Category Archives: rape

A state of petrified adolescence

Dalrymple writes that Anthony Burgess, in his 1962 novel A Clockwork Orange, showed that he foresaw

the importance that the youth culture would attach to sexual precocity and a kind of disabused knowingness.

In a rape scene, Alex

meets two 10-year-old girls who, like him, are skipping school, in a record shop, where they are listening to pop music with suggestive titles such as Night after Day after Night.

Their education that afternoon

consists of repeated rape by an already experienced 15-year-old.

Anthony Burgess

Dalrymple notes that it would not have surprised Burgess

that magazines for 10- or 11-year-old girls are now full of advice about how to make themselves sexually attractive, that girls of six or seven are dressed by their single mothers in costumes redolent of prostitution, or that there has been a compression of generations, so that friendships are possible between 14- and 26-year-olds.

The precocity necessary to avoid humiliation by peers

prevents young people from maturing further and leaves them in a state of petrified adolescence. Persuaded that they already know all that is necessary, they are disabused about everything, for fear of appearing naïve. With no deeper interests, they are prey to gusts of hysterical and childish enthusiasm; only increasingly extreme sensation can arouse them from their mental torpor.

Hence

the epidemic of self-destructiveness that has followed in the wake of the youth culture.

Populism in its most malign form

Black cab rapist: John Warboys

Plebiscitary justice

Dalrymple writes that if the public were allowed to have its say in the granting of parole,

it is difficult to conceive that any decisions would ever be taken that defied the strongly-expressed views of large numbers of people.

But

whether any such opinions were expressed at all would be a matter of chance or factors that have nothing to do with justice.

The belief of John Worboys’ victims that he would repeat his crimes if released

was no firmer evidence than his psychologists’ belief that he wouldn’t repeat them.

Guilty of supreme sordor

The Ched Evans affair was, writes Dalrymple,

emblematic of a prevalent aspect of contemporary British culture. No one who has gone down the main street of a British town at midnight on Friday could really have been much surprised by the incident.

The case illustrates

the sub-Gomorrah nature of many contemporary British enjoyments, in which women participate as enthusiastically as men. Evans has acknowledged that his behaviour was bad, though (perhaps understandably) without recognition of how disgusting it was. But it would be implausible to say that the conduct of the alleged victim was on an altogether different and higher moral plane from his.

Sexmobocracy

Screen Shot 2016-01-10 at 14.07.01

Yet the feminists are silent — deafeningly so

And hardly a peep from the feminists

Muslim men, writes Dalrymple, are

integrated enough to want Westernised lives for themselves, but not integrated enough to want such lives for their sisters.

Or even for any non-Muslim women who happen to be around.

It is not, says Dalrymple,

  difficult to see the reasons for this.

But

where are our feminists, fearlessly fighting for speech codes and the use of the impersonal she in academic books, when women suffer such severe oppression? Hardly a peep is heard from them.

Screen Shot 2016-01-10 at 14.09.34Screen Shot 2016-01-10 at 14.10.52Screen Shot 2016-01-10 at 14.15.08Screen Shot 2016-01-10 at 14.16.24

A rapists’ charter

Ann M. Starrs

Ann M. Starrs: flatulent and at the same time chilling

Starry night

Dalrymple points out that some of the quotations (from articles inside the journal) found on the cover of the Lancet are

of such an unctuous sententiousness that they make Mr Podsnap seem like a neurotic self-doubter. They are usually inexact, flatulent, self-important, and frequently stupid.

He cites a passage taken from the article A Lancet Commission on sexual and reproductive health and rights: going beyond the Sustainable Development Goals. It is the work of Ann M. Starrs, described as president and chief executive officer of something called the Guttmacher Institute, which appears to be devoted to advancing the cause of abortion. Starrs’ words are considered so luminous that the Lancet’s editor reproduces them in large type on the front page:

Screen Shot 2015-09-26 at 09.10.37

The Lancet: self-important and frequently stupid

Ann M. Starrs’ Declaration of Sexual Rights

Sexuality and reproduction are universal concerns that affect every human being. Although there has been great progress in recent decades, the global community must now expedite and expand that progress to be more inclusive and comprehensive. A new agenda for sexual and reproductive health and rights is needed that recognises the full scope of people’s sexual and reproductive health needs, and enables all people to choose whether, when, and with whom to engage in sexual activity; to choose whether and when to have children; and to access the means to do so in good health.

The emotion in the reader of this, writes Dalrymple,

is similar to that aroused by a badly scratched record or a whining child.

The purpose of Starrs’ words, he points out,

is to create in the reader the impression of the writer as generous and broad-minded, denial of whose principles establishes him who would deny them as a bigot.

Yet Starrs’ words are

Screen Shot 2015-09-26 at 09.20.16

No perversion is too perverse for Ann M. Starrs

a rapists’ charter; no perversion is too perverse to fall under their permissive rubric.

Dalrymple notes that there have been men who have been able to achieve orgasm only by

  • derailing trains, or
  • paddling their hands in the entrails of the people they have killed

He asks:

Ought the full scope of their sexual needs have been met?

Dalrymple says:

That people ought to be able to have sex when they choose, with whom they choose, entails that they should be able to force themselves on others even in public. There can be no when without a corresponding where, for sexual desire (impossible to distinguish from need) does not always arise at moments hitherto considered appropriate.

He concludes:

From the fate of children under this regime of inalienable rights to be included in the proposed Declaration of Sexual Rights, it is best to avert one’s mind.

When whim is law

The victims

Some of the victims

Reflections on the case of Frederick and Rosemary West

The serial killers’ path, writes Dalrymple,

was smoothed by the increasing uncertainty as to the line between acceptable and unacceptable conduct, or even whether such a line exists.

Increasing sexual permissiveness

was taken by the Wests, whose libidos were a great deal stronger than their powers of reason, to entail a complete absence of limits; they told those whom they raped that what they were doing was only ‘natural’ and unobjectionable.

The cellar

The cellar

They operated

in an atmosphere in which, increasingly, self-discipline was not accepted as a necessary condition of freedom—in which everyone’s merest whim was law.

The case reveals

how easily, in the anonymity of the modern urban environment, and in the midst of crowds, people may disappear.

Such disappearances

are made all the easier by a collective refusal—in the name of individual liberty—of parents to take responsibility for their children, of neighbours to notice what is happening around them, of anyone to brave the mockery of libertines in the defence of some standard of decency.

Screen Shot 2015-04-12 at 19.31.04

The evil

The various public agencies—the police, the schools, the social services, the hospitals—proved no substitute

for the personal concern that families were once supposed to have provided, but that, in a permissive climate in which tolerance all too often shades into indifference, many provide no longer.

The failure of these agencies

was not accidental, but inherent in their nature as bureaucracies: the state is not, and never will be, a substitute for an old-fashioned Mum and Dad.

Blackmailers’ charter

Political corrector

Political corrector: Alison Saunders

They answered and said unto him, If he were not a malefactor, we would not have delivered him up unto thee. (John 18:30)

A growing threat to the rule of law

The Director of Public Prosecutions, the top public prosecutor for England and Wales, wants a man accused of forced sexual assault to be required to prove to police that his indicter assented to coition.

This, Dalrymple explains,

reverses the onus of proof for the first time from the prosecution to the defence. The man is to be presumed guilty until proved innocent rather than the other way round.

Suppose, says Dalrymple,
the DPP had suggested that, henceforth, muggers or any other class of criminal had to prove that they did not mug their accuser: what an outcry there would be — and justifiably so — from the habitual defenders of human rights. But the response from those quarters has been muted, to say the least.
It seems that while human rights
are universal, some people have fewer such rights than others, among them those people acquitted of racist murder or accused of rape.

Dalrymple drives home the important point:

The very worst criminal has the right to a defence, no less than the sainted innocent, and the basis on which he must be found guilty, beyond reasonable doubt, holds for him too. This is a basic protection of our law.

The sentences given to rapists are ludicrously inadequate

Screen Shot 2014-01-10 at 03.31.33The vast majority of crimes are susceptible to explanation or understanding, and punishment is very often unjustified, morally or practically. Leniency and pity are called for, and we must support every conceivable protection for the accused. It would be outrageous, for instance, if a released murderer were refused access to the airwaves or permission to publish a book on the grounds that he was a murderer.

However, there is one crime that is of special heinousness, deserving only the most condign punishment. It is a crime that must, for moral reasons, be treated with exemplary severity and unparalleled harshness.

That crime is rape.

The sentences given to rapists are ludicrously inadequate, and a different standard of proof is necessary to secure conviction of the accused. The presumption of innocence ought in this case to be abandoned or at least diluted; and because in this crime there can be no smoke without fire, it is distressing that so many cases end in acquittal. After all, rape is a more serious offence than murder, and people accused of rape are almost always guilty even if found innocent.

In the case of rape, it is safest always to adhere to the jurisprudential principle guilty because charged.

Presumption of guilt

Screen Shot 2014-01-10 at 03.31.33The no-smoke-without-fire argument is

primitive jurisprudence, returning us to the Middle Ages.

In murder trials, Dalrymple has often been ‘frustrated’ by

the inability to introduce evidence that the accused is a nasty, violent man, precisely of the kind to commit the offence.

But

the man in the dock is accused of specific acts, not of being a bad man in general of the kind whom we all love to hate. It is, therefore, right that he should be protected against the introduction of prejudicial information (or unsubstantiated rumour).

Screen Shot 2014-02-25 at 02.01.34Moreover,

Increased severity of punishment of wrongdoers cannot be used to atone or make up for past unjustified leniency.

The rule of law

does not come naturally to the human mind, and we are all susceptible to abandon it when our passions are engaged. Burning witches at stakes is much more natural.

The British: least attractive people in the world

Screen Shot 2015-06-26 at 14.57.09If anyone doubt this, let him visit, says Dalrymple, Manchester Airport, which

combines the worst of British architectural functionalism with practical dysfunction, the perfect marriage of abominable ugliness and incompetent design. It is a visual assault on the human soul.

In passing through security, Dalrymple runs into a group on their way to a stag party, all wearing, he says, If a woman says no, molest her! T-shirts. His comment:

A culture which produces young men who think it not only amusing to wear such a slogan, but right to travel to a foreign country wearing it, is a vile, crude and stupid one. This vileness, crudity and stupidity is not unselfconscious, it is the considered rejection of what is better in favour of what is worse. Vileness be thou my charm, crudity be thou my refinement, stupidity be thou my intelligence.

(The slogan on the T-shirts seems to be a version of the Spurs chant Van-Per-Sie, when a girl says no, molest her!, a popular taunt in the stands immediately after the footballer was accused of rape. Charges were later dropped when van Persie’s accuser admitted she had made the whole thing up.)

Next to Dalrymple in the queue,

dressed in the slovenly fashion in which almost all people dress, was a young man, none too clean. He was wearing a T-shirt advertising a rock group whose slogan was Corrupting minds. This was not satire; this was a political programme.

Once inside the departure lounge,

you could hear the sound of English males ‘enjoying’ themselves. They brayed drunkenly (it was 11 in the morning) not from joy but as a triumphant expression of their collective, unopposed power. The people at the airport were not members of the Lumpenproletariat, it was typical of the British population. Our leaders avert their gaze from the problem. The future is deservedly grim.