Having read Naomi Wolf’s attack on the complainants in the Assange sexual assault case, my colleague Libby T learnt that:
“Women are irrational and spiteful. They lash out against men because of petty jealousy, particularly when they believe a man they desire is interested in other women.”
Fortunately, as a Daily Mail reader, I do not share that misogynist perspective on all women. I know that the problem is not ordinary decent women, who conduct themselves with sexual decorum. No – the real problem is left wing feminists.
Thank heavens for the Daily Mail, whose fearless reporting casts “an extraordinary light on the values of the two women involved”. This is the Daily Mail’s perspective on the complainants:
His point of contact was a female party official, referred to as Sarah (her identity must be protected because of the ongoing legal proceedings but this is the woman in the top picture).
An attractive blonde, Sarah was already a well-known ‘radical feminist’. In her 30s, she had travelled the world following various fashionable causes.
While a research assistant at a local university she had not only been the protegee of a militant feminist academic, but held the post of ‘campus sexual equity officer’. Fighting male discrimination in all forms, including sexual harassment, was her forte.
You see, there’s no need to be down on all women. It is just left wing feminists with militant views. They present the greatest danger to men who, perfectly reasonably, prefer to ride bareback.
Although the Daily Mail has been forced to block out the faces of the complainants, they run blurred pictures of the women. Fortunately, in one picture, they’ve rather saucily left one complainant’s cleavage unblurred. And if you’re really keen on seeing a bit more of them, the Daily Mail directs you to Youtube where, apparently, you can see this:
In the front row of the audience, dressed in an eye-catching pink jumper — you can see her on a YouTube internet clip recorded at the time — was a pretty twentysomething here called Jessica.
Well, if you dress like that, what do you expect?
So, why have these two oversexed radical feminists with lax sexual morals brought this complaint. The Daily Mail reaches similar conclusions to Naomi Wolf:
How must Sarah have felt to discover that the man she’d taken to her bed three days before had already taken up with another woman? Furious? Jealous? Out for revenge? Perhaps she merely felt aggrieved for a fellow woman in distress.
Of course, not all feminists are of the Swedish sort. Only a few months ago, Naomi Wolf broke her 20 year silence over her own experience of sexual abuse:
Twenty years on, I am handing over a secret to its rightful owner. I can’t bear to carry it around anymore.
In the late fall of 1983, professor Harold Bloom did something banal, human, and destructive: He put his hand on a student’s inner thigh—a student whom he was tasked with teaching and grading. The student was me, a 20-year-old senior at Yale.
…
The saddest part? If a Yale undergraduate came to me today with a bad secret to tell, I still could not urge her to speak up confidently to those tasked with educating, supporting, and mentoring her. I would not direct her to her faculty adviser, the grievance committee, or her dean. Wishing that Bart Giamatti’s beautiful welcoming speech to my class about Yale’s meritocracy were really true, I would, with a heavy heart, advise that young woman, for her own protection, to get a good lawyer.
This, obviously, is a very different situation from that experienced by the two Swedish women who are unreasonably insisting that their wishes not to have sex without a condom should be respected. That sort of so-called “assault” is more like this sort of complaint:
Mark Levinson in Corvallis, Oregon, did not notice that his girlfriend got a really cute new haircut — even though it was THREE INCHES SHORTER.
I wouldn’t want to conclude this discussion without directing you to the analysis of Assange’s lawyer, Mark Stephens, who has also enlisted the help of Index on Censorship – of which he is a trustee – in publicising his client’s version of events:
[P]eople are beginning to realise that the honeytrap has been sprung.
Let us leave the final word to Andy Newman of Socialist Unity. A commenter points out:
I don’t think that it is a coincidence that all the women but one who have commented on this issue here have expressed concern.
But Andy Newman slaps him down:
well at least two of the women who have commented here are radical feminists, who have highly negative views of all men; and one of them has a vendetta against tommy Sheridan.
Well, that’s radical feminists for you. Always using their honey to trap unsuspecting men.
UPDATE:
A “radical feminist” writes to the Guardian to argue that the attempt to question Assange over his refusal to respect a woman’s wishes that he wear a condom during sex is, essentially, akin to a ‘nigger lynching‘:
There is a long tradition of the use of rape and sexual assault for political agendas that have nothing to do with women’s safety. In the south of the US, the lynching of black men was often justified on grounds that they had raped or even looked at a white woman. Women don’t take kindly to our demand for safety being misused, while rape continues to be neglected at best or protected at worst.
Katrin Axelsson
Women Against Rape