No exception for Assange: Rape apologetics and the left

[ismnotwasm]

Their mythology is often the hardest to defeat.
Just the other night, Bill Maher, the libertarian who, due to his willingness to confront the "sacred cows" of the right, has become a seeming icon to many on the left, conducted a live TV interview with Julian Assange, safe as he is from serious accusations of rape, secure in the Ecuadorian embassy, and with millions of uncritical supporters around the world, including Maher.
Maher said "I hope you get out soon Julian," at the end of a discussion of the apparent importance of Wikileaks, acting as if Assange was already in prison for his "political activities" as opposed to being in hiding in the U.K. to avoid charges of sexual assault in, and the likelihood of extradition to, Sweden.
And now Assange appears to be running for office in his native Australia. Some think he might win.
Assange has become another in a tragically long series of men, leaders within their own left groups or within their specific context, that the left has given a "pass" to on allegations of rape and misogynist violence, both ignoring the abuse of women and making it clear that this is seen to be subordinate to the "greater" importance of the fight against the "capitalist class" or "imperialism."
The appalling example of the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) in the U.K. recently covering up the actions of its male "cult of personality" leader is a case study in how leftists are willing to sell out women who have been victimized by the left's internal misogyny. There is nothing new about this, and leftists have come blindly to the defense of rapists before, as they did in the case of Mark Curtis in the U.S. in the '80s, who everyone now acknowledges was obviously guilty.

http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/michael-laxer/2013/02/no-exception-assange-rape-apologetics-and-left

[BainsBane]

1. Someone on DU accused me to condoning child rape

because I didn't believe Bradley Manning's document dump was justified. The fact he turned those documents over to an accused rapist was evidently meaningless to this person. I was understandably angry.

[ismnotwasm]

2. Manning himself is a conflicted person

Which of course doesn't make him a rapist, but Assange is an opportunistic fuck who did NOT protect his sources, I wonder if Manning was manipulated, or blackmailed. I don't go for speculation like that usually, but Assange is disgusting.

[seabeyond]

8. i am not impressed with his story either

250k of unknown info is not being a whistle blower. if he target something specific. but he didnt. he downloaded a bunch of stuff hoping to find a catcha moment.

yea, putin is an alpha dog.

we all needed to know this.

[BainsBane]

10. that was my point

The OP asked how Manning was different from Daniel Ellsberg. I said I viewed it differently because Manning's document dump was undifferentiated, not as a principled stance against a particular policy. Evidently some of the documents related to contractor's raping children in Iraq, which I did not know prior to that thread. The OP--who I'm convinced is some 20 yr old boy--accused me of justifying child abuse because I didn't think the document dump legitimate. He was able to provide no evidence that Manning knew what was on the documents. The result was he and a juror insulting me as a bitch. When another poster pointed out the irony in pretending to stand against rape while invoking misogynist language, he claimed calling someone as bitch was not the same as justifying child abuse. I pointed out to him that the abused little girls grow up to be the bitches he so despises. That of course had no impact on him. I didn't believe his moralism for one second.

[seabeyond]

12. I didn't believe his moralism for one second.

nope. i refuse to be a hypocrite for a left "hero".

like with weiner. loved the man. not gonna make excuse and validate his behavior. he gets to own it.

simple enough

[ismnotwasm]

13. I looked into Assuage

For a while there. (Of course I spent hours looking into Sarah Palin as well before passing judgement)

The short version is that Assauge has no principles. I understand others feel differently, but guilty of rape or not he is NOT some principled freedom fighter. He is an opportunist who's sloppy release of documents put his sources in danger

Not facing trial for rape accusations, labeling as a 'witch hunt' is just evil and chicken shit.

I'm sorry you went through that, its par for so many on the left. As long as women's issues are convenient, they rally, once they are not-- right under the bus. Not all the left of course, but far too much of it.

[seabeyond]

14. egomaniac. i picked up on that immediately and he never rang true

for me in whatever he said.

[Tempest]

3. But was it rape?

Both women claimed it was consensual sex until they were approached by unnamed third parties. It was only after then they filed rape charges.

[ismnotwasm]

4. Well, he would need to go to trial to determine that now wouldn't he?

There is also no basis to Assange’s own claim that Sweden is the “Saudi Arabia of feminism.” It is simply untrue that what Assange is accused of in Sweden would not constitute rape in the U.K. and it is unconscionable for any progressive-minded person to dismiss these charges on this basis. The City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court ruled :
The framework list is ticked for rape. The defence accepts that normally the ticking of a framework list offence box on an EAW would require very little analysis by the court. However they then developed a sophisticated argument that the conduct alleged here would not amount to rape in most European countries. However, what is alleged here is that Mr Assange “deliberately consummated sexual intercourse with her by improperly exploiting that she, due to sleep, was in a helpless state”. In this country that would amount to rape.
This was upheld by the High Court:
It is clear that the allegation is that he had sexual intercourse with her when she was not in a position to consent and so he could not have had any reasonable belief that she did.
Nor is it true that Assange is ‘merely’ wanted for questioning. As David Allen Green points out:
Assange is not wanted merely for questioning.
He is wanted for arrest.
This arrest is for an alleged crime in Sweden as the procedural stage before charging (or “indictment”). Indeed, to those who complain that Assange has not yet been charged, the answer is simple: he cannot actually be charged until he is arrested.

[seabeyond]

7. that is for a court to decide.

the allegation is, and seems to be confirmed by all parties, she insisted on condom previous night. intercourse while she was asleep without condom and when she woke said she wanted one, he refused.

the second girl he HELD her DOWN because she was reaching for a condom and he didnt want to wear one.

these women have the right to demand, insist a condom. life and death, not to mention pregnancy.

rape? ... consensual? ...

that is for the court to decide.

he is not special and does not get special privilege.

[intaglio]

5. I want to say publically that I was wrong about Assange

I viewed him as a possible rapist and certain abuser of women but genuinely fearful of extradition to the USA and I admit being slightly dubious of the testimony against him.

I now view him as having no justification for avoiding trial and that the women in the case have a right to be heard

I was wrong

[ismnotwasm]

6. Thank you

That's very encouraging.

[seabeyond]

9. good for you. the women have been villified.

i dont know the right or wrong of it, but i do know villifying the women and raising him as a hero with privilege to not address in court is everything that is wrong.

[redqueen]

11. There is no doubt that what those women describe constitutes rape.

I had read claims that he was being treated differently than other rape suspects. That was my only hangup ever about this case.

It doesn't surprise me in the least that the waters were so muddied by people eager to defend an alleged rapist.

That's standard operating procedure in a rape culture.

[seabeyond]

15. i rarely got into those threads. we had been thru dks. villify the victim and doing it all over

with the women accusing assenge.

i stayed mostly out of those threads. but, i did read up, so as du was saying he is being treated unfair, i was reading otherwise.

[thucythucy]

16. The Mark Curtis case was all about vilifying

the survivor, who was a 15 year old girl. The Socialist Workers Party used the case to fund raise--just absolutely disgusting from beginning to end. They even claimed that Curtis didn't get a "jury of his peers" because it was an all white jury (in Des Moines, Iowa). Because of this many of his supporters actually thought he was African American. In fact, Curtis was a college educated white man who raped an African American child. He was literally caught with his pants down at the scene of the crime--and his defenders STILL wouldn't admit one of their own could be a rapist.

It's good to hear that the left in general has come around to seeing this guy was obviously guilty. It's too bad though that so many people who are supposed to be our allies buy into rape enabling and apologist BS.

[seabeyond]

17. ah, and of course another favorite rapist to cheer on du is polanski, raping a 13 yr old

drugging her and boozing her up and then villify her.

men of power.

[thucythucy]

18. "Men of power"

is right.