Frigid Jones' Diary

'Cutting up Playgirl' by Carrie Jones
That's what the author calls her autobiography which is scheduled to be published soon in an interview to the Daily Mail. It seems to be a tell-all book by a lady who has little to tell anyone. (George Mikes may have been right when he said that on the continent, people have a sex life but in England, they have hot water bottles.) I'm not sure what to make of it although it stuns me that she claims not to have told her family that she has written the book at all. I can understand not telling an abusive husband about writing a book which speaks of his behaviour but considering that she describes her husband as a good man, I cannot imagine why she hasn't told him or her daughters about the book. I know that if I were in their shoes, I would want to have some time to brace myself for the hullabaloo the book will in all probability cause in their lives.
Link: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/femail/article.html?in_article_id=510248&in_page_id=1879

Woman with Disability Raped, Denied Liberty

James Chalmers says, "The Times also devotes attention to the Mental Welfare Commission’s scathing “Justice Denied” report on the case of Ms A, a 67 year old woman with a learning disability who appears to have been the subject of repeated assaults which have led not to criminal proceedings against her alleged assailants, but instead to subjecting Ms A to a “protective regime that effectively deprives her of much of her liberty”. The Times report is not online, but there is a BBC News story online, and a summary of the report can be downloaded from the Commission’s website." [1]

There were no prosecutions because she wasn't considered to be a reliable witness due to her disability.

According to the BBC report, "She was sexually assaulted by five men over the past decade - none of whom have ever been prosecuted, despite the attacks being reported to police. ... Four of these incidents, all of which were reported to the police and the fiscal, involved one man." [2]

The report on the Commission's site says:

"The UN Convention on Rights of People with a Disability places a duty on State Parties to ensure effective access to justice for adults with a learning disability on an equal basis with others. For a number of complex reasons, this did not appear to have happened for Ms A. ...

We are satisfied that Ms A is protected from further risk of assault. However, we do have serous reservations as to the lawfulness of certain aspects of her current care plan. ...

The levels of protection that have been put in place mean that she is barely allowed outside her flat without an escort. We believe that this level of restriction requires an appropriate legal intervention and the safeguards that would accompany it. It was generally acknowledged that Ms A was most at risk from a small number of identified men. The fact that these men were not prosecuted has left Ms A at greater risk. Management of these risks has been through highly restrictive care arrangements. If the people who Ms A claimed (and others believed) had assaulted her had been brought to justice, her safety would be less compromised and these restrictions less necessary. ...

It is difficult to escape the conclusion that different standards were applied to Ms A because she had a learning disability." [3]

Links:
[1] criminalletters.blogspot.com/2008/04/very-bad-news-day.html
[2] news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7349900.stm
[3] mwcscot.org.uk/web/FILES/Publications/Justice_Denied_Summary_FINAL.pdf

Jeans and Rape

BILL NUMBER: SCR 106 introduced by Senators Romero (and others) in California 'would recognize April 23, 2008 as "Denim Day California" and would encourage everyone to wear jeans on that day to help communicate the message that there is no excuse for, and never an invitation to, rape'.

Whoa! Wait a second? Who thinks that wearing jeans is an invitation to rape?" [1]

An Italian court, the Court of Cassation which is the highest appeal court in the country, primarily comprising elderly male judges said (in 1999) that women wearing tight jeans could not be raped because such jeans cannot be removed without their consent although that ruling was later rescinded. At the time, the court had 410 male judges and 10 female judges. [2]

Links:

[1] http://www.supremedicta.com/2008/04/retarded-state-legislation-california.html

[2] http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9406E0D7133AF935A25751C0A96F958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=2

A Five Second Delay Could be Rape

In the 2004 case of Maouloud Baby, Maryland's highest Court of Appeal, has said that a man can be convicted of rape if he doesn't stop as soon as the woman asks him to stop.

In this case, "Maouloud Baby was convicted of first-degree rape in December 2004 after jurors heard testimony that the 16-year-old continued having sex with an 18-year-old woman for 'about five or so seconds' after she told him to stop," according to USA today. [1] This conviction was then reversed by the Court of Special Appeals.

However, Judge Lynne Battaglia writing the opinion in the Court of Appeal has now said, "We conclude that post-penetration withdrawal of consent negates initial consent for the purposes of sexual offense crimes and, when coupled with the other elements, may constitute the crime of rape."

This negates a 1980 ruling of the same court. In Battle v. State, 287 Md. 675, 684, 414 A.2d 1266, 1270 (1980), the Court said: "Given the fact that consent must precede penetration, it follows in our view that although a woman may have consented to a sexual encounter, even to intercourse, if that consent is withdrawn prior to the act of penetration, then it cannot be said that she has consented to sexual intercourse. On the other hand, ordinarily if she consents prior to penetration and withdraws the consent following penetration, there is no rape."

The court has also said that that rape trauma syndrome evidence should first be subjected to Frye-Reed analysis if an appropriate objection is interposed.

Source: [1] http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2008/04/md-court-expand.html

Soonamai Desai

I have been reading the (unpublished) memoirs of Soonamai Desai, a Gujarati lady who lived to be 100. She died in 1983 and the memoirs speak of both her public and her private life. She was the first woman corporator in Navsari and travelled widely. I have been intrigued by her life and also by her description of social life in general, the difference between the India she grew up in and the one she died in, and the way in which her story ties up with 'standard' history.

For example, she speaks of meeting Madam Cama in Paris and of how the lady had made arrangements for what should be done if she died there as she expected to since at the time she doubted that the British would give her permission to return either to England or to India because of her Nationalist activities. As it turned out, the British did allow Madam Cama to return to her homeland and she died on Indian soil but I hadn't known anything at all about the French funeral arrangements. In fact, I didn't know that they had existed at all.

What I found particularly touching though weren't her memories but her description of growing old. She said that in old age, the respect and admiration of one's acquaintances give way to their mockery and to a 'don't care attitude'. After all what can the old actually do? They become dependent on others and are therefore helpless. To understand the lot of the old, one has to be old -- to understand how desolate they can be as all their contemporaries pass away and they have no one to turn to. She ended by saying, "So now my life is not only in its evening -- it is decidedly night and as I look back, with a few blinding spots which have hit me hard enough to make my head reel; life, fate, destiny -- call it what you will -- has been good to me and it is in this mood that I await the coming of a stage of life called death but which could be but another phase of life with some impatience and great curiosity."

Against Pro-ana Sites

The National Assembly -- the lower house of the French parliament -- has unanimously passed a bill that makes publicly inciting extreme thinness illegal whether in magazines, advertisements or on websites. The bill was proposed by Valérie Boyer who belongs to the ruling conservative UMP party and under it, those who incite others to deprive themselves of food to an excessive degree can be fined up to 30,000 euros or, if the person dies, sentenced to up to three years in prison.
The bill will go to the Senate within a few weeks.

It remains to be seen if the bill will actually help curb anorexia nervosa should it become law.

Sources:
[1] http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/apr/15/france.fashion
[2] http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-ap-france-fashion-anorexia,1,7093355.story
[3] http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article3715030.ece

A Woman, A Widow, and A Witch

If

• you're a woman
• and a widow
• and belong to a lower caste

you could be

• stripped
• garlanded with shoes
• paraded through the village streets naked
• and accused of being a witch

should you attempt to enter a temple.

timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Cities/Widow_paraded_naked_for_entering_temple/rssarticleshow/2927206.cms

There's much to be said about the abuse of people from low castes. There's just much to be said about discrimination against women in general and widows in particular. But I'm not going to say it here. I'm going to focus on the fact that, in this case, this one woman was, of all things, accused of being a witch.

It happens. Say something you're not supposed to say. Stand up for yourself. In an urban setting, you'll probably be called either a slut or a ball-breaking bitch but chances are, you won't be called a witch.

The rationale behind the reactions in urban and rural settings is very similar though -- to denigrate what you cannot control hoping, in the back of your mind, that the self-confidence and assertiveness in the woman will disintegrate. And at the very least, if that doesn't happen, that you'll scare other women enough not to have them act similarly.

Witch-hunting is still prevalent in various parts of the world including some Indian states such as Assam, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Rajasthan, Andhra Pradesh and Maharashtra. Between 1991 and 2000, over 522 cases of witch-hunting were registered in Bihar alone.

What's frightening though is that nowadays, being branded a witch is often just a device for people to do such things as settle property disputes and ensure that women do not stand up for their political and other rights. That seems to have been what's happened in this case: a woman who's three times as vulnerable because of not only being a woman but also a widow and a member of a lower caste was targetted when she entered a Kali temple in Dhanbad.

The persecution of so-called witches is sometimes due to Shamans who encourage such acts and due genuine ignorance and superstition while at other times, as I suspect is the case here, it's due to the need for a covert and 'socially acceptable' means of keeping women from asserting their rights.

It ranks among the most ignored crimes against women in Indian society today but many social activists say that legislation alone is unlikely to do much to help solve the problem unless there is a change in the attitudes of the people. And until attitudes do change, India will continue to have the dubious distinction of being, as someone once put it, 'a Nuclear Power engulfed in a Black Magic frenzy'.

References:
In the name of the witch : frontlineonnet.com/fl1723/17230870.htm
I've also quoted from an article I wrote ages ago here.

Not a Post Feminist World

I just came across a link on Quizlaw.com in which the author points out that we aren't really living in a post-feminist world.

"I’m used to seeing ugly misogyny in the gossip world, but aside from the usual right-wing nutjobs, I’m not as accustomed to seeing it as much in politics. However, New York Magazine ran a fascinating piece over the weekend on Hillary Clinton and the way her candidacy has brought the sexist douchebags out of the woodwork..."

Following the link which spoke about the gossip world, I reached an article which speculates about whether Ellen Page is gay -- the evidence: she apparently hasn't shaved her armpits in some film. (And, incidentally, if you're like me and have no idea who Ellen Page is, wikipedia has an article about her.)

It reminded me of an amazing post I read a few days ago about the politics of body hair by Anji in which she says:

"The hair on our heads must be our ‘crowning glory’; the rest of our bodies must be as bald as a newborn. Much of this can be attributed to the fetishisation of youth. Like glossy hair, bright eyes and unlined skin, hairlessness gives the body the appearance and feel of a young girl’s, or what I once saw described on the website of a hair removal product as a ‘prepubescent appeal’. It is curious that in a society where paedophilia is so reviled and such a huge problem, it is thought of as harmless and ordinary that men live out their paraphilic fantasies by requiring that the women they are exposed to look as young as possible.

... A woman, taught throughout her life that beauty through youth is her ultimate goal and that upon ageing her beauty dies, may feel compelled to remove every trace of adulthood within her control - and hair removal is so easy, so readily available, and she is so socialised to believe it is normal, that she reaches for the razor."

Anji's post doesn't really talk about being perceived as homosexual because of not removing body hair but I think it is interesting that to be considered a heterosexual woman one has to look a certain way. In fact to be considered a woman at all, one has to conform to various norms.

One woman discovered that the hard way: Khadijah Farmer was thrown out of a ladies' restroom Caliente Cab Company after New York's gay pride parade last June because the bouncer thought that she was a man and refused to look at her identification.

Anji's post: shutupsitdown.wordpress.com/2008/04/07/the-politics-of-body-hair/

First Case Registered in NRI Police Stations

Earlier this year, six police stations were set up in Punjab to deal with NRI crimes since NRIs have increasingly apparently begun to arrange for contract killings in India because laws are far less systematically applied in India than in the countries where they live.

The Hindustan Times, for example, says, "Kuldeep Singh of Mukerian was killed in October 2005 following a land dispute with Gurdev Singh, an Indian living in the US. The NRI is said to have paid Rs 1.2 million for the contract killing." [1]

In addition to this, NRIs often face situations where their property in india is grabbed by relatives or by tenants who refuse to leave. According to the Times of India, '327 criminal cases were registered by police department last year on complaints filed by NRIs'. [2]

However, the first case to be filed in these police stations has been one which involves domestic violence, dowry issues and an NRI husband who appears to have deserted his wife. The case was filed by Deesho of Natha Nangal who married Kulwinder Lal of Rotanda in April 2003. Soon after her marriage, she began being harassed for dowry. her husband left her in his parents home when he went to Dubai but she shifted to her own parents' home because of their abuse. He apparently didn't visit her when he last came to India. [3]

Links:
[1] http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?id=fe31b492-8459-40c3-96ef-3cb4f83f6e89&&Headline=Contract+killings+on+the+rise+among+NRIs
[2] http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Rise_in_NRI_complaints_in_Punjab/articleshow/2832201.cms
[3] http://www.punjabnewsline.com/content/view/9914/38/

Fish Net Stockings Banned

Sometime ago the Wall Street Journal law blog discussed whether associates [at law firms] are too freewheeling with fashion [1] following the publication of this article. [2]

Now, it appears that a law firm in London has banned its staff from wearing fishnet stockings, because employees find them “distracting”. [3]

Responses to this [4] seem to vary from:

What a total load of tosh - it's all about their inadequacies, not yours! My male partners openly coo when I'm wearing Jimmy Choos, short skirts and nicely cut tops as it all reinforces the image they wish to project about themselves, the people they work with and the quality of bird they've attracted to the partnership. The fishnets though makes them feel uncomfortable - one step too close to their perceptions of tartiness!
Posted by: City Woman on 03 Apr 2008

to

Fishnet stockings? Are you out of your mind?? Which law firm do you work for? Soho Working Girls LLP? If you want to recognised for your legal skills rather than your ability to lie on your back, stop being so stubborn.
Posted by: Investment Banker on 03 Apr 2008

I'm not entirely certain I understand why fish net stockings have specifically been banned but although I'd love to wax eloquent about the importance of freedom and choice, I'm not sure whether everything is acceptable work wear or if a line should be drawn somewhere (though presumably not at fish net stockings -- yeah, I like them though I can't remember the last time I wore a pair; for some reason I usually get stuck in plain brown or beige ones.)

A while ago I heard of an Indian IT company banning gaudy Indian clothes from being worn at the office. Considering that a large fraction of Indian clothes are, well, loud, I'm not sure how that worked out.

Links:
[1] blogs.wsj.com/law/2008/01/31/are-associates-too-freewheeling-with-fashion/
[2] online.wsj.com/article/SB120175142140831193.html
[3] timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/rod_liddle/article3689757.ece
[4] legalweek.com/Navigation/28/Articles/1112050/Career+Clinic+Management+says+my+fishnets+are+a+distraction!.html

Non Violent Rape = Being Forcefed Chocolate Cake

Nick Erikson who was to stand for election to the London Assembly representing the British National Party wrote in his notorious rightwing blog:

"I’ve never understood why so many men have allowed themselves to be brainwashed by the feminazi myth machine into believing that rape is such a serious crime.

Rape is simply sex (I am talking about 'husband-rape' here, for those who deliberately seek to misunderstand me). Women enjoy sex, so this type of 'rape' cannot be such a terrible physical ordeal. To suggest that rape, when conducted without violence, is a serious crime is like suggesting that force feeding a woman chocolate cake is a heinous offence. A woman would be more inconvenienced by having her handbag snatched. ... Again, for those who are seeking to cause trouble by deliberately misunderstanding me: yes, violent rape by a stranger in the street is a terrible crime, but I am not talking about that -- I am talking about 'husband-rape'.

The demonisation of rape is all part of the feminazi desire to obtain power and mastery over men. Men who go along with the rape myth are either morons or traitors."

This is what the same politician had to say about domestic violence:

"Take domestic violence for instance. The truth is that Home Office figures have shown that there is an equal amount of violence perpetrated by men and by women, but the feminist media keep repeating the myth that virtually all domestic violence is men attacking women. The Sun has recently launched a campaign against domestic violence - just another excuse by its female editrix, Rebekah Kemp (nee Wade), to vilify men.

But now the full ugliness of Rebekah's misandry has - it seems - been revealed. She has been arrested on suspicion of assaulting her husband (the actor Ross Kemp)! Eventually released without charge - remember that the police are also committed to the feminist agenda - Rebekah has been keeping very quiet about this incident. It was Noel Coward who said that "some women are like gongs - they need to be struck regularly". It would seem that the editor of the Sun fits this description perfectly! Come on Ross, let's see if you're as tough as your on-screen persona - give your wife a good slap!

As an aside, unprovoked male violence against females is, in fact, extremely rare. The vast majority of domestic disputes are initiated by the woman. What often then happens is that the man defends himself and the woman, being generally smaller and weaker, comes off worst. She then calls the police and the man is arrested and convicted, even though he is the innocent party who was merely acting in self-defence!"

I don't even know how to respond to this.

Sources:
[1] thisislondon.co.uk/standard-mayor/article-23470426-details/Women+more+troubled+by+bag+theft+than+rape,+BNP+candidate+claims/article.do
[2] salon.com/mwt/broadsheet/2008/04/02/brits/
[3] reddit.com/info/6ef6d/comments/

Woman Without Identification

There’s a woman I came across some time ago who’s about my age.

She’s been widowed twice. Has a son. Lives with her sister’s family. She’s alive. She has a life.

She has no identification: no birth certificate, no school certificate — she never went to school — and no marriage certificate — neither of her marriages were registered. She certainly doesn’t have a Voter’s ID, PAN card, Ration Card or Driver’s Licence.

I know she exists. As far as the government is concerned, she doesn’t.

She can’t open a bank account or do anything which requires some form of identification.

Her son’s a child. Her sister isn’t too happy about having her in her home, or so I hear. If she disappeared, I’m not sure who, if anyone, would notice.

(Image: babasteve)

Malaysian Woman Sues for Loss of Virginity

There have been several cases in India dealing with promises to marry. I’ve never come across one like this though:
A Malaysian woman is suing her husband for the loss of her virginity (before their marriage). He obtained her consent by promising her a happy marriage. However, her in-laws refused to recognise the marriage which, as a result, was anything but happy.
In addition to close to a million USD, she wants the marriage to be declared null and void.

Source: earthtimes.org/articles/show/196636,malaysian-woman-sues-husband-over-lost-virginity.html

What (Some) Judges Say About Rape

“A raped woman is framed socially and within the law as something broken. Neither Madonna nor whore but somewhere in between. The carrier of bad luck. There is a general but grudging acceptance that it isn’t really her fault, but if she had done something else, gone in another direction, not had that drink or worn that dress or smiled that way, it might never have happened…”From ‘The Story of Jane Doe: A Book about Rape’ (Random House, 2003 at 118)

1982: Judge Bertram Richards said that a teenager who had been raped was “guilty of a great deal of contributory negligence” by hitchhiking home late at night. www.newint.org/issue187/death.htm

1983: Judge Brian Gibbens, 76, said he had “considerable sympathy” for a 35-year-old builder who had sex with a seven-year-old girl, and added: “It strikes me as one of the kinds of accidents which could almost happen to anyone.” justice.org.nz/pubs/reports/1999/family_conference/author_24.html

1986: Mr Justice Leonard, the High Court Judge in the Ealing Vicarage rape trial, said, “the trauma suffered by the victim was not so very great.” He gave the burglar who organised the raid a much harsher sentence than the two rapists and was later hauled up for placing more value on property than on person. telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/03/08/nsaward08.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/03/08/ixhome.html

1988: Judge Sir Harold Cassel QC said that an ex-policeman was driven to indecently assaulting his twelve-year-old mentally-retarded stepdaughter because his wife’s diminished desire for sex during her pregnancy had caused “considerable problems for a healthy young husband”. He accused the woman of ‘encouraging’ the assaults although the she said, “As far as the sexual side, my husband did not go without the whole time through my pregnancy, so I do not know where the judge got his information from.” bunker8.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Sue/body.htm

1991: Sir Arthur Myerson reduced rapist Brian David Huntley’s sentence because he “showed concern and consideration by wearing a contraceptive.” news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1263875.stm; http://homes.cerias.purdue.edu/~spaf/Yucks/V1/msg00061.html

1993: Judge Ian Starforth Hill described an eight-year-old victim of a sexual attack as “not entirely an angel”. business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article2876160.ece

1993: Judge John Prosser let a 15-year-old rapist go free ordering him to pay his teenage victim £500 “for a good holiday”. business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article2876160.ece

1993: Judge Smedley in a case heard at the Old Bailey explained why evidence of the victim’s distress should be disregarded: “A word of warning. If the account the complainant is giving was completely fabricated you may think she is clever, then clever enough to act out distress”. bunker8.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Sue/body.htm

2003: Judge Richard Benson, a circuit judge, gave a 58-year-old father a three-year community rehabilitation order for repeatedly molesting his daughter while her mother was shopping when she was seven and eight since he thought the case was at “the more bland edge of the spectrum”. guardian.co.uk/world/2003/dec/16/law.ukcrime

2006: Judge Addison passed a suspended sentence of nine months on a swimming instructor, Ross Sweet, who sexually assaulted two eight-year-old girls on two occasions and praised him for being a good and caring teacher. thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article65397.ece; news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6288819.stm; telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/06/23/njudges123.xml

2007: Judge Julian Hall said to Eric Cole, 71, who had sexually assaulted a six-year-old: “In criminal terms, what you did was quite mild.” He ordered Cole to pay his victim compensation of £250, adding: “If it buys her a nice new bicycle, that’s the sort of thing that might cheer her up.” dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=433514&in_page_id=1766

2008: Judge Julian Hall of the Oxford Crown Court said a ten-year-old girl had dressed provocatively while letting her rapist, Keith Fenn, 24, and his accomplice Darren Wright, 34, off with astonishingly lenient sentences. news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,21969117-663,00.html

Incidentally, rape is apparently not illegal under Nigerian law. worldivided.com/2007/12/07/when-submission-becomes-a-routine/
In 1913, Rebecca West said: “I myself have never been able to find out what feminism is; I only know that people call me a feminist whenever I express sentiments that differentiate me from a doormat or a prostitute.”Edit this entry.

Damini

I’ve got a film called ‘Damini’ playing on the TV next to me. I read a review of the film and have absolutely no desire to watch it although I suspect I’m going to watch it anyway. The basic story seems to be:

• poor village girl named Damini marries rich urban man
• taunted by her mother-in-law, she makes friends with the maid
• the maid is raped by her brother-in-law and three others in her marital home
• Damini initially unwittingly helps to cover-up the incident
• she later fights for justice for the maid
• while doing this, her in-laws buy everyone in the system who can be bought, she herself is declared mentally unstable and the maid is killed
• she somehow escapes from a mental institution in which she has been dumped because of being supposedly mentally unstable and goes on to continue fighting for justice with the help of a lawyer who’s given up on justice
• she ultimately succeeds primarily because her husband has a change of heart and supports her

Apart from the fact that it’s a little too easy for the story to have been true for me to have any desire watch it, I can’t help but wonder if — as inappropriate as this is to say — it’d have been smarter not to fight for justice. Damini would not have had to go through all that she did go through and, even more importantly, I can’t help but suspect that if there was no such fight, the maid would not have been killed (since she seems to have been killed primarily to ensure that the rapist’s family’s ‘honour’ was not denigrated).
The film ends very neatly with the criminals getting their just deserts but that hasn’t stopped me from wondering if there are times (in real life) when it’s a good idea to cut one’s losses and leave vengeance to God?

Sisters in a Circus

I know that they said that circuses with animals violated animal rights but … am too tired to say anything coherent. Just came across a story about two Bulgarian sisters in a circus which left me stunned:
One was forced to swim in a tank with flesh eating pirhanas and the other was forced into a container where snakes were tossed at her.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080326/od_nm/circus_dc

Expected

NOT TO be anywhere around bling because it’s distasteful
NOT TO wear red, scarlet or maroon because it’s cheap
NOT TO focus on your own goals because selfishness is disgusting
NOT TO sit down without crossing your ankles because it’s tawdry
NOT TO be amoral yourself because it’s imperative that you conform to societal norms
NOT TO judge anyone else’s morals because it’s not your place to do so
NOT TO know about anything scandalous because it isn’t respectable
NOT TO complain because nothing yours is yours by right
NOT TO forget that there is much which should be questioned in society because complaisance is unthinkable
NOT TO ask questions in your own life because it’s annoying
NOT TO offer an opinion without being asked for one because it’s almost always inconsequential
NOT TO slouch because that’s excusable only if you’re a jellyfish
NOT TO fall ill because it’s inconvenient for everyone around you
NOT TO make plans because it makes you unavailable if your presence happens to be wanted
NOT TO swear because it’s unseemly
NOT TO drink because it’s undignified
NOT TO substitute good taste with a brand because that’s noveau riche
NOT TO avoid working hard because it’s unacceptable to be mediocre
NOT TO read anything which isn’t a serious academic work or at least literary fiction because frivolty is ludicrous

Anything for Clear Skin

Of all the times women have used (often lethal) products to try to ensure that they had clear skin and bright eyes:

• Aqua Toffana, a deadly poison which caused to its creator to be executed,
• arsenic,
• belladonna,
• chalk,
• lime water,
• mercury,
• sulphur,
• and, among others, white lead,

the 21st century is no better:

• Drosperidone, fourth generation progesterone, OTC?

A Walk

“Don’t hitchhike.

Don’t sit alone by the sea for more than ten minutes.

Stop thinking about watching the sun rise over a field, all by yourself.

Stop thinking about long, leafy walks that lead nowhere.

Stop wondering how the streets looks at midnight, after a drizzle.

Stop…”
I just came across these lines in an old post by Annie Zaidi [1] about street harassment euphemistically known as eve teasing for some reason I’ve never really understood.
There’s a path I love to go for walks along: it’s not out of the way but it is entirely secluded and can give you the feeling of being not in a city even if only for brief moments. Annie’s comment about not thinking of long, leafy walks that lead nowhere reminded me of it.
I love the path but I don’t feel safe walking along it by myself which means that if I am to walk along it, I need to coerce someone into coming along with me (which tends to destroy the feeling of being entirely alone).
The last time I went for a walk there, feeling the way I do, I asked to be accompanied. At the beginning of the path there were about half a dozen watchmen and all of them stared when we approached. The chap I was with seemed a bit unnerved and asked if the area was restricted.
It wasn’t.
It turns out that you can be physically safe by ensuring that you’re not alone. Or you can safeguard your reputation by not being seen heading towards secluded areas with a man. But you can’t do both (even though, in this particular case, even if one was so inclined, I don’t know what in God’s name one would do in an area such as that considering how messy, thorny, and, quite probably, snake-infested it is).
And, no, the solution isn’t to avoid secluded areas altogether because it isn’t just secluded areas which require one to be careful. How many times have you heard of women being ‘eve teased’ on a public road, on a train, in the market, on a bus…
Being safe is not solely about dressing conservatively or about avoiding the stereotypical dangerous places. In fact, as bizarre as this sounds, I’ve had more men stop on streets to ask if I want a lift, to inform me that they want to make ‘fraanship’, or to grope me when I’ve been dressed conservatively (in a sari or a salwaar kameez, my hair pulled back into a neat chignon, and a large bindi on my forehead) than when I’ve dressed in jeans and a shirt.
I’m quite certain that there is no such thing as a place which is inherently safe.

Link:
[1] http://www.anniezaidi.com/2006/03/streets-stories-strategies.html

Libel in Fiction

The most famous libel in fiction case is that of Princess Irina Youssoupoff v. MGM [1934] 50 TLR 581 (CA) in which the Princess successfully claimed that she had been defamed in the 1932 movie ‘Rasputin and the Empress’.
The film showed a Princess in it called Natasha having been seduced. The Princess in the film was, however, clearly ‘identifiable’ as Princess Irina Youssoupoff who had in fact been raped and not seduced. One of the defences MGM used was that the Princess had indeed been shown to have been raped and therefore could not be blamed which in turn meant that she had not been defamed. (While this does demonstrate the attitudes towards women which prevailed at the time, that’s something I’ll leave for another day.) Slesser LJ held that the test should not be whether the plaintiff had been exposed to ridicule, hatred and contempt but if — expanding the Parmiter v Coupland definition – the defamation had caused the plaintiff to be shunned and avoided. He thought that the film was defamatory whether it suggested rape or seduction and said:

“I, for myself, cannot see that from the plaintiff’s point of view it matters in the least whether this libel suggests that she has been seduced or ravished. The question whether she is or is not the more or the less moral seems to me immaterial in considering this question whether she has been defamed, and for this reason, that, as has been frequently pointed out in libel, not only is the matter defamatory if it brings the plaintiff into hatred, ridicule, or contempt by reason of some moral discredit on her part, but also if it tends to make the plaintiff be shunned and avoided and that without any moral discredit on her part. It is for that reason that persons who have been alleged to have been insane, or to be suffering from certain disease, and other cases where no direct moral responsibility could be placed upon them, have been held to be entitled to bring an action to protect their reputation and their honour. One may, I think, take judicial notice of the fact that a lady of whom it has been said that she has been ravished, albeit against her will, has suffered in social reputation and in opportunities of receiving respectable consideration from the world. …. When this woman is defamed in her sexual purity I do not think that the precise manner in which she has been despoiled of her innocence and virginity is a matter which a jury can properly be asked to consider.”

The WSJ Law Blog [1] speaking of another case on the issue which has just been filed says:“To make out a libel-in-fiction claim — a somewhat counterintuitive theory in which a plaintiff claims that something that is fictional is not factually accurate — Batra [the plaintiff] must demonstrate that the identities of the real and fictional characters are “so complete that the defamatory material” becomes a “plausible aspect” of the plaintiff’s real life.”
Links:
[1] http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2008/03/20/libel-in-fiction-claim-rarely-successful-survives-summary-judgment/?mod=WSJBlog
[2] http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F2/364/