"In 2006, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, which conducts Internet pornography investigations, produced a list of 5,200 Pentagon employees suspected of viewing child pornography and asked the Pentagon to review it. But the Pentagon checked only about two-thirds of the names, unearthing roughly 300 defense and intelligence employees who allegedly had viewed child pornography on their work or home computers.
The defense investigators failed to check an additional 1,700 names on the list, defense officials have revealed in correspondence with Senator Charles Grassley, Republican of Iowa.
Acknowledging the lapse, the Pentagon has told Grassley that child porn investigations were not a high priority at the time of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement investigation, and that it is now checking the additional names.”
This was revealed 3 years ago and no action has been taken since.
The government obviously doesn’t want to pursue this case because it will cause them too much embarrassment. DON’T allow them to bury this case.
Disney vs. 7 early fairytales
The 1812 version of Snow White is even worse when you consider that the girl was only seven years old in the tale (plus her unconscious body ended up being carted around by the prince until one of his servants accidentally woke her up). Also, in The Little Mermaid, the mermaid’s unable to speak because she had her tongue cut out >__<
But I’d love to see faithful adaptations of the original tales. Especially Bluebeard. We need a Bluebeard adaptation.
Actually, the original-original pre-Grimm Brothers’ stories that were passed around Europe via oral tradition are nowhere near as violent as the Grimm’s made them. Cinderella’s stepsisters were never ugly and kept their eyes, Snow White’s mother was not even a villain (instead a group of bandits were), and instead of spending the whole story napping Sleeping Beauty outwitted a dangerous bandit leader, wouldn’t let him sleep with her, and saved herself.
The original oral stories were radically changed by the Brothers Grimm to fit their personal and political beliefs. Most notably, they often added in female characters solely for the purpose of making them evil villains and took away most of the heroines’ agency and intelligence. Both brothers belonged to a small fanatical sect of Catholicism that vilified women because of the idea of Original Sin and Wilhelm in particular had a particularly deep hatred of women. The Grimms were actually pretty horrible people. Those cannibalistic queens and ugly stepsisters and the mass amount of violence against women didn’t exist until the Grimms wanted them to. Their ideas stuck so soundly though that we now assume they were in the original tales and that these terrible characters and ideas come out of some perceived barbaric Old World culture. But in truth they’re really the Grimms’ weird obsession with hating women showing through. The original oral folklore focused on the heroes’ and heroines’ good deeds and used them as ways to teach cultural norms and a society’s rules and encouraged girls to be quick-witted and street-savvy instead of passive princesses, and the Grimms promptly stripped that all away.
"Grimms Bad Girls and Bold Boys" by Ruth Bottingheimer is an excellent book on this
Now things are starting to make sense.
Bill Gates reclaims top spot of being the world’s richest man
Not surprising at all considering him and his wife delve into supporting the prison industrial complex. Any share holder in that department has to be well paid considering it’s one of the most successful businesses. And it doesn’t look like he’s letting down soon, he recently bought into massive security and prison management company. He also invested 2.2 million dollars in private prisons as shown by a tax return from the Bill and Melinda foundation [via a MotherJones investigation] in 2012 alone.
According to the Palm Beach Post, The GEO Group has a laundry list of incidents in its private prisons.
The State of Texas even canceled an $8 million contract with The GEO Group because of a juvenile jail where officials found feces on walls and floors, locked emergency exits and excessive use of pepper spray on minors.
“[The GEO Group] knowingly put workers at risk of injury or death by failing to implement well recognized measures that would protect employees from physical assaults by inmates,” stated Clyde Payne, OSHA’s director in Jackson, Miss.
Mother Jones also found that the Gates Foundation invested $2.4 million in G4S, a UK-based company that operates private prisons for juveniles. G4S has had its own scandals over the deaths and abuse of children, reported the BBC and The Guardian.
The defense contractor DynCorp received $2.5 million from the Gates Foundation, even though DynCorp has a long history of scandals.
In 2010, DynCorp employees hired Afghan boys to dress up like girls and dance, and possibly provide sexual services, noted The Guardian.
In 1999, DynCorp was involved in a sex slavery scandal in Bosnia where DynCorp employees were accused of raping and buying girls as young as 12, noted The Huffington Post. [**]
So good job Bill, you’re making all the moves to make that money huh? even at the expense of the disenfranchised, empowering such abusive, dehumanizing and toxic institutions by investing in them. A sure shot way of becoming successful in this country.
Cate Blanchett’s acceptance speech may have read feminist, and her wording was beautiful, except her thanking of Woody Allen (whose adopted daughter Dylan Farrow has come out publicly about her abuse at the hand of her proto-father) and intentional framing of him as a feminist film maker, that everyone seems so fast to ignore in congratulating her for ‘calling out the Academy.’
Blue Jasmine saw no other nominations or awards for a reason, and her acting deserved all it won, but Cate Blanchett chose to reinforce an industry that values male filmmakers and celebrities like Woody Allen over the children and young women they abuse and violate. That doesn’t sound very feminist to me.
This is exactly why I will never give American Apparel a single penny.
Not only does the founder have a history of raping female employees (some of them teens), masturbating in front of female reporters, harassing female employees, promoting sexism, and promoting pedophilia, but it seems they’ve now gone to straight-up advertising with pornography which appear to be creeper shots.
The above is an actual advertisement they posted on their tumblr page.
I had to blur it out because that is not even remotely SFW.
The original link is posted in the source. I don’t recommend you click it.
American Apparel needs to be held accountable for their crimes against women, and particularly the founder, needs to be put in prison for rape and pedophilia, among other things.
These bastards will never get any of my money.
Whenever we portray domestic violence as somehow less bad than random violence against a stranger, we’re furthering the idea that being in a relationship automatically gives a man the right to a woman’s body, and that being with him is tantamount to consenting to be hurt in that way. I feel this is really important, so I’ll say it again: Whenever we think that a woman who just doesn’t leave is responsible for what a man does to her, and that he is less culpable than if he had beaten a stranger, we’re implying that being in a relationship with him is akin to giving consent for whatever he might do to her. In other words, we’re equating a relationship with ownership, and decide that what goes on within it is nothing to do with us.
There is no great stigma attached to being a rapist. Of course, it’s not a word anyone wishes to see applied to themselves. We’d all hate to be called rapists, just as we’d hate anyone close to us to be accused of rape. But when it comes to committing rape - actually having sex with someone who is not consenting? It seems a lot of us are totally cool with that. Go ahead, rape away, just make sure no one calls it by that name.
A 2010 survey reported by Sky News revealed 46 per cent of men aged 18 to 25 do not consider it rape if a man continues to penetrate a woman after she has changed her mind. Last week a survey conducted by Rape Crisis and Reveal magazine showed a third of women do not believe a rape to have taken place if an alleged victim did not fight back. It’s only eight years since a poll by Amnesty International suggested 8 per cent people believe a woman to be totally - that’s totally - responsible for rape if she’s had many sexual partners. The truth is, an alarming number of people are very comfortable indeed with the idea of rape in certain circumstances. Like George Galloway, they merely see it as “bad sexual etiquette.” Rape doesn’t horrify them, not a bit; rape accusations do.
Army dismisses 588 soldiers from ‘positions of trust’ over misconduct
The Army removed 588 soldiers from so-called positions of trust, such as sexual assault counselors and recruiters, after finding they had committed infractions such as sexual assault, child abuse and drunken driving, officials said Wednesday.
The Army said it reviewed the qualifications and records of 20,000 soldiers and found nearly 600 unsuitable for their jobs as recruiters, drill sergeants, training school instructors and staff of sexual assault prevention and response programs. The news comes amid reports of military sex assaults rising to historic levels.
Nearly 80 percent of women serving in the military since Vietnam have experienced sexual assault, reports Service Women’s Action Network (SWAN), an advocacy group serving military sexual assault survivors. Yet, more than three quarters of the victims do not report the crime, according to the Department of Defense.
(Photo: AP Photo/Hasan Jamali)
When [an abusive man] tells me that he became abusive because he lost control of himself, I ask him why he didn’t do something even worse. For example, I might say, “You called her a fucking whore, you grabbed the phone out of her hand and whipped it across the room, and then you gave her a shove and she fell down. There she was at your feet where it would have been easy to kick her in the head. Now, you have just finished telling me that you were ‘totally out of control’ at that time, but you didn’t kick her. What stopped you?” And the client can always give me a reason. Here are some common explanations:
"I wouldn’t want to cause her a serious injury."
“I realized one of the children was watching.”
“I was afraid someone would call the police.”
“I could kill her if I did that.”
“The fight was getting loud, and I was afraid the neighbors would hear.”
And the most frequent response of all:
"Jesus, I wouldn’t do that. I would never do something like that to her.”
The response that I almost never heard — I remember hearing it twice in the fifteen years — was: “I don’t know.”
These ready answers strip the cover off of my clients’ loss of control excuse. While a man is on an abusive rampage, verbally or physically, his mind maintains awareness of a number of questions: “Am I doing something that other people could find out about, so it could make me look bad? Am I doing anything that could get me in legal trouble? Could I get hurt myself? Am I doing anything that I myself consider too cruel, gross, or violent?”
A critical insight seeped into me from working with my first few dozen clients: An abuser almost never does anything that he himself considers morally unacceptable. He may hide what he does because he thinks other people would disagree with it, but he feels justified inside. I can’t remember a client ever having said to me: “There’s no way I can defend what I did. It was just totally wrong.” He invariably has a reason that he considers good enough. In short, an abuser’s core problem is that he has a distorted sense of right and wrong.
I sometimes ask my clients the following question: “How many of you have ever felt angry enough at youer mother to get the urge to call her a bitch?” Typically half or more of the group members raise their hands. Then I ask, “How many of you have ever acted on that urge?” All the hands fly down, and the men cast appalled gazes on me, as if I had just asked whether they sell drugs outside elementary schools. So then I ask, “Well, why haven’t you?” The same answer shoots out from the men each time I do this exercise: “But you can’t treat your mother like that, no matter how angry you are! You just don’t do that!”
The unspoken remainder of this statement, which we can fill in for my clients, is: “But you can treat your wife or girlfriend like that, as long as you have a good enough reason. That’s different.” In other words, the abuser’s problem lies above all in his belief that controlling or abusing his female partner is justifiable….