-woods-rape.

• Some "rapes" are less serious then others. Of course, Mr. Kenneth Clarke is right!
• Yes means No! Forcibly raping a 17 year old is the same rape as consensual love making
• "Rape is rape is rape" is a lie, Joe Biden! 20 different types of rape!

4) Rape is over-rated

Male on male rape, like in prison, has never been given special attention. Though prison rape deserves more attention, nobody would suggest removal of due process and inversion of the burden of proof.  Now that male on female rape has no major reproductive consequences, it should not be accorded more seriousness then male on male rape.

We believe that 95% new rape legislation of the last 50 years should be unceremoniously scrapped. We made a point that during the last 50 years rape has become less relevant and less damaging then during prior human history.

Rape is a crime, but due to modern technological advances in abortion and DNA testing, it is no different from battery, forcible robbery, and other "normal" crimes.

Thus penalties could be lessened, not increased. (No, we don’t say real forcible rape should go unpunished).

Certainly, there is no reason for creating a police state that inverts the burden of proof for rape prosecutions, takes away presumption of innocence. Certainly colleges should not be required to use "preponderance of the evidence" for disciplinary action against male students accused of rape

• Due process has to be re-instituted in rape legislation. It is our legal tradition that rather 10 guilty go free then one innocent be convicted. Due process violations are more egregious in date rape and other modern rape inventions. If it can not be proven, too bad. Bullies and known Mafia goons also escape conviction because of due process. Prosecution of true forcible violent stranger rape is less impeded if bound by due process.
• The rape of our language has to end. We should return to clear vocabulary. Consent is consent, illicit sex with a consenting minor is just that, and not non-consensual rape. 17 year olds are no children, rather only those under 14 or under 12.
• Statutory rape and age of consent should be analyzed by honest scientists unimpeded by US senate and US congress vote interference in scientific research (Rind study)

• We suggest that those concerned about underage adolescents use other protection then blanket draconian punishments. Parental consent, mandatory counseling before sexual relation with a minor, notary declaration of intent, etc.

Justice Secretary Kenneth Clarke has been heavily criticized for talking about "serious rape" as compared with other types of rape. But can some rapes be viewed as more serious than others?

The  word "rape" needs to be differentiated, into "serious rape", "forcible rape", "rape rape" because the word "rape" nowadays means everything.

1. "Rape is rape is rape" is a lie, Joe Biden! 20 different types of rape!
2. Consent, rape & minors. What is consent to sex?
3. Victim dupes man into raping her. How can you rape without knowing you are raping?
4. Judge John Reilly forced to apologize for differentiating nerd’s groping from sexual assault
5. Republicans re-re-define rape: to the original definition rape had for 2000 years before re-definition 30 years ago
6. Feminist rape laws don’t apply to male prison rape victims
7. Hofstra false rape case: any law abiding man can be jailed at a woman’s whim!

Mr. Kenneth Clarke saying the truth (video) (which later on he has to retract)

Speaking to Victoria Derbyshire, the Justice Secretary said some cases of date rape or sex with under-age children might not qualify as rape “in the ordinary conversational sense”.  Ed Miliband, the Labour leader, called for Mr. Clarke’s resignation during Prime Minister’s Questions over the comments. Listen to full interview on BBC Radio 5 Live     Source: Telegraph

The justice secretary’s remarks suggesting some rapes were worse than others has led to a storm of protest and demands for his resignation from Labour.  BBC

Tyrannical political correctness speech code taboos prohibit sensible discussions

Political correctness is a speech code to silence discussion. It erects taboos: don’t talk, don’t question. Making a comment on a taboo topic yields to  ad hominem attacks, demands of resignation! Like a medieval church. The topic is taboo, critics are silenced, no discussion is allowed.

In the rape issue, there are stupid anecdotal one sided arguments.

"If we listen to what the victims of rape tell us about its impact, there is no difference between those who have suffered date rape and those who have been attacked by strangers. BBC

What a stupid comment! The "victim-feminists" who claim that a drunk-party-girl-who-next-day-is-sorry-she-consented-rape is the same as the mauled-in-the-forest-at-knife-point-rape are an offense to true forcible rape victims. These are the same people that say: consensual sex with an adolescent minor is rape, the same as violently raping the adolescent minor against her or his will. And such insanity pervades world wide press and politics.

Nation-wide and world wide politics are based on such drivel. Where is the peer reviewed research that supports such statements?

Unlike the car accident example with subsequent paralysis, as shown in the articles linked above, the modern revised definition of "rape" encompasses total different things

• violent forcible rape,
• consensual sex where consent is considered invalid later on, if the "victim" convinces a judge that she was too drunk, if she was underage, if she presented a fake ID and the perpetrator could not know he did commit "rape"
• consensual sex where consent is withdrawn in the middle of the act and he continued for 5 more seconds (yes, google "5 second rape" if you don’t believe it.
• consensual sex when the woman only felt raped 2 days later when he did not call her
• consensual sex with an adolescent minor
• When is a rape not a rape? | Police Inspector Blog mentions the pervasiveness of false rape accusations but fails to mention that lots of these lead to false rape convictions:  because of the dogma "women don’t lie", and the perverted suspension of due process, the "presumption of guilt of the accused in rape cases", it is very easy to be unjustly harassed and tried for years (Kachelmann, Strauss-Kahn) and possibly convicted of rape that has never happened 

Most men have already been raped by a woman, but are unaware of it

I have asked many men: "Have you ever said no to a woman and she continued with sexual activities like oral sex or sex?".  Almost all of them said they told a woman "Stop, I am tired" and she just continued.This happens when a man had enough sex but an insatiable woman wants more. It could happen early in the morning when the man wants to sleep.

I believe Britain has a sexist rape law where women can not rape. But by gender neutral rape laws this clearly constitutes rape. By the feminist rape definition that a simple "no" or "stop" in a consensual sexual relationship means "rape". And this is the same as dragging a screaming woman into the forest? Or 5 guys in prison holding down a man to rape him? David Cameron, thank you for your honest truth. Too bad you weaseled out and retracted, though half-heartedly

Kenneth Clark retraction (Video)

"Often the victims of stranger rape will generate more sympathy, which seems to me absurd. We mustn’t ever give out the message that your rape isn’t as bad as someone else’s rape."  BBC

One guys says that someone else says. Totally anecdotal. The typical feminist victim attitude where an objectifying gaze hampers women’s intelligence and a consensual-sex-while-drunk or yielding-to-insistent-male-pressure is as bad as forcible rape.

For legal purposes, intent is important

Now let us suppose, this is true. Being dragged into the woods by an armed stranger is the same trauma as changing one’s mind in the middle of consensual sex and the guy does not stop immediately. 

Different ways to get run over by a car

A person gets run over by a car and is left paralyzed. In all the following cases, the effect on the victim is the same. Legally, they are very different.

Tyrannical political correctness speech code taboos prohibit sensible discussions

Political correctness is a speech code to silence discussion. It erects taboos: don’t talk, don’t question. Making a comment on a taboo topic yields to  ad hominem attacks, demands of resignation! Like a medieval church. The topic is taboo, critics are silenced, no discussion is allowed.

Other dogmatic speech restrictions

• The Bible is always right and the Bible says the sun revolves around the earth. Detractors will be burned alive or imprisoned.  The catholic church apologized to Galileo Galilei in the year 2000! His trial was in 1633!
• Compare James Watson and the race and iq controversy
• underage sexuality and the Rind Study. The study could be wrong, but even an unanimous vote of the US senate plus congress are not the right way to disprove a peer reviewed study in a quality research journal.

Related articles

• David Cameron urged to sack Kenneth Clarke over rape comments (mirror.co.uk)
• Kenneth Clarke is undermining rape case justice, Harriet Harman claims (guardian.co.uk)
• Kenneth Clarke: I upset a lot of people in the rape debate, Justice Secretary admits (telegraph.co.uk)
• Kenneth Clarke rape comments slammed by Ed Miliband who calls for him to be sacked (mirror.co.uk)
• Clarke ‘must go’ over rape comments (mirror.co.uk)
• UK minister: Some rapes more serious than others (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• A word on rape, Ken Clarke | Harriet Harman (guardian.co.uk)
• Kenneth Clarke apologises for causing offence with comments about rape (telegraph.co.uk)
• Ken Clarke is wrong on rape – but many seem to agree with him (newstatesman.com)
• Clarke: I got bogged down on rape (mirror.co.uk)

Schwarzenegger, the powerful strong governor having sex with a dependent employee, his maid Mildred Patricia Baena. By feminist terminology, this is more then sexual harassment, this is rape. Due to the power differential, she is unable to consent. 

Arnold Schwarzenegger fathered a child more than 10 years ago outside of his marriage to Maria Shriver, a source close to the former California governor confirmed to CNN on Tuesday. [...]

Schwarzenegger fathered the child with a household staffer, the Times article said. He has provided support for the child since birth, the source told CNN. 
Schwarzenegger acknowledges having child with staffer

If the maid accused him of rape, Schwarzenegger would be instantly jailed with no bail

Can you imagine if the the maid Mildred came forward, now, with charges that he raped her?  Just exaggerate things a little, how she was powerless and afraid of losing her job. But, as the burden of proof is inverted, it would be more prudent to allege real forcible rape, with some lurid details how she kept saying no but she was no match for his superior Mister Universe strength.  She could allege that this was a repeated pattern, over years. She could even sprinkle in some allegations of sexual abuse of his child. He would have to prove his innocence.

Women don’t lie about rape and are instantly believed. Furthermore, our legal system and constitutional rights to due process are not valid in rape and child abuse cases. Men accused of rape are guilty until proven innocent.

Of course, after a decade there would be no way for him to prove his innocence. The child would be the proof of sex having happened. Add a few lurid stories about groping other women and orgies while pumping iron on steroids. Schwarzenegger would be arrested instantly. (like IMF Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn) No bail, because he might be a flight risk. Probably he could re-gain his Austrian nationality in case he made it to Europe.

The female power to cry "rape"

Our man-made cultural progress made us safe. We are not in constant danger of being attacked by lions, snakes, even marauding neighboring tribes. The Magna Carta and our modern constitutions gave us legal rights against unjust unproven accusations, undue imprisonment. Unfortunately, as Human-Stupidity documents, we created new dangers looming over every man (much less over women). Child abuse accusations, possession of so called child porn, and rape accusations can be leveled at any time against every man and lead to instant arrest, jail, and conviction without due process of law.

That power to allege rape, of course, give a woman infinite power. A man would have to cave in to her every demand and blackmail. It is amazing why Arnold Schwarzenegger dare to fire his maid. But she was a nice person with character, she only told the truth and did not use her legal privilege to accuse him of rape. It does not matter that maybe Mildred was the one that pursued Arnold.

Arnold can shirk paternity: legally the maid’s husband is the father

If Arnold did not recognize paternity, then he can not be forced any more. No matter how much proof, the maid Mildred Patricia Baena’s husband is the legal father and will be obliged to support the child. No way out.  It does not matter that the child looks exactly like Arnold (see the photo)

Birth Certificate of Mildred Patricia Baena’s son   Arnold’s Secret Son: Here’s the Birth Certificate

But, of course, before she does that in court, she would have to establish as a matter of law that paternity and that, in fact, he is the father and that’s all very problematic because it’s presumed and conclusively presumed that a child born during a marriage is a child of the father, the spouse during the marriage and that’s a rebuttable presumption but the rebuttal has to come, generally, within two years — the first two years. If — if he wasn’t told until the third year it may be that that’s a conclusive presumption and that — and that she can’t establish paternity now unless everyone possibly agrees. In other words, if Arnold agrees that…
What Are the Possible Legal Implications of Schwarzenegger’s Affair and Love Child? | On the Record

Is it not amazing how several insane unjust feminist inspired politically correct laws can apply in one simple case?

Can’t rich powerful men find prettier lovers

We have come a long way from president Kennedy’s lovers (Marilyn Monroe), via homely Bill Clinton’s intern and now big breasted but homely Mildred Patricia Baena. The old code of silence gone, with modern press’ indiscretion, men have to cheat with who is easily available nearby.

Feminists already found out Arnold’s sexcapade is  criminal

Of course, some feminists already found out the legal implications, but the mainstream press is still quiet about it.

Identity of Schwarzenegger’s Mistress Takes Him From ‘Cheater’ to ‘Criminal’

But at the same time, I haven’t heard anyone really speculate what was going on for all these years between Baena and Schwarzenegger. Was it really just an "affair" — or something else?

When it comes to powerful men involved in "sex scandals," like Schwarzenegger, Tiger Woods, John Edwards, Bill Clinton, etc., we often jump right to focusing on the infidelity itself. Sure, they all had sex with other women behind their wives’ backs. They cheated. They’re dogs. But what about the element of power here? Why does no one consider for a moment that maybe these men used their positions of power to get what they wanted from women who weren’t their wives?

It seems like this question is especially pertinent in the Schwarzenegger situation. Baena was his employee for many years. We don’t know the exact circumstances … Sure, it’s possible that the two were completely on the same page and wanted to carry on a relationship behind Shriver’s back. But there’s also the possibility that their union was the result of an abuse of power.

Think about it on an everyday level. Say Schwarzenegger was just Baena’s boss at a retail gig, or a legal office, and he was coming onto her, and initiating an affair. Wouldn’t that be sexual harassment? Does the fact that we’re talking about a governor and his housekeeper make the situation any different?

"Sex scandals" like Schwarzenegger’s shouldn’t necessarily be considered throw-away infidelities. There’s something more here. All too often, these pampered celebrities or politicians appear to be abusing their positions of power by initiating sex with women who are their employees, their subordinates. It’s possible the affair is completely consensual, but it’s also hard to believe that Baena — and women like her — weren’t to some extent pressured into these affairs. And if that’s the case — why we aren’t calling a spade a spade. If it looks like it, walks like it, and sounds like it, it might just be sexual harassment. If so, men like Schwarzenegger must be legally called on their offense.

Do you think sexual harassment played any role in Schwarzenegger’s affair or similar "sex scandals"?

Related articles

Maid violates professional ethics and walks into a prominent naked guest’s room

The New York Police Department claims that at about 1 p.m. on Saturday, a hotel maid entered a $3,000-a-night suite at the Sofitel near Times Square, believing that it was empty.

That is a bad start.  She made a mistake. This should not happen in a top class hotel. Were the sex roles inverted, were a male employee walk in on a prominent naked female guest, like Mrs. Hillary Clinton, the male employee would be fired and arrested for sexual harassment.  Usually, hotels have a policy to avoid such embarrassment: cleaners should knock on the door, ring the bell, yell "room service" when walking into rooms.

Strauss-Kahn then emerged naked from the bathroom, and grabbed her, pulled her into the bedroom and threw her on to the bed, before trying to lock the suite’s main door, according to New York Police Dept. Deputy Commissioner Paul Browne, who outlined the charges to reporters. "She fights him off, and then he drags her down the hallway to the bathroom, where he sexually assaults her a second time," he told Reuters.

What a coincidence: she makes a serious professional mistake. A hitherto well behaved, civilized man, suddenly goes crazy? Just because he was naked he wanted to take advantage of her and rape her?

A man on the covers of all magazines, admired by millions of women, who could get women at a snap of his fingers. A man from a country with legalized prostitution who could afford 2 luxury prostitutes per day, in case he is a sex addict.  And this guy, exactly the moment the woman walks in, illegally, incorrectly, grabs her and rapes her?

The maid, 32, finally managed to push Strauss-Kahn away and escape, according to Browne, and her colleagues called 911. Strauss-Kahn had checked out by the time police arrived at the hotel, leaving behind his cell phone.

Very strange. No rapist makes it out of a 5 star hotel, full of security agents, trained to catch thieves, impostors, troublemakers.  Especially people who cause trouble and then want to slip away without getting caught. Top hotels have a very professional security staff. I am sure maids are trained to instantly report crimes to security. So any delay in reporting would be her second professional failure of the day.

New York Police usually does not take longer then 5 minutes to arrive.  And he made it all the way into the plane? Check out of hotel, check into the airport, pass security?

Strauss-Kahn was arrested on charges of attempted rape, conducting a criminal sexual act, and unlawful imprisonment of the woman. 
Arrest of IMF Chief on Attempted Rape Charges Throws French Presidential Race Into Chaos | Time Magazine

A really important man:

In fact DSK, as the French call one of the country’s leading political figures, happens to be on the cover of virtually every French magazine this week as the country’s possible next President, [...]

Across Europe, too, Strauss-Kahn’s arrest will have a major impact. It could impact critical negotiations over the E.U.’s deep debt crisis, in which Strauss-Kahn has been a key — if not the key — player. He was due to be at emergency debt meetings in Brussels this week, and perhaps mindful that he could soon be one of the E.U.’s most powerful leaders

False rape charges to cover up own wrong, or for political reasons?

What are the alternative explanations? Don’t forget, she committed a serious professional lapse, almost a crime. So it is quite likely that she did that for a reason, with intent.

• Many political and economic enemies would pay millions to get him out of the way.  maybe they bribed a lowly hotel maid?

But there is a much easier and parsimonious explanation:

The room maid, in serious violation of her professional duties, walked into a client’s room and surprised him naked. Even if that was a honest mistake, it could have serious consequences for her. 

• Maybe he reacted with strong irritation, wanted to complain and get her fired (for good reasons). That scared her. There is no talk about her getting fired now.
• Maybe she walked in with the intent to steal and was caught
• Maybe she walked in with the intent to seduce a famous man
• Maybe she planned to seduce him and was rejected. "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned"
• Maybe she walked in with the intent to seduce a famous man and then blackmail him by threatening to cry rape.
• Maybe he made an indecent proposal, even tried to indecently touch her. In revenge, she cried rape.

As we learn in the false rape society, many women have a knee jerk reaction to cry "rape" in order to distract from their own problems.  Did you notice? Nobody talks of firing her for her transgression.

Let us see if there is any hard corroborating evidence, except an accusation by a guilty woman that committed a serious, unforgivable professional mistake.

Jacques Attalli, the economist, a prominent Socialist and friend of Strauss-Kahn said: "The most likely outcome is that this case will stick and even if he pleads not guilty, which he may be, he won’t be able to be candidate for the Socialist primary for the presidency and he won’t be able to stay at the IMF."

Michel Taubmann, author of a new official and approved biography of Strauss-Kahn, said: "He is a well-known seducer but does not have the profile of a rapist."
Dominique Strauss-Kahn charged with sex attack on New York hotel maid | The Guardian