Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Rape Rampant in US Military
Statistics and soldiers' testimonies reveal a harrowing epidemic of sexual assault in the US military.
Sexual assault within the ranks of the military is not a new problem. It is a systemic problem that has necessitated that the military conduct its own annual reporting on the crisis.
A 2003 Air Force Academy sexual assault scandal prompted the department of defense to include a provision in the 2004 National Defense Authorization Act that required investigations and reports of sexual harassment and assaults within US military academies to be filed. The personal toll is, nevertheless, devastating.
Military sexual trauma (MST) survivor Susan Avila-Smith is director of the veteran's advocacy group Women Organizing Women. She has been serving female and scores of male clients in various stages of recovery from MST for 15 years and knows of its devastating effects up close.
"People cannot conceive how badly wounded these people are," she told Al Jazeera, "Of the 3,000 I've worked with, only one is employed. Combat trauma is bad enough, but with MST it's not the enemy, it's our guys who are doing it. You're fighting your friends, your peers, people you've been told have your back. That betrayal, then the betrayal from the command is, they say, worse than the sexual assault itself."
On December 13, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and other groups filed a federal lawsuit seeking Pentagon records in order to get the real facts about the incidence of sexual assault in the ranks.
The Pentagon has consistently refused to release records that fully document the problem and how it is handled. Sexual assaults on women in the US military have claimed some degree of visibility, but about male victims there is absolute silence.
Pack Parachute, a non-profit in Seattle, assists veterans who are sexual assault survivors. Its founder Kira Mountjoy-Pepka, was raped as a cadet at the Air Force Academy. In July 2003 she was member of a team of female cadets handpicked by Donald Rumsfeld, at the time the secretary of defense, to tell their stories of having been sexually assaulted. The ensuing media coverage and a Pentagon investigation forced the academy to make the aforementioned major policy changes.
Report reveals alarming statistics
Mountjoy-Pepka often works with male survivors of MST. She stated in a telephone interview that four per cent of men in the military experience MST. "Most choose not to talk about it until after their discharge from the military, largely because the post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in over 60 percent of MST cases is too overwhelming," she informed Al Jazeera.
Last week the Pentagon released its "annual report on sexual harassment and violence at the military service academies". At its three academies, the number of reports of sexual assault and harassment has risen a staggering 64 percent from last year.
The report attributes the huge increase to better reporting of incidents due to increased training and education about sexual assault and harassment. Veteran's Administration (VA) statistics show that more than 50 percent of the veterans who screen positive for MST are men.
According to the US Census Bureau, there are roughly 22 million male veterans compared to less than two million female vets.
In Congressional testimony in the summer of 2008, Lt. Gen. Rochelle, the army chief of personnel, reported the little known statistic that 12 percent (approximately 260) of the 2,200 reported rapes in the military in 2007 were reported by military male victims.
Due to their sheer numbers in the military, more men (at a rough estimate one in twenty), have experienced MST than women.
Shamed into silence
Billy Capshaw was 17 when he joined the Army in 1977. After being trained as a medic he was transferred to Baumholder, Germany. His roommate, Jeffrey Dahmer, by virtue of his seniority ensured that Capshaw had no formal assignment, no mail, and no pay. Having completely isolated the young medic, Dahmer regularly sexually assaulted, raped, and tortured him.
Dahmer went on to become the infamous serial killer and sex offender who murdered 17 boys and men before being beaten to death by an inmate at Columbia Correction Institution in 1994.
Capshaw reflects back, "At that young age I didn't know how to deal with it. My commander did not believe me. Nobody helped me, even though I begged and begged and begged."
The debilitating lifelong struggle Capshaw has had to face is common among survivors of military sexual assault.
Later during therapy he needed to go public. Since then he says, "I've talked to a lot of men, many of them soldiers, who are raped but who won't go public with their story. The shame alone is overwhelming."
In 1985 Michael Warren enlisted in the navy and for three years worked as a submarine machinist mate on a nuclear submarine. One day he awoke to find another soldier performing fellatio on him.
He recollects with horror, "I was paralyzed with fear. I was in disbelief... shame. When I reported it to the commander he said it was better for me to deal with it after being discharged. Nobody helped me, not even the chaplain. The commander at the processing centre wouldn't look me in the face. When I filled out my claim later they didn't believe me. It's so frustrating."
Armando Javier was an active duty Marine from 1990 to 1994. He was a Lance Corporal at Camp Lejeune in 1993 when he was raped.
Five Marines jumped Javier and beat him until he was nearly unconscious, before taking turns raping him. His sexual victimization narrative reads, "One of them, a corporal, pulled down my shorts and instructed the others to ‘Get the grease'. Another corporal instructed someone to bring the stick. They began to insert the stick inside my anus. The people present during this sadistic and ritual-like ceremony started to cajole, cheer, and laugh, saying "stick em' - stick-em'."
Extreme shame and trauma compelled him not to disclose the crime to anyone except a friend in his unit. He wrote in his account, "My experience left me torn apart physically, mentally, and spiritually. I was dehumanized and treated with ultimate cruelty, by my perpetrators... I was embarrassed and ashamed and didn't know what to do. I was young at that time. And being part of an elite organization that values brotherhood, integrity and faithfulness made it hard to come forward and reveal what happened."
The reality of being less equal
Women in America were first allowed into the military during the Revolutionary War in 1775 and their travails are as old. Drill instructors indoctrinate new recruits into it at the outset by routinely referring to them as "girl," "pussy," "bitch," and "dyke."
A Command Sergeant Major told Catherine Jayne West of the Mississippi National Guard, "There aren't but two places for women - in the kitchen or in the bedroom. Women have no place in the military."
She was raped by fellow soldier Private First Class Kevin Lemeiux, at the sprawling Camp Anaconda, north of Baghdad. The defense lawyer in court merely wanted to know why, as a member of the army, she had not fought back.
The morning after the rape, an army doctor gave her a thorough examination. The army's criminal investigation team concluded her story was true. Moreover, Lemeiux had bragged about the incident to his buddies and they had turned him in. It seemed like a closed case, but in court the defense claimed that the fact that West had not fought back during the rape was what incriminated her. In addition, her commanding officer and 1st Sergeant declared, in court, that she was a "promiscuous female."
In contrast, Lemeiux, after the third court hearing of the trial, was promoted to a Specialist. Meanwhile his lawyer entered a plea of insanity.
He was later found guilty of kidnapping but not rape, despite his own admission of the crime. He was given three years for kidnapping, half of which was knocked off.
The long term affects of MST
Jasmine Black, a human resources specialist in the Army National Guard from June 2006 to September 2008 was raped by another soldier in her battalion when she was stationed in Fort Jackson, South Carolina. She reported it to her Sexual Assault Response Coordinator (SARC) and the Military Police, but the culprit was not brought to book.
After an early discharge due to MST and treatment at a PTSD Residential Rehabilitation Treatment Program (PRRTP) facility, she was raped again by a higher-ranking member of the air force in February 2009.
Administrator for a combat engineering instruction unit in Knoxville, Tennessee, Tracey Harmon has no illusions. "For women in the military, you are either a bitch, a dyke, or a whore. If you sleep with one person in your unit you are a whore. If you are a lesbian you are a dyke, and if you don't sleep with other soldiers you are a bitch."
Maricela Guzman served in the navy from 1998 to 2002 as a computer technician on the island of Diego Garcia. She was raped while in boot camp, but fear of consequences kept her from talking about it for the rest of her time in the military. "I survived by becoming a workaholic and was much awarded as a soldier for my work ethic."
On witnessing the way it treated the native population in Diego Garcia, she chose to dissociate from the military. Post discharge, her life became unmanageable. She underwent a divorce, survived a failed suicide attempt and became homeless before deciding to move in with her parents. A chance encounter with a female veteran at a political event in Los Angeles prompted her to contact the VA for help. Her therapist there diagnosed her with PTSD from her rape.
The VA denied her claim nevertheless, "Because they said I couldn't prove it ... since I had not brought it up when it happened and also because I had not shown any deviant behavior while in the service. I was outraged and felt compelled to talk about what happened."
While it will go to any length to maintain public silence over the issue, the military machine has no such qualms within its own corridors. Guzman discloses, "Through the gossip mill we would hear of women who had reported being raped. No confidentiality was maintained nor any protection given to victims. The boys' club culture is strong and the competition exclusive. That forces many not to report rape, because it is a blemish and can ruin your career."
The department of defence reported that in fiscal year 2009, there were 3,230 reports of sexual assault, an increase of 11 percent over the prior year.
However, as high as the military's own figures are of rape and sexual assault, victims and advocates Al Jazeera spoke with believe the real figures are sure to be higher.
Veteran April Fitzsimmons, another victim of sexual assault, knows what an uphill battle it is for women to take on the military system. "When victims come forward, they are ostracized and isolated from their communities. Many of the perpetrators are officers who use their ranks to coerce women to sleep with them. It's a closely interwoven community, so they are safe and move fearlessly amongst their victims."
Her advice to women considering joining the US military?
"The crisis is so severe that I'm telling women to simply not join the military because it's completely unsafe and puts them at risk. Until something changes at the top, no woman should join the military."

263 Comments so far
Show AllThis demonstrates why heterosexual men should not be allowed to join the military.
you're right; they should all be of the other persausion.................
And you're right.....they are very artistic in constructive ways.......
peaceman, i've left a reply for you on that other thread..............
This demonstrates why, among other reasons, no one should join the military. Ever.
you're right too btb.............pacifists and beasts are the best.
Shouldn't the Swedish premier (or whatever his title is) issue a warrant for the arrest of the author of this article?
After all, the premier must owe Karl Rove a few more favors for helping him get elected.
It's all about power and domination, isn't it... ? It reminds me of what I have read about the Russian army, which usually is portrayed in the West as being medieval in its attitudes, pathological in its sociology, etc.
But one wonders how it could be otherwise, given the overall purpose of the organization.
The book 'Sorrows of the Empire', published 2004, and not that it was not happening before then, reported this and I assume that since it remained a problem either/or hardly anyone read the book or if they did, just didn't give it much thought past thinking 'maybe them g.i.s deserved to take what they wanted, which would sorta make it the woman's fault, chilling commentary of the vaunted great u.s.of a. It is a sad stupid inconsiderate world we live in and telling women not join is in my opinion the best advice.
And mustn't forget that the commanding office of a unit in the military will at most times stick up for the males.
I suppose this will be ignored while feminists obsess about strange Swedish definitions of rape.
ignored by whom?.............
BRIAR: As a feminist I am equally appalled by the male on male violence as I am with the male on female. Since in either case it's about "forced entry," the aggression which is associated with taking possession of another's body is disgusting, barbaric, and amoral in either (gender) case.
It is not feminists who are concerned with the Julian case. That's a right wing meme right up there with Obama being a socialist, or Muslims seeking to conquer the Western world.
With media in the hands of corporate-owned fanatics, lies told often enough are perceived as true by the naive, and/or idiots. Perhaps you're not in either category.
"IF the "usual suspects" show up on this tread [SIC] to tell us about "all the violence" done to men, I hope each of them one day finds himself in bed with the next Loreena Bobitt."
These are your own words from the comments section of the 12/16 Naomi Wolfe article on CD.
This statement merits a complete retraction and apology to the readers of this website.
You have never even bothered to acknowledge or clarify this disgusting and grotesque statement.
You have never claified who you meant by "the usual suspects."
Care to comment?
Or would you prefer to throw homophobic taunts my way. You owe an apology for that also. Do you need the quote to tickle your memory on that one, or would you just like to say you're sorry?
I really think that you should retract the Babbitt comment or be banned from this website for violating its policy on violent language and hate speech. If you refuse to retract and alogize I will continue to campaign for your removal from this website until its coordinators take up the issue of your Babbit male mutilation comment.
No, JOE, you owe ME an apology for ALWAYS bringing the alleged violence against men into ANY and EVERY discussion that involves rape. I did not realize that men were being raped, not by women, jerk-off, but by MEN. So the issue is still one of MALE violence, and pointing that out in no way describes me as a man-hater. For years I have spent time in this forum explaining what the Mars-rules (which means militarism trumped above all other "values") does to a society. That men attack other men is an aberration on the basic wish to attack, a wish that is cultivated in, by and through the military.
The Loreena Bobitt comment was made off the cuff, and yes, insensitive; however, that was ONE event in comparison with the THOUSANDS of women who know genital mutilation and/or gang rape and its physiological repercussions. You are NUMB to that horror. NUMB. As in numb-skull?
As for males being circumsized, I never had a son, so I never was put in a position to make that decision. I haven't had my male dog fixed, and I see how the sexual urge makes him quite aggressive at times. Still, I feel it's wrong to take that away from him.
I am tired of your vendetta against me. If anyone is paying attention, they would see that I try to avoid you like the plague; but you CYBER STALK me, and then seem to collect a little jury of your own peers to join in. You have misconstrued my words on MANY occasions. While it's possible that you really don't get what I'm saying, I think your attacks are premeditated.
That you fail to show the slightest sensitivity to the epidemic levels of violence directed at women, does not warrant my demonstrating the slightest respect for you, or your cause.
When you can show an inkling of empathy for women's rights, and the violence done to so many, then you can talk to me about what you take for my lack of compassion for violence done unto men.
It's the sickness of patriarchy... that men will fuck other men, as they do women. Women who do NOT want them. OR men who are overtaken.
I was quite sickened by the story of the man raped in a Texas prison, convicted for a crime he never committed. The story was told in gross detail in the film, "The Exonerated." The story moved me to tears.
Unlike you, I respond to violence in general. The truth is that it is largely MALE warriors who devise the wars, fill the military, teach aggression, and then act on it. Many in inappropriate ways. I feel just as badly for men who are raped as women who are raped. But the numbers are NOT equivalent. (This article explains that there are many more males in the military, therefore numbers are higher in this particular "culture.")
I really wish you'd leave me alone. One more time and I will flag you. Your hostility has gone on for MONTHS. And while you can dig something out of a previous thread to make me look bad, I have not figured out how to work the archives. There are countless examples of your naked misogyny on view for any who care to look into the heart of the beast.
Actually I observed that you have consistently used abusive, demeaning and sometimes violent language towards numerous commentators who dared to oppose your vision of things. Also you are quite willing to stoop to bigoted homophobic taunts, for which you take no responsibility and show no remorse.
You can rant all you want, but it won't change that.
"The Loreena Bobitt comment was made off the cuff, and yes, insensitive; however, that was ONE event in comparison with the THOUSANDS of women who know genital mutilation and/or gang rape and its physiological repercussions. You are NUMB to that horror. NUMB. As in numb-skull?"
Thats not an apology. That's just heaping further insult.
I didn't gang rape or genitally mutilate anyone, nor have I ever advocated it. I have been an active anti-torture advocate most of my life.
You. on the other hand did write the a comment that advocated mutilation, and then tried to deny it not once but twice.
aAlso I have worked with children and young teens some who have been violently abused and some who have been sexually abused by women. So I'm sorry if that upsets your categorical view of the world, but you need to update your views on the matter because that reality shows no sign of changing and violence by women is increasing dramatically. It doesn't require a specific gender, it only requires a brutal and violent attitude and manner. The fact that many more men than women are violent does not negate the pain and humiliation sufferred by the victims of all genders, regardless of the perpetrator's gender.
You constantly heap invective on me,but frankly, I would not flag or officially protest mere invecctive. If you haven't noticed your invective (ie asshole, liar etc) just roll off, sometimes I find it actually funny and I think it makes you look mentally unbalanced.
But I have always drawn the line at peole who seem to advocate violence, and will pursue this matter as far s I can with the website hosts.
I will also continue to counterpost your bobbitt quote until you retract it and apologize for it.
Yell and rant all you want. It won't change my response.
You also ought to apologize for the homophobic taunts.
And BTW, I have not cyber stalked you. You did cyber stalk me on the Chen Health Insurance thread. You stalked me and subjected me to your homophobic taunts, that amount to hate speech.
"I will also continue to counterpost your bobbitt quote until you retract it and apologize for it."
"And BTW, I have not cyber stalked you."
you can't have it both ways, which is it?
Siouxrose is a very prolific poster here. To judge by the sheer volume of her her posts, combined with the obvious amount of thought put into a great deal of them, it is hardly surprising that one comment was made that you could take offense at. As far as I can tell, the comment you pick up on is repeated by you without any real context, nor is there a link to the post so that context can be determined. You threaten to try to get Siouxrose banned from the site because of "violent speech" but do not provide the context allowing the reader to make up their mind that such speech was indeed inappropriate and violent.
As far as the "homophobic taunts" you would need to also provide some sort of evidence, as I have never seen any such thing from Siouxrose, and it seems out of character for her.. Perhaps our understanding of what constitutes a "homophobic taunt" differs though. I cannot come up with anything however that I have seen Siouxrose say that would come under any reasonable definition of a "homophobic taunt" however.
When Siouxrose goes into the topic of the "battle of the sexes", from what I have seen, she speaks in archetypes. In such a discussion, "male" does not mean having a penis and testicles, and "female" does not mean having a vagina and bleeding monthly. She often will try to clarify this by using "Mars" and "Venus" though these are also simplifications of the archetypes. If she had to explain this every time she talked, however, it would make her posts miles long, and very redundant. Most Humans embody the characteristics of both Male and Female. From what I have seen of her posts, Siouxrose is not a "man hater" - what she does hate is the imbalance of forces that throughout most of recorded history seems to be an attempt by the combined forces of the male archetype trying to subjugate or destroy the forces of the female archetype.
Of course, I can see your confusion, to really understand much of what Siouxrose says, it seems that one needs to have some sort of background in the "esoteric" traditions, as she uses a lot of symbology derived from these traditions. Unfortunately, these symbols do not readily translate to other traditions, and the meanings of these symbols is often a very complex thing (but simple enough to understand, once one sees them for what they are).
We all have our own paths to follow, as we all come from different backgrounds, and there are differences between us that inform our perspectives. None of us are perfect, we all have our bad moments, and some of us even have good moments sometimes. Even the bad moments can be learning experiences. Rather than say "You once made a comment that I don't like so I will harass you with it taken out of context - but don't call it stalking!", wouldn't it be more productive to actually argue ideas and maybe come up with solutions? From what you have stated of your own background, it seems to me that you would be better served by asking what was meant by these "homophobic taunts". I know openly gay men who would have no hesitation to call a straight man something along the lines of a "sissy" or "girlyman" to get under their skin. ("Are you going to let this queen here get more done than you?" can be a good way to motivate most straight men) As I have never seen any of these "homophobic taunts" you complain about here, I must wonder if they are of a similar intent. From what I understand of Siouxrose, from her writings here, it seems to me that she probably is quite the antithesis of homophobic.
Overall, though, it seems to me that the main problem you have with Siouxrose is not any of this, but a misunderstanding on your part (or perhaps a miscommunication on her part) that boils down to the simple fact that she tends to talk about archetypes and you seem to think she is discussing gender.
And I am sorry Siouxrose if I mischaracterized any of your intents, and If I did, please feel free to correct me. Obviously I can only extrapolate when it comes to such things, but I think in this case there were enough known points for me to somewhat accurately extrapolate the rest. I'm human, however, so fallible.
There is nothing stalker like in posting a quote that was made on a public comments board from a self proclaimed "published" author like siouxrose . In this case it's called bearing witness to violent and abusive hate speech. Why do you have a problem with that. All she has to do is retract the statement. If she owns it, why is it stalking to call atention to it?
Expansion of the definition of "stalking", "rape" (as in the case of Assange) and even violence is my main critique of the police state feminist menatlity. You are certainly abusing the use of the term stalking.
You need CONTEXT for that direct quote?!
Wow. So in what context are you imaganing that quote might be okay?
Go look for yourself at Siouxrose December 16th, 2010 10:53 in comments section of 12/16 Naomi Wolfe article.
Regarding the homophobic taunts, in the same thread siourose stated that she thought that I was probabaly a closeted homosexual, which to me was just an irrelevant homophobic insult. You'll have to search for it. I don't care if that taunt gets left up as it demonstrates what a vicious bigot siouxrose is.
Your inquisitorial tone is kinda cop like and leaves me thinking you'll be defending your hero siouxrose regardless of what I post.
Did you ever look at the comment, herdpoisoning?
It is not taken out of context and you exhibited prejudice by assuming that it was.
Still think it's okaY?
herdpoisoning: I second your eloquent post in defense of Siouxrose's positions.
You call yourself Peaceman and yet you come to the defense of sioxrose, who throws more violent and abusive langauge than any other poster here on CD.
Do you defend siouxrose's male mutilation comment also.
It seems that concepts like non-violent speech and being against hate speech get thrown right out the window by SR's little fan club.
The hypocrisy is really piling up around here.
dreamjoehill: I call myself Peaceman because I am a pacifist and abhor violence of every sort. I'd rather be called a wimp or sissy than a bully...okay? I'm not sure why you want to quarrel with Siouxrose, because she has contributed many "non-violent" and "peaceful" comments to the CD forum from day one.
She in no way would mutilate or encourage someone else to commit the act of male mutilation.
Is it possible you misconstrued her message?
You can say I'm in SR's little fan club, and proud of it.
Hypocrisy? Aren't we all working for peace and justice?
"she has contributed many "non-violent" and "peaceful" comments to the CD forum from day one."
That's true for most of her posts but you're only selectively choosing. Friends don't let friends make too many mistakes. Go back and read the archives. They don't lie.
"You can say I'm in SR's little fan club, and proud of it."
That doesn't speak well of your ability to independently judge someone. I don't oppose her but personal biases make poor arguments.
"You claim "That's true for most of her posts," which implies something more than 50% -- when the facts are clearly demonstrably revealing almost twice that rate ( perhaps 99 out of 100 as being totally benevolent )."
You have no authority to dictate how I think. I just gave a general fact and there you go trying to spin to your personal bias.
"Most would agree that your attempt at SO egregiously slanting the table, for creating a biased and twisted comparison, as deceptive -- proving my point."
Any sane person who's read my posts would not agree to your lying. I will let others, not yours or SR's personal biases, make their independent judgments.
"Of course, friends and even more so good friends -- are committed to us achieving our commitments, even when we fail to deliver. This is about having our friends ACT as coaches that point out our flaws, to improve our ability to see what is otherwise not clear."
I don't know "peaceman" but you're not helping SR by flaming thread after thread. I just pointed out his flaws peacefully. Let him talk it over with me. You stay out of it.
"Your exaggerating whipping of a dead horse issue is hardly supporting a better SIOUXROSE Once again, you feign concern and apparently benevolently interject " I don't oppose her but … … … but … … … MY ASS""
I wrote down the facts from everything I read in the archives. I'm not personally biased.
"Why do you so often need to remind us that you don't oppose her, while you BLOVIATE about what she says, opposing that ?"
You're asking a strawman question.
"Why do you so often need to remind us that you don't oppose her, while you BLOVIATE about what she says, opposing that ?" -Justice Arcs.
What a complete pile of nonsense!
Take a pill or a toke and calm the f--- down!
Marco has only opposed siouxrose's hate speech, and has been overly gentle about it.
In the comments section of the Naomi Wolfe article on 12/16 siouxrose wrote:
"If I had to visualize what you looked like, it would be an unkept fat slob... and then you wonder why no women want to take you on as a lover. Your very SCREEN presence disgusts me... however, there are a few men I'd make room for in the sack on 15 minutes notice. So take your "misandry" false allegation and shove it up your ass. Perhaps you're a closet homosexual?"
This is sick, twisted and homophobic hate speech. Siouxrose should be banned from this website for it.
There is a fudemental disconnect between SR and me. Seems like a strong tendency to see the worst in each other.
But I have complemented her on her surpringly concise and insightful views on international affairs and the Great Enabler in the White House.
We disagree strongly on a few key points related to family laws and policy and affirmative action in the Academy, te latter of which I think has achieved it's goals, and men are now at an educational disadvantage in the US.
Still the issue of hate speech must be resolved and I challenge the commondreams community to take a stand against casual acceptance of "off the cuff"hate speech and homophobic slurs.
I have a thought about personal biases and this article and I want to post it a little later this coming morning. I'm getting sleepy so I'll do it in the morning for you to read and post the reply on the top of the thread. JA and his "peaceman" can finish patting each other all night and that unknown poster can finish his spamming for the night before he runs out. Sorry for the delay but a restful mind as my fiancee is telling me is what I need. I'll read your comment again and think a little more. See you in the morning.
Update: See "Marco Nanto December 23rd, 2010 10:11 am".
It's a form of degeneracy to deny the evidence of bigotry and hate speech in order to support your "guru" you sick bastard.
Oh that makes me feel better, siouxrose's comments are only occasiona hateful and homophobic
In the comments section of the Naomi Wolfe article on 12/16 siouxrose wrote:
"If I had to visualize what you looked like, it would be an unkept fat slob... and then you wonder why no women want to take you on as a lover. Your very SCREEN presence disgusts me... however, there are a few men I'd make room for in the sack on 15 minutes notice. So take your "misandry" false allegation and shove it up your ass. Perhaps you're a closet homosexual?"
This is sick, twisted and homophobic hate speech. Siouxrose should be banned from this website for it.
.
"but … … …" MY ASS"
And why bring YOUR ASS into it you, sick pup.
Then again its clear what a complete ass you are.
You are quite consistent in your use of personal invective and unfounded accusations in order to divert the subject from siouxrose's chronic use of hate speech and censorial invective. and other uninvited sexual innuendo and abusive sexualized language.
Were you abused in your past SR? If so it still gives you no right to channel your abuser and use homophobic and sexually abusive language ("asshole". "jerkoff" & "closet homosexual etc) against me because you don't like my emphasis on male victims of sexual violence.
Please stop your use of sexualized,violent and abusive language against me. It is very abusive and actually causes me a great deal of anguish and flashbacks of abuse at the hands of physically abusive and sexually twisted nuns in Catholic school. The priests were okay but the nuns would beat children, sometimes brutally.
SR has explicitly advocated male mutilation
SR has insulted me dozens of times in the most vulgar, sexualized and homophobic terms.
She has employed homophobic taunts tinged with anal penetraion and shaming language about my being physically unattractive and sexually undseirable.
How long would such language against a woman be allowed on this forum? What is wrong with you people?
There is a pattern of extreme verbal abuse here plain and simple.
I have never seen the likes of it tolerated on this website before.
Sioux Rose Must Retract these hate statements or be banned from these pages!
Hate Speech cannot be allowed to flourish on these boards!
Yet you've never been able to quote a single example of my hate speech because it doesn't exist!
On the other hand I have provided several examples of Siouxrose's hate speech slurs, and vicious invective.
You can't argue with the hatefulness of these quotes so you babbkle along in intellectual nonsense land hurling paranoid accusations.
You are, in short, a proven fraud!
"It looks as though the hate speech is primarily coming from your dozens of similar postings, not her single one on another thread"
It's all her words JA
Sorry your guru turned outto be a hateful fraud.
"I'd rather be called a wimp or sissy than a bully...okay?"
I have never been a bully. or called a bully, except here by CD's resident raving feminist. I have been called just about every homophobic taunt that you can name and have had to defend myself in the street from angry male homophobes.
I have also experienced haomoseaxual taunts and such from women, but not for years from anyone until siouxrose wrote homophobic taunts with specific rference to anal penetration on 12/16 in the comments section of the Wolff article as follows:
In the comments section of the Naomi Wolfe article on 12/16 siouxrose wrote:
"If I had to visualize what you looked like, it would be an unkept fat slob... and then you wonder why no women want to take you on as a lover. Your very SCREEN presence disgusts me... however, there are a few men I'd make room for in the sack on 15 minutes notice. So take your "misandry" false allegation and shove it up your ass. Perhaps you're a closet homosexual?"
This is sick, twisted and homophobic hate speech. Siouxrose should be banned from this website for it.
Thanks for posting the link so that everyone can see all the posts. Just so everyone knows, I have nothing personal against either "Justice Arcs" or "Siouxrose". My only "crime" is arguing logically on merit instead of bias. I'm interested in finding a compromise between Sioux Rose's positions and DJH's positions on feminism. Peace?
What you are is a judgemental meglomaniac.
You see your views as truth and those who diasegree as deceitful. How sophmoric.
"It would be appreciated that ( at least for this screen name ) that you remember this issue, next time …"
I don't have any other screen names, this is another one of your paranoid and unfounded accusations.
It's all about you defending the leader of your little delusional new age clique. Evidence be damned.
Go back to high school. That's the level of argument you've stooped to.
DJH, I think it's better to leave JA in solitude by now. He's trying to repeat his personal points of view hoping that they'll get accepted as "facts". An infinite loop of his creation to be precise. Come on over to today's recent articles. I think you'll be interested and look forward to what you have to say. Don't let him or SR drag you too far lest JA succeed in getting you banned.
Thanks for the advice.
I think you're right. At this point it's a waste of breath to thry to communicate with the delusionsl JA.
Only a complete idiot would be as biased as you to lie like you even after reading that thread. Thanks for showing your dripping hatred. Try replying to my other post where I ask some questions about women and the military when you're done trolling and attacking.
Doesn't it get damp in your troll cave, JA?
It kind of smells too.
,,
You say you caught me in dozens of "lies." That's the biggest lie of them all.
You have distorted and lied all through that thread, and you exhibited a definite anti-male bias.
In the thread that you refer to you chose to viciously attack anyone who called siuoxrose out on her hate speech and now you're here to do it again.
Are you implying that I am against "Peace and Freedom?" What a load of shit that is. But that's what you are JA a nasty thrower of rhetorical shit.
I am a peace activist and labor organizer. I just don't have much tolerance for your bourgeoisie bigotry and your superior tone.
You are clearly an intellectual elitist, and a hypocrite when you claim a superior commitment to peace and justice while bashing my intentions without any basis.
You are a defender of bigots who pretend to be progressive but throw around hate speech. You have nothing to be so superior about here.
Justice Arcs,
Thanks for your kind words and "3rding" on on Herd's post.
Namaste
Never mind. Honor by association fallacy.
Is "peaceman" your sock puppet by any chance? You keep interfering for him and he's just giving you biased praises. Whereas I only have one account and never went by any other name, your presence is questionable. Go get some rest.
Your rambling makes no sense...
What you don't understand is that I sincerly believe that siouxrose is a hatespeech writer and you are her sycophantic, and sorely obnoxious minion. You are both essentially little bullying despotwannabees.
You JA, manage to keep your bullying rhetoric just this side of crazy and violent.
Siouxrose jumps clear over that fence.
djh,
Sharpen your verbal machette and jump back in. Don't let an Astrologer / Numerologist / Tarot reader beat you. That's like being outwitted by a Scientologist or a UFO Abductee!