Re: violence directed upon mens genitals by women
There is no double standard when you only hear one side of the story....
...It's a dog bites man story. Right up there with the dwarf with a Hoover superglued to his pecker"
I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you did not read the second article that I cited regarding the woman who tore off the man's testicle becuase he would not given into her sexual advances. Did you read the second article? If not my second post is not going to be in context.
For your information I read the complete story regarding the woman who burned her ex's penis, and I checked the story with several other media outlets before I made the post, and I will explain your assumptions later.
Here are some excerpts from the second BBC Article that I cited:
.....A woman who ripped off her ex-boyfriend's testicle with her bare hands has been sent to prison....
Amanda Monti, 24, flew into a rage when Geoffrey Jones, 37, rejected her advances at the end of a house party, Liverpool Crown Court heard...
There was no provocation brougth forward in the trial other than the woman's sexual advances were not recieved. Hence the refrence to Shakespeare-hell knoweth no furry ..... Call Shakespeare a fool or a sexist if you wish, but there is a great deal of commentary on human nature to be found his plays and writings.
She pulled off his left testicle and tried to swallow it, before spitting it out. A friend handed it back to Mr Jones saying: "That's yours."
This woman did not do this in private. People were around. An eye witness confirmed that this woman tried to eat his severed testicle. Sexual assualt/rape is one thing. Genital mutilation is another thing, but when you add trying to eat the severed mutilated testicle, the whole thing is raised to a new level of rage, hatred, and insantity.
....Monti admitted wounding and was jailed for two-and-a-half years....
She admitted to what she did in Court, and she told her story in a Court of law. How is her side of the story missing here?
.....Sentencing Monti, Judge Charles James said it was "a very serious injury" and that
Monti was not acting in self-defence....... The court heard that Mr Jones had ended his long-term but "open relationship" with Monti towards the end of May last year.......The pair remained on good terms and on 30 May she picked him up from a party in Crosby and went back for drinks with friends at Mr Jones's house.....An argument ensued and Mr Jones said there was a struggle between them......In his statement, Mr Jones said she grabbed his genitals and "pulled hard".
He added: "That caused my underpants to come off and I found I was completely naked and in excruciating pain."
.....The court heard that a friend saw Monti put Mr Jones's testicle into her mouth and try to swallow it.....She choked and spat it back into her hand before the friend grabbed it and gave it back to Mr Jones. Doctors were unable to re-attach the organ....In a letter to the court, Monti said she was sorry for what she had done....She said: "
It was never my intention to cause harm to Geoff and the fact that I have caused him injury will live with me forever. I
am in no way a violent person." ....The letter added: "I have challenged myself to explain what has happened but still I just cannot remember. This has caused much anguish to me and will do for the rest of my life.....
Not a violent person? Stupid is as stupid does=violent is as violent does. Any bets on whether this is the first time she has asaulted someone or exibited violent and antisocial behaivour? This woman is now portraying herself as the one who is suffering here, and her comments minimize what she did to this man.
If you as a woman are not deeply upset, offended, appalled, disgusted or disturbed by this woman's actions, then you need to take a deep look at yourself
just as would any man who was not equally affected were this a man inflicting this kind of violence and genital mutilation upon a woman
Now onto the original article that I posted regarding the russain woman who set fire to her husbands penis. For your information I read the article before I posted it, and I believe a more indepth review will reveal that you made some very big assumptions.
Here is the same story straight from the Pravda:
A female Muscovite burnt her ex-husband’s penis in revenge for his adultery. The Tvoi Den newspaper reports that the man was taken to hospital with burns all over his body, but his jealous ex-wife did not feel guilty at all.
http://english.pravda.ru/society/stories/22-08-2007/96233-penis-0
The woman named only as Irina, 41, was married to Dmitry, 48, for 19 years. The couple divorced three years ago but shared the same apartment afterwards.
Irina took her revenge upon Dmitry at the moment when the man could repulse the attack neither physically nor psychologically. Shortly before the incident the man broke his heel, so he could not walk a lot and spent much time at home.
When the incident took place Dmitry was watching an adult program on a night TV channel. His ex-wife grabbed a bottle of vodka and approached the man sitting in front of the TV set.
She spilled some vodka on him the man and wanted to set him on fire with a match but her attempt. The flame died out in the air.
Dmitry could hardly realize what was going on and made no attempts to stop the crazy woman. Then, Irina made a wick of a newspaper and threw the burning paper aiming at the man’s crotch. Dmitry told doctors that he had felt terrible pain but could not extinguish the fire. He started burning like a torch. At first, Irina was just observing how the ex-husband was agonizing but then decided to send for a doctor.
Doctors say that
Dmitry could have burned alive if the woman had not called an ambulance.
Severe burns were found on the man’s arms, legs, chest and penis.
Dmitry can not explain the reason of the ex-wife’s action. He said that the idea to divorce suddenly occurred to Irina three years ago, and the woman would not explain to the man why she wanted to divorce him. Dmitry also has no idea regarding the reasons of the recent incident.
Irina at the same time does not feel guilty and insists that ex-husbands must be punished even if they once were unfaithful.
Translated by Maria Gousseva
This woman made a choice. The fact that they lived together for three years after their divorce was due to "economic reasons". However, she could have left, but she chose not to. Lets look at the facts: The couple was divorced for three years prior to this incident of violence and potential homicide. The woman stayed due to "economic reasons".
Where was this woman deprived of a choice to leave this situation?? Where does her responsibilty to make her own life better start to fall strictly upon her shoulders?
....Now I'm not, in any shape, form or fashion, excusing what she did.........He's sitting there going "I don't know what I did to deserve this?!" Oh, horseshit. He knows exactly what he did....
You just made a huge assumption, and what alleged potential provocation do you think justifies her response or would elicit such a response by an innocent healthy well adjusted woman void of serious pyscholgical disorders?
The only thing that the article mentions as a posible motive is that the woman wanted to punish him for his past affair. Again, she could have left, and I think the legit question is why didn't she? Using money as an excuse is a cop out if this guy was so digusting to live with.
..... and something tells me that his EX-wife had told [him] just because we have to frigging live together she didn't want to see his hairy fucking scrote or some such thing.....
And what does this statement and sentiment have to do with making her actions anything resembling cause and effect? Also, that "something" is likely your own experiences and biases, and you have made huge assumptions regarding her lack of culpability and intent for her actions.
Again, she was not legally forced to live there, and she was not being intimidated to do so. If seeing the man naked watching an adult TV program is that bad, go else where. Or perhaps she could chose not to look. We tell our children stuff like this all the time. In addition, all to often being offended or getting pissed off about something is a choice and there are those who enjoy their anger and the self endowed carte blanche they feel when they are acting from anger.
Do you have a problem with admitting that women are capable of and more often than a good many women would like to admit do in fact resort to evil, twisted acts that degrade and brutally hurt men [and children as well]?
....I'd love to see an interview with the wife I bet she knows EXACTLY why she lit him up....
This is perhaps the one thing we agree on regarding the two articles that I posted--yes she does know why she burned this mans genitals and nearly killed him.
The key question is can there be any real justification for her actions? Was there any reasonable provocation? This side of self defense is there any justification? Also,if she wants to retaliate, why must she direct this violence towards his genitals? What does her choice reveal about her?
The big clincher is that what would you be saying and feeling if this was a woman who was similarly burned by a man was for similar circumstances? If your responses are not eqaul and identical for both genital burning scenarios, then you are in need of some serious self examination.
The facts are:
1. The man was dealing with an injury that had him incapaciated.
2. This woman made two attempts to set fire to this man.
3. She used an accelerant--this indicates calulation and premediation.
4. Her only stated justification was becuase he had an affair?
5. The couple had been divorced for three years?
6. She could have left but chose not to likely due to having to accept a lesser standard of living.
7. This violence was not just violence, it was directed towards his gentials
It was long since time to move on and in her case move out as well. She should have looked to stay with family, stay with freinds, get a new appartment with another single woman who is in similar circumstaces, but dont resort to violence. The fact that her brutality was directed towards his genitals only makes her violence that much more wrong, evil and disturbing.
Minus a "smoking gun" of her being raped by this man prior to this incident, or a history of proven DV, where is the justification for what this woman has done? There is no cause and effect here. Furthermore, violence does not solve these problems or bring about healing, and if a woman hates a man and his genitalia so bad that she resorts to genital mutilation and in the other case eating mutilated genitalia (this is Dahmeresque), what does it say about these women?
PS I have worked with DV treatment teams, and I have worked with rape victims and victims of sexual abuse. I have helped investigate child sex abuse cases, incset, an sexual assault. I have an idea of what the reality of these heinous crimes are about. I did not just fall of the turnip truck, and I have seen the ugly underbelly of society up close and personal. It knows no boundaries of gender, race, religion(or lack there of) nationality, level of education, or socioeconomic status.