CNN reports on a victory for child-molesting step-fathers in Italy:
Sexually abusing a teenager is less serious a crime if the girl is not a virgin, Italy’s higher court said on Friday in a controversial ruling that immediately drew a barrage of criticism.
The court ruled in favor of a man in his forties, identified only as Marco T., who forced his 14-year old stepdaughter to have oral sex with him after she refused intercourse.
The man, who has been sentenced to three years and four months in jail, lodged an appeal arguing that the fact that his stepdaughter had had sex with men before should have been taken into consideration during his trial as a mitigating factor.
The supreme court agreed, saying that because of her previous sexual experiences, the victim’s “personality, from a sexual point of view, is much more developed than what would be normally expected of a girl of her age”.
“It is therefore fair to argue that (the damage for the victim) would be lower” if the abused girl was not a virgin, Italian news agencies quoted the court as saying.
This means the man could now be handed a lighter sentence.
I am not sure exactly what to say in response to this. But I think Il Duce’s granddaughter got it about right.
“This is a shameful, devastating ruling,” said Alessandra Mussolini, grand-daughter of wartime fascist dictator Benito Mussolini. “The real problem is that there are no women in the supreme court.”
Susan bangs head on desk.
Mussolini had some good genes, apparently. Good for his granddaughter.
Well. . .hasn’t it always been so? Doesn’t it equate? Woman with sexual experience equals Whore, Harlot, Damaged Goods, etc. A very large number of the male population in all countries still hold this to be true. And far, far too many in all countries still feel that sex with a female of any age is the RIGHT of the male. In our own country, for example. . .one in four and heading strongly to one in three girl children are sexually abused (and often that is really raped, but we have a nicer name for it when it involves girl children under the age of 14)during their childhood. . .ONE IN THREE. Now there is a statistic we can be really proud of!
As much as I try not to paint things with a big broad brush, I just cannot understand WHAT MEN THINK THEY ARE DOING? ONE IN THREE??? Sorry. . .a touchy subject for me even after a lifetime of sorting through it.
And I don’t know about the laws in yours or other states, but here in Idaho, we just slap ’em lightly on the wrist and tell them that was a bad thing, so try not to get caught again. The higher up the food chain the man is, of course, the less severe the admonishment. If you are a Church Leader, A Politician, A Doctor, A Lawyer, An Acedemic. . .well, we will for sure put you on probation.
Nothing about mens abusive sexual acts on minors or adults for that matter, surprises me any more. It hasn’t changed very much in the past 65 years except we keep better records these days.
I suppose a certain subset of men will be men, as they say, and that time can do little to change it. But, what has changed is that more and more women have the wherewithal to leave a relationship they are unhappy with. And just the threat of that has to cut down on a lot of molestation and sexual abuse. At least, I hope so.
not teenagers
right. But if the mother discovers the abuse and can leave, it might serve as a deterrent from it happening in the first place.
That, to me, is the saddest of all abuse. When the mother has to put up with her daughter being molested by her husband because she has no other options.
I agree that more women are in a position to leave than before. But I think you overestimate the postive change. The fact is that men who are abusive tend to gravitate toward women who are more dependent. They are often just less independent in personality and it takes a lot of abuse before they are ready to leave. If they have the funds to leave. And if they manage to get out before he kills them.
Sadly, I have taught a number of girls who were abused by step-dads, mom’s boyfriend, etc. Too many of those mothers did not leave their “man.” They chose, instead to not believe their daughters and ship the girls off to live with other relatives.
It reminds me of Dr. King describing one way that the oppressed learn to deal with their state, by giving in to their oppressor and believing that they deserve daily punishment and degradation.
I was going to say that the saddest is when a Mother doesn’t believe her daughter, or worse, believes her but is jealous. That’s sick. I’ve seen it.
Does anyone BELIEVE that. Jesus H Christ. In other words you`re saying the only option she has is letting her daughter be molested? If she chooses that option, she`s a poor excuse for a mother & if it is an option, it indicates there are others.
Well, if she doesn’t have the money to run away – can’t hold down a job on her own, for example, due to a lack of education – and her country has no good employment insurance system, then she’s got pretty much two other choices: report the guy to the cops and wind up on the street; or run away, wind up on the street, and hope he doesn’t come looking for revenge.
Yes, there are shelters and safe-houses that try to help women in this situation. But they’re almost always badly overloaded and underfunded. Or she could try her luck at a “faith-based” institution, but there she’s got a good chance of getting preached at about what a horrible woman she is, and how she needs to go back to her husband.
So she has no good choices.
That is all so true. And if the abusive spouse is a “good guy” and well liked in the town (which happens all the time) the police won’t believe her. They probably wouldn’t believe her if he was just an ordinary guy. The ability we all have to give people the benefit of the doubt is amazing.
And what’s the point of putting her life on the line to protect the child? If he kills her, then the child is probably worse off.
And if she’s not believed, she’s in big trouble. What happens if the abusive husband then decides to file for divorce and custody of the kid? (As the mother is unable to support herself and has a history of mental problems, IE, reported a “good guy” for abusing a young girl) It’s unlikely, but that’s not going to matter to someone who already seems to have everything out there arrayed against them.
I’m guessing that you are agreeing with me even though you sound like you aren’t?
Yes, I’m agreeing with you. I’m just poking at the likely consequences of reporting him and not being believed.
wow…i’m surprised any members of il duce’s family survived. go allessandra!
that is whack and a half.
Allessandra recently celebrated a fascist salute given at a soccer game by Lazio’s striker Paolo di Canio after he was subbed off. di Canio turned towards the Lazio Ultra fans (who are basically all fascists) and gave the salute.
‘How nice that Roman salute was, it delighted me so much,’ she said, ‘I shall write him a thank-you note’.
http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story?id=321284&cc=5901
must have “victim’s rights” crap, too. This is the logical conclusion to correlating criminal punishment to the circumstances of the victim instead of the requirements of the law.
If there were ever a time when I would be ashamed to be a man it would be now.
I’m speechless.
Women are less equal than men.
And some women are less equal than others.
Oh, and as a bonus. . .incest (apparently when not directly biological) is now relative.
It’s so true.
And it’s so pervasive that people don’t even realize when they’re being sexist and such. Even women denigrate themselves.
Hey, here’s a puzzler for you: A friend sent me a funny joke, but it’s sexist. Makes fun of women. It’s funny. But. Do I make light of it, or make a comment? Do I alienate unnecessarily if I make a comment?
(I’m always going through these mental gymnastics about how to respond to (especially unconscious) instances of sexist attitude. While such jokes cause pain to shoot through my heart, do I get further by handling it in a humorous or clever way? What’s best?)
There is more verbal abuse committed in the name of humor than most people want to admit. It is insidious, under-the-radar, and very hurtful. Abusive jokes lead to an atmosphere that is permissive of greater harm.
In all instances, I choose to object, in a straightforward manner. Depending on the perpetrator and the egregiousness of the “joke”, I use varying degrees of a “rebuke and inform” method. If you explain yourself carefully, and someone is alienated by your objection, then to hell with’em, I say.
that you don’t “get it” — and have your friend explain why he/she finds the joke funny. By explaining the “humor”, your friend may realize the sexism in the joke.
I’ve actually done that with in-law jokes — I happen to have in-laws that are fantastic and that I love dearly, so when someone makes a joke about mothers-in-law, the jokes usually go right over my head. (Wonder if that’s why I never liked “Everybody Loves Raymond” — the portrayal of the wife’s relationship with Ray’s parents totally set my teeth on edge…)
This ruling effectively says that because the child had been sexually abused previously, a few more times would not make so much difference to her.
If this is the prevailing judicial view on sexual abuse of children in Italy, I would advise all women to depart the country immediately, and take up residence elsewhere, because God only knows what the court may have up its sleeve for adult females.
That was my first thought too…does this mean if someone continues the abuse long enough, it’s no longer a crime?
sick.
If this is the prevailing judicial view on sexual abuse of children in Italy, I would advise all women to depart the country immediately, and take up residence elsewhere, because God only knows what the court may have up its sleeve for adult females.
Where would they go?
Even if they decided to demand a homeland and engage in a decades-long struggle to establish it, it would beat the centuries Italy has been around, and still has not progressed any further than to essentially give judicial blessing to pedophilia.
Hanging around to see what rulings might be made regarding the human status of adult women would not, in my view, be a wise choice.
You’re a slut and it’s open season.
Longer version: If you are a 14 year old girl and have sex with, say, a 15 year old fellow that you think is the love of your life then after that you are a slut and any man can do anything he wants to do to you. Even a step-father. Hey, what’s the limit here? Why can’t her father demand a blow-job? Why can’t the entire male population of the village expect a gang bang?
What’s missing from this narrative is the word “No” and a woman’s right to expect it to be respected. If she says “Yes” to one it does not mean she is saying “Hell, yes,” to every Tom, Dick and Harry-balls afterwards. This is so disgusting it’s enough to make a woman slice off a breast and become an Amazon. Fuckin’ men and their right to take advantage of women who express their sexuality…
The thing that always gets me is how “normal” these men appear to the rest of the world. People always are shocked and say he was such a great guy, who would have expected him to do such a thing. Yeah. That’s part of the problem. A teenage girl or a full grown woman? Makes no difference. He puts on a face for the world and everyone thinks SHE’s crazy if she says anything.
on top of the “she couldn’t have been raped because her jeans were too tight, she must have willingly helped” just gives me more reason to never set foot in Italy. Would love it if women around the world would take that step, and hurt the country in the pocketbook through a drop in tourism…
If it is anything like in the states, the ruling was probably related to only one charge out of many.
While we do not know from reading the article, I would suspect that it was only in relation to #2. I would be surprised if whether she was a virgin would have any bearing #1.
If it is only in relation to #2, it is actually quite reasonable. In fact, it is reasonable enough that many of our states have similar laws and caselaw.
So this ruling doesn’t really bother me anywher near as much the fact that his sentence is so short to begin with!
He should be using the “she was not a virgin” defence to argue his sentence down form 60 years to 55, not to argue is down from a measily 3 years 4 months!
Why are you all so outraged about the virgin part, and not about someone getting 3.3 years for forcing his stepdaughter to blow him, before working to get his sentence reduced.
but you just said it was reasonable to ask for mitigation of statutory rape if the victim of forced fellatio is someone that has prior sexual experience.
Is it your contention that there is a significant depreciation of trauma attached to forced sexual acts when the victim has performed the sex acts in the past?
It could be true in individual cases, but that makes for one hell of a shitty precedent. It also makes the victim’s past sexual history a materially relevent factor and opens up a whole wide swath of obstacles to women that want to report a crime.
but you just said it was reasonable to ask for mitigation of statutory rape if the victim of forced fellatio is someone that has prior sexual experience.
No I didn’t, try reading it again.
It is not unreasonable to ask for mitigation on the “statutory rape” part that is just in relation to her age. The reason is that those laws are in effect to keep our girls virgins till they reach the age of consent.
As to the part where he was in a position of responsibility over her, it IS unreasonable for them to apply that mitigating factor.
As to the “forced” part, that is “rape” not “statutory rape”. It is a different charge, and should be brought as such. It would be absolutely inappropriate to rule that it would be appropriate mitigation.
I don’t really think it is appropriate mitigation anywhere. I do think it is appropriate to consider that if she is a virgin, she as lost something more than a sexually active girl. Instead of thinking mitigation, it would be appropriate to consider additional sanctions. Again, I am not talking the “rape” part, but the “statutory rape” part.
Is it your contention that there is a significant depreciation of trauma attached to forced sexual acts when the victim has performed the sex acts in the past?
No. It only applies to the part where we consider her under age and that she needs to be protected from sex.
The non-consentual part is covered by rape. The age and position of authority part are covered by statutory rape. Consent is not a part of statutory rape.
It could be true in individual cases, but that makes for one hell of a shitty precedent. It also makes the victim’s past sexual history a materially relevent factor and opens up a whole wide swath of obstacles to women that want to report a crime.
It makes for a shitty precident if it applies to rape. That’s the problem, the article doesn’t tell us what the ruling really is about. It is just the gut reactions, just like most of the people here.
Do you realize that what this ruling does, is already codified in many of the United States? That’s right, either by statute or caselaw many states consider the past sexual activites of the girls when considering statuory rape cases. Again, not “rape” but in cases involving sex with a minor.
Like I said before, where is the outrage that he got such a short sentence to begin with? His sentence before the reduction was 3.3 years. Where is the outrage that it wasn’t 30 years?
Like I said, “She has other options.” Before I let anyone molest my child,
there`s one dead asshole littering the ground. Don`t ever think letting your child be molested is your only option. Our children are to be protected till death do us part. Move to ITALY if you think molestation is an option.
Have a nice trip.
nonetheless, when women find themselves in such dependent relationships they can become crippled emotionally and morally. And it is incredibly sad when this happens. That was my only point, really.
It is only horrifically sad for the child. The emotional cripple has a choice. She is never without options, no matter what.
Well, let’s look at her options here:
Again, she has no good choices. It’s society’s responsibility to provide her with them, and our society has failed.
And let’s be clear that living on the street means prostitution for her (and probably for her daughter at some point).
Prostitution? Are you in left field? Sure it`s a possibility, but many prostitutes weren`t abused or didn`t come from the “streets”.
It seems like these are excuses to me. Who said I went to jail?
Option 2 above. She ends up on the streets.
Look, she has options. They are ALL bad options.
Not all women are alike. Some are strong; some are weak. The weak ones will not be able to protect their children either because they choose not to or because they are mentally or physically incapable of it. And its entirely possible that a strong woman would die trying to kill the man who is harming her child — and still not be able to protect her. Society needs to help those children. We don’t.
And yes, some women are simply craven bitches who ignore what is going on right under their nose.
When I said we don’t — I meant we as a society don’t. We fail them.
I have a friend who told me about being strangled by her husband. The only reason she’s still alive is that her son was old enough, and brave enough, to hit his father over the head with a cast iron frying pan.
I get emotional about this because a woman in my office was in an abusive situation with her husband. Unfortunately, before she could work out a plan to escape him — he shot her to death. Fortunately the SOB then shot himself to death. Unfortunately he did both acts right in front of his 13 year old daughter.
The thing is, people who didn’t know her situation used to tell her how lucky she was because he was always sending her roses and he seemed to be such a great guy. And even after, people who knew him claimed that he was a really nice guy.
It is impossible for anybody to know what goes on in a relationship except the two people involved. Even their children see the situation through their own lense.
I have lived with a survivor of a nasty relationship for some 5 years now.
After some 20 years of the momentum of being in an abusive relationship the process of healing can be very slow.
Things I do and things I say kick in old memories and reactions I have little to no control over.
Only once have I felt compelled to actually say, “I’m not that guy.” But that thought always comes to mind.
Negative patterns in the brain take a long time to heal. I’ve had my own experiences with that, so it helps me to have patience when others are working things out.
it’s hard to imagine how horrendous that must have been for all involved. The passing of time helps but never quite erases the emotions from something like that.
Was the daughter able to overcome…
Well, let’s see. Single woman with a daughter living on the streets after having run away from abusive husband. No other means of support. She’s going to have a hard time getting a job, because of a lack of a permanent address, training, and job experience. There are shelters, but again, they’re overloaded and poorly-funded. What other choice does she have?
A woman kills her husband, who the cops saw as a “great guy”, or even just an “ordinary guy”, in cold blood. What do you think’s going to happen to her? The justice system’s going to say “Oh, even though you have no proof, you say he was raping your daughter. Well, you’re free to go. And here’s a check for $1 million!” ?
These aren’t excuses. These are explanations for why society has to do something about this problem, rather than just handwaving it and saying that the mother has options, so everything’s just peachy.
Oh really? So not only would you drop your daughter on the street, but you’d put yourself in jail instead of being there with her? And that’s assuming that you could kill the guy in the first place…
The issue here is that many of the other choices available to the woman end with her and her daughter on the street. And that’s a best-case scenario, there are plenty of places things can go that are worse than that. Preventing these situations from happening, and giving the mother and daughter an out when they do happen, is the responsibility of society. Ours has failed.
You are correct that we as a society have failed the children. You are incorrect in stating that I may not prevail in stopping a child`s molester.
A parentless child is better than one being abused or brought up by emotional cripples. I know exactly what I`m talking about. There is NO excuse.
Really? So a child at the mercy of the state foster care system, likely with a note in her file about the incident is a good option? Think about that for a second. Most foster care systems are already hard enough on normal children. The consequences for this kid if she winds up with a couple of religious conservatives are still pretty bad.
And why do you think you’d prevail? Remember the profile of the women who usually get targetted by this kind of asshole.
Again, the mother has no good choices. None.
And on top of it all most of her best friends will abandon her… out of fear, mostly, I suppose, although I don’t really know the dynamics of those relationships.
Lu 17:2 It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones.
I mean if the Iranian Shiites can hang girls for fighting back against rapists, how could Italian Catholics hold up their heads with any pride if they were actually punishing the rapists? As we continue on in the World Cup of Women Hating Evil Fundamentalists, the stakes get higher. The US Christians will proudly wave the bloody coat hanger. The old city of Jerusalem will feature pallid Torah scholars with Major League stone pitching skills, and those tolerant pantheistic Hindus can burn some lower caste gals or toss acid at them.
You have absolutely no evidence that the Catholic Church condones this decision by a civil Italian court or that the Italian people (catholic or not) agree with this decision. Under your logic, all of America agreed with Bush v. Gore.
So until we as a “society” get these things straightened out, I`ll champion the children whenever & wherever I can. Some people would starve in a supermarket because their welfare check didn`t come through. I`d be eating the pate. This “blame society” is a cop-out.
BTW I`ve raised my daughter alone, since her mom died, when she was
not yet 3 yrs. old. I`ve been through the mill with laws & people thinking she should be taken from me because I probably couldn`t raise her decently. How could some long haired biker know how? bla bla bla.
She`s 24 now & I have 2 lovely grand-daughters.
Pity the fool to try & harm them.
I also raised her three half brothers from her mom as my step children.
This is not a sob story; far from it.
Hey Knucklehead,
now I understand your name when you say you’re a long haired biker. I grew up around bikes cuz I’m an SOB
(son of a biker)! I can see where you ran into a wall sometimes with the system because of who you are or what you look like. Bikers are some of the best people I know.
Good for you for raising those kids by yourself. It ain’t easy. I’ve got two daughters of my own and one son. I’ve raised them on my own twice while separated from their Mother. Even when Mom is here I still feel like I’m raising them myself.
The point is I agree with you about doing whatever is necesarry to protect your kids. I’d kill the MF’r that laid a hand on them period and deal with the consequences later. Society doesn’t make it easy for women who are in dire straights but that doesn’t excuse a parent who doesn’t protect their child.
I’m also a WBB (wanna be biker)! Just can’t ever seem to find the money to buy a bike. Before my Pop died last year we talked about getting a couple of basketcases and building them up for ourselves but that never happened. Being a custom painter, I get to work on other peoples bikes all the time and that just makes me want one worse.
One of these days it’ll happen.
Take care
Thanks for getting it. As for you being a wanna be. You are wrong. Having an attitude like yours is what a real biker is. And you Sir are a real Biker.