Kavanaugh And Sex Crimes
As the Kavanaugh situation is dragging on, perhaps it may work to examine sexual attitudes of parties involved.
On one side, we see women afraid of men's sexuality who want to portray just about anything that a man can do as a sex crime. On the other side, we see men afraid of women's sexuality who want to keep women from having extramarital sex or having access to contraception. Both sides have a vast following, and both sides are wrong.
It appears that there is already a sex offender on the Supreme Court, and he too is far-right. Clarence Thomas got in even in spite of a high-profile sex harassment campaign by Anita Hill. Both of these men want to litigate women's sexual behavior while themselves being perpetrators of sexual crimes.
With Kavanaugh, my concern is what he actually did. Right now the issue is not being handled in a sane manner. I have a friend who went to jail for a year and lost everything that he had because he got drunk and talked to a 16-year-old. I know other people who got away with raping their children since their children were 3. And the way to bring sanity to this issue is to consider the degree of the wrongdoing. There are miles to go between talking to a 16-year-old and raping your child since he is 3. There must be degrees to these crimes in the same way as there are degrees to theft and murder.
Should Kavanaugh be barred from the Supreme Court over his sexual past? Once again, that depends on what he did. Once again I want to see sanity brought to this matter, and that means considering the degrees of the wrongdoing.
One thing is clear for certain. It is wrong for a man who commits sex crimes to persecute women's sexuality. What this man does is completely hypocritical. And hypocrites have no business preaching morals.
On one side, we see women afraid of men's sexuality who want to portray just about anything that a man can do as a sex crime. On the other side, we see men afraid of women's sexuality who want to keep women from having extramarital sex or having access to contraception. Both sides have a vast following, and both sides are wrong.
It appears that there is already a sex offender on the Supreme Court, and he too is far-right. Clarence Thomas got in even in spite of a high-profile sex harassment campaign by Anita Hill. Both of these men want to litigate women's sexual behavior while themselves being perpetrators of sexual crimes.
With Kavanaugh, my concern is what he actually did. Right now the issue is not being handled in a sane manner. I have a friend who went to jail for a year and lost everything that he had because he got drunk and talked to a 16-year-old. I know other people who got away with raping their children since their children were 3. And the way to bring sanity to this issue is to consider the degree of the wrongdoing. There are miles to go between talking to a 16-year-old and raping your child since he is 3. There must be degrees to these crimes in the same way as there are degrees to theft and murder.
Should Kavanaugh be barred from the Supreme Court over his sexual past? Once again, that depends on what he did. Once again I want to see sanity brought to this matter, and that means considering the degrees of the wrongdoing.
One thing is clear for certain. It is wrong for a man who commits sex crimes to persecute women's sexuality. What this man does is completely hypocritical. And hypocrites have no business preaching morals.
posted by Ilya Shambat at 8:54 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home