why does sarah palin hate women?
Maybe for the same reason that Larry Craig hates gays? Is it just me, or has sexual self-loathing really evolved into a disturbing GOP trademark?
The following is almost beyond comprehension for anyone with a soul or a conscience.
During four years in which Sarah Palin was mayor of Wasillia, rape victims were charged for their own rape kits. The practice was the brainchild of her handpicked police chief (which she hired shortly after being elected mayor). This absurd, cruel, disrespectful and harmful practice (which was not practiced by Alaska State Troopers or any other Alaskan city, just Wasilla, and only under Palin’s watch) was not put to and end until then-governor Tony Knowles made it illegal by signing a bill into law that objected to the practice. Governor Knowles explained thus:
“We would never bill the victim of a burglary for fingerprinting and photographing the crime scene, or for the cost of gathering other evidence,” Knowles said. “Nor should we bill rape victims just because the crime scene happens to be their bodies.”
Source: Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman, Wasilla Alaska, article published May 22, 2000.
Which begs the question, why on earth would any law enforcement agency want to charge a woman for the investigation of her own rape? Because the examination and the rape itself aren’t humiliation enough?
At the bottom of the above sited article, in the always enlightening and disturbing “comments section,” a supporter of this heartless practice (who implies he is a police officer who has “worked” a lot of rape cases) attempts to explain the logic behind charging rape victims for, essentially, inconveniencing the police:
“To weed out the false accusations women make with respect to sexual assaults, many towns have and are charging for rape kits. I have worked enough rapes to know when the town ho cries foul just to be vindictive and YES she should be charged.”
Town ho?
I’m not sure what to do with this. There seems to be an assumption here that most or all rape victims in Wasilla are probably lying. Let’s make a huge leap of the imagination here and say that’s true (though it certainly is not). What about the occasional exception, that actual rape victim who isn’t lying? Charge her, too, just in case?
If Wasilla law enforcement really can’t afford rape kits, maybe they ought to try catching more rapists and charging the actual criminals for the inconvenience and expense of the investigation.
I have a serious question here. Are we absolutely, positively sure that Sarah Palin is a woman? I mean, has anyone checked, just to be sure? The McCain campaign’s vetting process seems to have missed all sorts of things, could this be one of them? The reason I ask is that I find it hard to believe that a woman mayor would allow such a law to go unchallenged during her term – let alone be the root cause of its existence in the first place.
- Louis Maistros
September 17th, 2008 at 9:59 am
If you think false rape reports are rare, then you haven’t been keeping up with current events.
Also, if you think what happens to a man when falsely accussed is trivial, then you are not for equality.
The rape kit proves a crime was commited, you make a comparison to a robbery, well you don’t have to prove the broken glass or broken door, it is right there for all too see, but in cases of rape, it is not so obvious.
So really, you should be mad at all the women who DO use false rape accusations to get out of all manner of trouble. Even girls as young as 14 are doing it, it’s a fashion thing now.
Where have you been??
September 17th, 2008 at 10:22 am
Wow Dutch, I’m completely impressed! So are we going to move forward to a situation where we have to pay for fingerprint dusting, cybersleuthing for child predators, and other detective work?
Yes, I am aware of what happens when a man is falsely accused, I’ve see it happen. While my faith in it is shaken we DO have a legal system in pace for determining these things. For the liars there is defamation of character, the right to counter-sue, slander, loss of reputation and a number of other means of recourse. Not saying its right, bt that is the system we agree to by living here.
I do not see how this in any way supports the idea of making women who have been sexualy assaulted be put through further stress and anxiety not to mention cost, in order to attempt to locate the predator in question.
And what about the vast percentage of rapes that go unreported?
Your attempt to spin this is unconscionable.
September 17th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
At no point did I say that false rape reports are rare. At no point did I say it was ok to falsely report a rape. At no point did I imply that men falsely accused of rape are less than victims. You have a strange and disturbing imagination.
If a woman falsely reprots a rape, she has committed a serious crime and should be punished, and yes, should even have to pay all costs incurred by her crime.
But having a law that forces ALL women who report a rape to pay for the investigation of the crime constitutes a “guilty before proven innocent” practice against women, which is, at least, unconsitutional — and, at most, is one of the most stupid and heartless things I’ve ever heard of.
Alaska has the highest sexual assault rates in the country. As governor, even Palin called the problem an “epidemic.” And it is a fact that MOST actual rapes go unreported. Many rape victims are so terrified of the rapist that they suffer in silence and live in terror rather than report the crime. And in Wasilla there was an additonal motivation to not report the crime — the fucking expense of it fer chrissake!
The practice of blindly assuming that all or most rapes committed in Wasilla are most likely false reports is: a)horseshit and b) irresponsible. Whether a false report has been made is up to the courts to decide, not for a heartless police chief to blindly assume. If even ONE true rape victim is punished in this way for simply having the courage to come forward and report the crime, that is a serious travesty of justice.
It is immoral, unconsitiutional, heartless, and all kinds of seriously fucked up.
September 17th, 2008 at 1:01 pm
BTW…
“you make a comparison to a robbery…”
No, I didn’t make that comparison. The Governor of Alaska made that comparison. Try to read more carefully.
September 21st, 2008 at 8:13 pm
Something I found more disturbing…
Standard procedure when administering a rape-kit is to offer the victim the option of emergency contraception. Since Palin has already said she doesn’t believe in abortion, even in cases of rape, this seems like a back-door way to force women into not having a choice.
September 21st, 2008 at 8:57 pm
Wow.
Kuttlefish has hit on some deep underlying shit.
By controling the rape kit application, Palin can influence the use of emergency contraceptives in rape victims.
That’s just so evil and wrong….
As for Dutch the Dipshit, everytime someone gets caught turing in a false fire alarm, there is jail time and/or heavy fines involved. Does that mean we should charge everybody who turns in a fire alarm, even if they’re trapped in burning building or if their house is on fire?
Of course not. There is no rubber stamp for this stuff.
I would hope that any woman found guitly of falsely reporting a rape would face serious criminal charges, nevermind paying for a rape kit, court costs, police expense, etc.
To horrify and abuse actual rape victims by demanding money after such an ordeal, even if it’s weeks later, is a slap in the face. The implications of Kuttlefish’s observation make it seem so much more like a Big Brother con job…
the whole concept is beyond uncivilized and an affront to society as a whole.
September 22nd, 2008 at 11:18 am
What does Palin stand for? well here goes one of them…. Palin
P - probably
A - another
L - lying
I - insensitive (incompetent)
N - narcissist
If it ever goes through everybody should past this in every blog they can.