HarlemHeat37
01-13-2011, 01:19 AM
Whatever you think about WikiLeaks oddball Julian Assange, it’s wrong that he’s under investigation for sex crimes in Sweden. Not because what he’s accused of aren’t “real” crimes, as some have argued, but simply because it’s just as wrong to prosecute Assange as it was wrong not to prosecute Kobe Bryant.
Put another way, it’s about time we prosecuted offenders based on the harm done to women’s bodies, regardless of whether the prosecution might be good or bad for business (or politics or sports, etc.).
Rape law will never protect all women so long as it works better or worse based on who the man is – rather than what he did.
The allegations themselves, assuming they’re true, seem appropriate enough for prosecution. The two women involved described behavior that, while not the most serious of sexual offenses, still constitutes criminal activity in most countries – including the United States. One said she was asleep when the assault occurred. If a person is asleep they can’t give “knowing, intelligent and voluntary” consent and it’s a crime to touch them.
The other woman said she agreed to start a certain activity with Assange, but that he didn’t stop when she told him to. Again, the law in most jurisdictions provides that even after consent is given, if one person changes their mind it’s a crime for the other one to continue.
It might be hard to stop once the proverbial train is out of the station, but too bad. You can be angry but you can’t keep going.
Seems unfair but think about it this way. If I invite you into my home for one hour, and a half hour later I change my mind and ask you to leave, you gotta go – because it’s my house! And if it’s my body – you should go sooner because bodies are more important than houses.
For these reasons, Assange can be prosecuted simply because he violated two women’s fundamental right to personal autonomy and bodily integrity.
But just because charges are viable doesn’t mean we should ignore the fact that they appear designed to advance an unrelated political agenda, namely, punishing the guy for leaking sensitive government files.
It’s hardly a coincidence that Swedish authorities declined to prosecute when the charges were first reported last summer – and only went wild looking for the guy all over the planet after the big WikiLeaks moment last month.
In short, if Assange were any other guy, he would not be under investigation for sexual assault.
When prosecutors use the public’s money to pursue a sexual assault case as a pretext for some other agenda, people become cynical and mistrustful of the rule of law. And worse, it makes all rape laws seem trite; designed not to compel respect for women’s bodily integrity but rather to facilitate punishment for unrelated reasons.
In another context, I might support the charges simply to get the message out that rape law in this country routinely fails to protect women’s personal autonomy. For example, in almost every state, rape requires proof not only of nonconsent but also “force.” This makes no sense. If you take my stuff without my consent, it’s called larceny. If you also use force, it’s called robbery. But if you take my bodily integrity without my consent, it’s not a crime at all, unless you also use force.
Aren’t women more valuable than stuff?
In another context, I would fight hard to persuade the Swedes to prosecute Julian Assange simply because women’s bodily integrity matters. But flexing that muscle in this case will do nothing to promote the value of bodily integrity.
In another context, I would relish the opportunity to use this case as a teachable moment – to explain why the things Julian Assange is accused of are serious offenses even though the women consented to some of his actions.
In this context, I’m hoping Assange isn’t prosecuted. The fact that two women in Sweden might achieve justice is not worth the harm that all women suffer when the value of bodily integrity is measured by the political benefits of prosecuting the man who took it.
Good read..what do you guys think about this?..
http://www.patriotledger.com/opinions/opinions_columnists/x1442458465/WENDY-MURPHY-Why-go-after-Assange-and-give-Kobe-a-free-pass
Put another way, it’s about time we prosecuted offenders based on the harm done to women’s bodies, regardless of whether the prosecution might be good or bad for business (or politics or sports, etc.).
Rape law will never protect all women so long as it works better or worse based on who the man is – rather than what he did.
The allegations themselves, assuming they’re true, seem appropriate enough for prosecution. The two women involved described behavior that, while not the most serious of sexual offenses, still constitutes criminal activity in most countries – including the United States. One said she was asleep when the assault occurred. If a person is asleep they can’t give “knowing, intelligent and voluntary” consent and it’s a crime to touch them.
The other woman said she agreed to start a certain activity with Assange, but that he didn’t stop when she told him to. Again, the law in most jurisdictions provides that even after consent is given, if one person changes their mind it’s a crime for the other one to continue.
It might be hard to stop once the proverbial train is out of the station, but too bad. You can be angry but you can’t keep going.
Seems unfair but think about it this way. If I invite you into my home for one hour, and a half hour later I change my mind and ask you to leave, you gotta go – because it’s my house! And if it’s my body – you should go sooner because bodies are more important than houses.
For these reasons, Assange can be prosecuted simply because he violated two women’s fundamental right to personal autonomy and bodily integrity.
But just because charges are viable doesn’t mean we should ignore the fact that they appear designed to advance an unrelated political agenda, namely, punishing the guy for leaking sensitive government files.
It’s hardly a coincidence that Swedish authorities declined to prosecute when the charges were first reported last summer – and only went wild looking for the guy all over the planet after the big WikiLeaks moment last month.
In short, if Assange were any other guy, he would not be under investigation for sexual assault.
When prosecutors use the public’s money to pursue a sexual assault case as a pretext for some other agenda, people become cynical and mistrustful of the rule of law. And worse, it makes all rape laws seem trite; designed not to compel respect for women’s bodily integrity but rather to facilitate punishment for unrelated reasons.
In another context, I might support the charges simply to get the message out that rape law in this country routinely fails to protect women’s personal autonomy. For example, in almost every state, rape requires proof not only of nonconsent but also “force.” This makes no sense. If you take my stuff without my consent, it’s called larceny. If you also use force, it’s called robbery. But if you take my bodily integrity without my consent, it’s not a crime at all, unless you also use force.
Aren’t women more valuable than stuff?
In another context, I would fight hard to persuade the Swedes to prosecute Julian Assange simply because women’s bodily integrity matters. But flexing that muscle in this case will do nothing to promote the value of bodily integrity.
In another context, I would relish the opportunity to use this case as a teachable moment – to explain why the things Julian Assange is accused of are serious offenses even though the women consented to some of his actions.
In this context, I’m hoping Assange isn’t prosecuted. The fact that two women in Sweden might achieve justice is not worth the harm that all women suffer when the value of bodily integrity is measured by the political benefits of prosecuting the man who took it.
Good read..what do you guys think about this?..
http://www.patriotledger.com/opinions/opinions_columnists/x1442458465/WENDY-MURPHY-Why-go-after-Assange-and-give-Kobe-a-free-pass