Some highlights, by which I mean lowlights, of a recent discussion on The Spearhead of IMF head Dominique Strauss-Kahn’s arrest on sexual assault charges. The Spearheaders, naturally, have some unique and interesting perspectives on the case:
Black women (like the accuser) are all a bunch of liars. Run away!
Reality May 18, 2011 at 11:04
I knew it was going to be a black woman- I suspected from the second I heard about this. Crystal Magnum anyone? Don’t want to make this a racial issue- but how can you avoid it? You take 5 ounces of Female/Feminist hate and deception, add 8 ounces of the stereotypical black thing of always sniffing around for a lawsuit, stir .. and you have more than enough reason to avoid black women even more vigorously than women in general.
The case is somehow all about how badly “beta” men are discriminated against by evil women:
Commander Shepard May 18, 2011 at 11:53
Typically false rape allegations are made when a woman realizes she’s slept with a beta but doesn’t want her rep taking a hit and wants to avoid feeling like crap (betas are icky) my gut tells me either this is a totally fabricated set up (politically motivated) or Strauss-Kahn is getting a lesson in how betas have to apologize everyday for their existence.
She’s accusing him because she’s got AIDS and therefore (?) wants to make a quick buck, ethics be damned:
Avenger May 18, 2011 at 18:55 …
Since she has AIDS she knows that an infection could take her out at any time and she has a teenage daughter. A person like this will certainly not think like a normal person and may very well do something for a lump sum of cash since she has nothing to lose and may have some resentment towards men and doesn’t care what happens to this one guy. She also may be thinking that if she dies at least her daughter will have the money. This is not someone I would trust. …
I predict that Strauss will be released on bail tomorrow. He’ll pay the female’s lawyer some money and then the whole thing will just fade away.
He’s probably innocent, but he’s a white-hating Commie Jew bastard, so ha ha:
goldenfetus May 18, 2011 at 09:57
Libertarian here. I doubt this guy is guilty. Seems unlikely, yet possible. But as observed, this guy is a White-hating elite Marxist Jew. So while I agree that political disagreement is not sufficient grounds for wishing false-rape accusation/conviction on him, I submit that his hostility toward my people coupled with his general evil is enough to justify the enjoyment of his suffering. We can’t forget that his politics are what makes this possible in the first place, or ignore the ‘reap what you sow’ component here.
As a white guy, I’d like to say that goldenfetus does not in fact speak for “my people.”
And before anyone steps in to complain that I’ve picked the “outliers” in the discussions, the fanatics whose opinions aren’t shared by the MRA masses, I will note that (as is generally the case with Spearhead comments I quote) all of the comments here have gotten numerous upvotes from Spearhead readers, and only a handful of downvotes, if any. In other words, they represent something close to the Spearhead conventional wisdom. (And by “wisdom” here I mean “offensive idiocy.”)
FIRST!
I think?
You have to admit. The facts in the case look screwy.
Do not misunderstand – I am not backing up the white supremacists on the spearhead.
However, the call to 911 took place 1 hour after Strauss left the hotel.
No rape occurred – he tried to rape her is the exact allegation.
This means that no DNA evidence can be obtained since no rape actually occurred.
And – she will get money whether he is found guilty anyway.
Read the story on the telegraph.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/dominique-strauss-kahn/8524881/Dominique-Strauss-Kahn-former-IMF-head-bailed.html
Hmmm… sounds to me like SOMEone hasn’t yet learned that it is possible to have DNA in cells other than sperm. Such as skin cells, which might lodge under finger nails during a protracted struggle. Or hair follicles, which become dislodged during the aforementioned altercation.
Or blood, also often the bi-product of a violent attack. Or maybe, just maybe, ejaculation outside of the vagina or a woman? A shocking possibility, I know, but one we are forced to consider.
In future, I recommend seeking treatment for cranial-anal infarction. It can be fatal if left untended for too long. An uncle of mine went that way. It was dreadful to watch.
Can someone explain to me how the head of the IMF, a man with a serious reputation as a “seducer”, counts as a “Beta”?
IANAL, just a run-of-the-mill zombie here, but I am pretty sure that attempted rape is still a crime….
Aaaaannnnnd….Seraph beats me to my second comment! Well played.
No rape occurred – he tried to rape her is the exact allegation.
One of the allegations is that he forced her to perform a sex act. The DA says that nothing consensual occurred in the hotel room.
A non-consensual sex act is rape.
Sheesh, if only there was an extended discussion of this recently to which one could refer….
@donald zombie thing –
Well, I meant no SEX occurred.
Sounds convenient to me.
Does it matter if there was no PiV penetration?
Dude allegedly made her do something she didn’t want to do. That counts as assault. If it was a sex act, it’s sexual assault. There’s more to sex than just PiV, and forcing anyone to do any of that is sexual assault, which we also know by the term ‘rape’. The story said she fought him off as well, so I expect that there was more than enough evidence to at least prove that they struggled.
And I can think of a bunch of things that she would have wanted to do directly after the assault that would explain a one hour gap in between the event and calling 911. Why do *you* think it’s suspicious?
IMO, there is most likely a political or financial motive behind this, outside of all the false allegations and political rape lies that go on, its atill suspicious.
Can you imagine if a plumber working a Hilary Clinton’s house just alleged that she did something and then she was had to resign assumed guilty?
Anyway, I like to read Mike Whitney and here’s his take on it..
“I have no way of knowing whether the 32-year-old maid who claims she was attacked and forced to perform oral sex on IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn, is telling the truth or not. I’ll leave that to the braying hounds in the media who have already assumed the role of judge, jury and Lord High Executioner. But I will say, the whole matter smells rather fishy, just like the Eliot Spitzer story smelled fishy. Spitzer, you may recall, was Wall Street’s biggest adversary and a likely candidate to head the SEC, a position at which he would have excelled. In fact, there’s no doubt in my mind that if Spitzer had been appointed to lead the SEC, most of the top investment bankers on Wall Street would presently be making license plates and rope-soled shoes at the federal penitentiary…..
Rest here ht tp://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article28159.html
It’s interesting that so many people, including the liberal Matt Yglesias are taking a political tack on this situation. Granted, Matt Y is a political blogger. Occam’s Razor says that this is exactly what it appears to be: A powerful man thinking he can abuse a low-status woman with impunity, but being too foolish (or arrogant) to remember that he wasn’t at home.
That lol doesn’t see a difference between a consensual indiscretion and a sexual assault, well…
Seriously, an hour isn’t that long. She could’ve just needed the hour to collect herself after a traumatizing experience.
@lol
So what you’re claiming is that somebody paid off a maid to fake injuries and accuse him of sexual assault? Or that the maid had a personal grudge against this guy for some reason or another? Sounds more than a bit far-fetched to me.
As for your Hilary Clinton example, I would say if she really had committed a crime against him, and there was enough evidence to support this, then she should be held accountable. Just because someone is rich and/or influential doesn’t mean they’re above the law.
Spitzer. Ah, Spitzer. Such a tragedy. No, seriously, I really liked him. I don’t even really care that he was entertaining prostitutes. It’s the hypocrisy that did him in. And I’m pretty convinced that had he not been gunning for the big banks, the chances of his hushing up his law-breaking and infidelity would have been much higher.
But there’s little resemblance between Spitzer and DSK. Spitzer’s encounters were consensual, and it was his hypocrisy–trying to prosecute prostitution rings at the same time as he was patronizing them–that was the fatal blow to his career.
If the allegations against DSK are true, then he’s a violent criminal. That’s a far worse failing than hypocrisy.
I imagine, if the plumber had to go to the hospital for injuries sustained while fighting off a violent attack by Hillary Clinton, and brought charges against her that were substantiated by surveillance cameras, eyewitnesses, and physical evidence, she’d probably have to resign too. But then I have an irrational ladybrain, so who knows…
Seraph got to it first. Calling one of the political elite with a gazillion bucks who helps run the world AND is known for being a millionaire a bata – even in the sense of the word when used with animal behavior – is ridiculous.
Also, if she IS lying (which I don’t believe) it will probably come out in a trial. It’s not as though Dominique Strauss-Kahn is a pauper who will have terrible lawyers. He’s not going to be convicted without being proven guilty (and he easily could be but we don’t know yet) If he’s not he’ll return to a life in French politics and MRAs will cheer about having a martyr (ignoring the fact that his life won’t be harmed by a false accusation). If he is then the rest of us can be relieved to see someone finally take an immigrant woman seriously while the MRAs continue to bitch about how it was all a lie despite all clear evidence.
*known for being a womanizer NOT known for being a millionaire. Though he probably is known for that too.
@Scarecrow and @lol here’s the main problem with what both of you are saying: None of us here have the full story. Plain and simple, we do not have the evidence. So saying things like ‘it sounds screwy’ is just sorta premature. The courts are the ones that are going to get the full story, not us. And you’ll notice that no one on here at least is saying ‘well, obviously he’s guilty’. Worst we have is “i don’t think she’s lying”, which i think isn’t all the justified (for the same reasons), but that’s the worst. There are a number of reasons possible for the ‘screwy’ details, which the courts will undoubtedly hear.
Also, how no PiV sex occurring is ‘convenient’ is beyond me. Especially since the current story says he forced her into oral sex, in which case there’s still that DNA evidence, along with the others Kes mentioned.
It’s amazing to me, though not at all surprising, that these MRAs are completely willing to buy into any out-there conspiracy that explains these accusations — except that DSK attacked and tried to rape a woman, and she reported the attack to the police. Literally there is nothing in the world that is less conceivable to some MRAs than that a woman could tell the truth about her rape.
Which is odd, because — as we’ve seen in recent days here — MRM theory also is heavily invested in the idea that rapes do happen because women ask for it so much and don’t control their sexuality. So, rapes kinda happen, maybe. But reported rapes are always false. Or something. Jesus, my head hurts. The “logic,” it’s so painful.
Well
we have the biases here, feminists will generally rally around a criminal if the criminal is female and the victim is male and mens rights people, because of over exposure to lies about rape will tend to take rape claims with a pinch of salt, there isn’t an MRA that hasn’t been falsely accused of being a rapist or abuser in one way or another..
Rape is more of a political weapon than anything else, progressive lynchings, feminism, Assange …
NWOslave and lol… what if it *is* true? What if it all happened, exactly the way the accuser said it did? What happens then?
@lol Wait, what? First, there isn’t an MRA that hasn’t been falsely accused of being a rapist orr abuser? Can you back that up, because that seems a bit of hyperbole there, gotta say. Though, i have to admit with most of their opinions on women I wouldn’t be surprised if many are abusers, but that’s besides the point.
More importantly, Rape is a political weapon? We have two high profile cases in a year (maybe longer? I can’t remember when Assange came up), as opposed to the ~200,000 cases of sexual assault per year. Numbers suggest it has very little to do with politics.
And progressive lynchings? What? What does that even mean?
Also, considering that every commenter on this site rallied around the guy in that DV article, your first point is kinda moot.
Nobby
I’ve been an mra for 4 years and Ive been accused of being a rapist, an abuser, part of an abusers lobby, a rape apologist etc countless times, and many times on this blog.
As for progressive lynchings, before feminism was using rape fear mongering and rape as a political platform, progressive democrats were using it in the same way against black men, during the progressive era, feminism does the same thing today, its just more sophisticated and no longer race specific.
Here are the charges against DSK, according to The Independent:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/strausskahn-granted-6m-bail-but-is-forced-to-stand-down-from-imf-2286638.html
What does a ‘progressive lynching’ mean? I haven’t seen a whole lot of real lynchings lately, gotta say, so please define the term.
Rape apologist /= rapist, first of all. very different concept. Same with ‘abusers lobby’. And that still doesn’t equate to ‘every MRA has been accused of being a rapist or abuser’. Also, considering we’re talking about an actual rape case here, saying that they have been ‘falsely accused’ carries a very different meaning then someone on a blog calling you names.
LOL, there’s a big difference between being called names on the internet — especially when people don’t even know your real name — and being accused of a crime and arrested.
I would imagine that every single person commenting here has been called a name on the internet. I certainly have, on my own blog, even. I think at least once by you (didn’t you recently declare that I was a paid agent of some nefarious feminist astro-turfing cabal, or something?)
Damn do those comments show a complete and total failure to comprehend the basics of the criminal law system. This guy was charged criminally, not sued civilly. That means the victim does not stand to get money from the court case, that the case cannot be settled by the victim for money, and that the state’s prosecutor is the lawyer who could give a plea bargain not the victim’s counsel (if she even had one). We do not make the perps pay cash to the victims in criminal cases-that is not how the US criminal law system works. I get a feeling that MRAs range from fairly oblivious to totally and completely fucking obvlivious one the scale of “knowing shit about the US political or legal systems”. The saddest thing is that plenty of them are from the US (and the rest seem to talk about it continuously).
@darksidecat It was mentioned in some article that she could sue in civil court and have a ‘lower standard of proof’, though i won’t pretend to know what that means or if it’s true. However, since she’s not and the case is going to criminal court, the point is kinda moot.