When feminists find what they're looking for

"I've never struck a woman in my life, not even my own mother." - W. C. Fields

***

When a Penis is a Weapon

"A New York Times story about 18 teenagers and men raping an 11-year-old girl is generating a lot of repercussion for the Times because of the way the story was written. What seems to be missing in the understanding of the reporter and the paper’s editors is that when a penis is used for violence, it is no different from a gun or a knife or a club. In rape, the penis is a weapon.

Would the newspaper have written the story in the same way if the 11-year-old child were stabbed or clubbed by 18 men? I think not."

As is often the case with feminists, I don't see the problem.

The original is very neutrally written story, as journalism should be. One can also see that the Times's stories on murder are written in a similar manner.

Just because one does not go frothing mad about a rape case does not mean that one condones rape.

The irony is that if the Times had gone on about the "incredible deep physical and psychological trauma these teenagers and young men inflicted one by one... upon this helpless child" and had quotes "expressing outrage and sorrow", the feminists would've been bashing it for being sensationalistic and might even have accused it of [metaphorically] raping the victim again in the public limelight and gaze.

Which just goes to show that the conclusion is pre-ordained.

I will also add that there is terribly, distressingly something associated with the act of sex that in the eyes of most tars men accused of it with an aura of guilt.

(Two commenters agree with me: "this is blatant misreading of the article")