“in almost every state in this country, rape requires proof of not only of nonconsent but also “force.” If you take my stuff without my consent, it’s called larceny. If you also use force, it’s called robbery. But if you take my bodily integrity without my consent, it’s not a crime at all, unless you also use force. Non-consent should be enough.” – Wendy Murphy on the inadequate protection of female sexual integrity under American law.
Spend 1 hour to watch this documentary and you will know more than most people about Wikileaks, and why its is arguably the most important new development this year.
Below is an exclusive rough-cut of first in-depth documentary on WikiLeaks and the people behind it from swedish government funded Sveriges Television. It is only available in this form until Dec 13th (tomorrow). So watch it before you go to bed tonight. You can watch it below, but i find that the video player functions better if you watch it here.
Vodpod videos no longer available.
Check Wikileaks page for more.
quote of the day:
“…these women are on the receiving end of a lot of hate mail. How does anyone who calls for his release and the dropping of the [rape] charges know the truth? ” – Birgitta Jonsdottir, an Icelandic MP and a collaborator of Wikileaks on the two women who accuse Assange of “sex by surprise” (a form of rape crime in Sweden)(source).
Due to its association with Wikileaks and Julian Assange, “sex by surprise” crime and the two girls who accuse Assange are being ridiculed by many of Wikileaks sympathizers around the world. This to me is unsettling.
I am hoping to learn more about what exactly constitutes a “sex by surprise” crime. Base on what i have read, it sounds to me it is a “sex by surprise” if sex continued after one party have withdraw their consent to sex, even if there is no use of force or struggle involve. Can a friendly Swedes confirm or explain to me what it is?
This sounds to me a very progressive law, and i like it. Females are a physically significant weaker gender in our society. Sometime the potential for a male to use force is intimidating enough to force the female into submission, even without actual threat to use force. Law like “sex by surprise” (as i understand it) are a safeguard to females because it completely remove force from the equation of sexual conduct.
I mean imagine you are a girl. You pick up a guy at the nightclub. You consent to sex with condom at his apartment. As it turns out, he does not have one but he still insist in sex. You said no, but he is pushy and he is drunk. You barely knows the guy. You begin to feel intimidated and threaten. You dont want to be hurt, and dont want to be a rape victim so you silently cave in. This too me constitute a form of rape, even if there was no actual threat of force. Remember to a weaker party, absent of actual threat of force does not eliminate the potential for force.
Obviously the caveat is, “sex by surprise” are hard to prove and over zealous enforcement of it might lead to abuses. There will probably never going to be perfect laws and enforcement with regard to what people do in their bedrooms. We can ask people to write written consents before intercourse, but that would really take the romance out of it all.
With regards what Julian Assange, I fully support his action in his capacity as the leader of Wikileaks, but it does not mean charges against his personal conduct should be dismissed just because he is Assange. Those cases should be examine base on the merit of the evident presented. Lets not forget that JULIAN ASSANGE HAS NOT BEEN FORMALLY CHARGED WITH ANYTHING. And that WHAT EVER HAPPENS TO ASSANGE OUTSIDE OF HIS WORK WITH WIKILEAKS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WIKILEAKS.
Governments, the establishment and the powerful have a habit of using sex as a weapons to discredit those who speak truth against them. What is happening to Assange happend to Daniel Ellsberg when he leaked the Pentagon Papers. Because of the history of using sex to smear political enemies, sex crime lose credibility in politically sensitive cases. So lastly, to the ladies, you deserve all the law against rape. You need to speak up against anyone who use rape protection laws as a political tool, because if you dont, the credibility of legitimate cases will be weaken.
Glenn Beck gave the more comprehensive analysis on the rape charge against Julian Assange (shockingly).
His conclusion: Julian Assange is a dirtbag, but not a rapist
His description of what happened is 100% consistant from what i have read from multiple other sources.
Apparently Sweden have very progressive rape laws. Julian Assange was in fact charge with one of those progressive laws, namely “sex by surprise”. According to Slate “sex by surprise” is highly unlikely to constitute a rape crime in the United States.
anyway, Assange and even Wikileaks are just symptoms of whats more to come. In the age of internet and globalization, power is more decentralized than ever, Wikileaks (and sadly Al Queda) are examples of new found power of people against establishment. Even if they somehow succeed in taking down Assange and Wikileaks, they will just be replace by others. So stop trying.
p.s. The Tea Partiers need to start speaking out against the attack on Assange and Wikileaks, if the truly believen in what they preach.
I was just in the shower thinking about the Vatican and the raped children then realizing how fortunate i am to live in a society where we are govern by laws of humans instead of 2,000 years old laws of “god” and justice is not determined by theologians but by lawyers (who are essentially logicians). thank god (pantheist) for that.