Summary: This post is about the objectively stupid claim that feminism makes Sweden a really bad place to be an even modestly considerate sexually active heterosexual man. Sweden!
Question: Which of the following three items is not like the other ones?
Item #1: According to this Time Magazine archive article from 1964!:
Sweden, which generally plays it lightly, last week was in an uproar about sex. The cause was a petition of protest to King Gustav VI Adolf signed by 140 eminent Swedish physicians, including the King's own doctor. Their plea to the monarch and to the government: take swift steps to stop sexual laxity, which "is a menace to the vitality and health of the nation."
For years, in Sweden, premarital intercourse has been widely condoned, and the government provides legal abortions when deemed "in the mother's interest." The result, warned the doctors, has been a tide of extramarital pregnancies and mounting venereal disease—with most of the victims young people. Sweden's gonorrhea rate has jumped 75% in five years, and of last year's new cases, 52% were among teenagers.
Reform Talk. The physicians placed the blame squarely on Sweden's schools, where sex education starts in the first grade, pointing out that young minds —unless taught differently—can confuse instruction with encouragement. Arguing that "chastity in no way is harmful to health," the doctors declared that "monogamous marriage [with] common responsibility for the children, is the natural order of life." In sum, the doctors urged schools to teach "what is right and wrong."
Source: Time Magazine: March 06, 1964
And item #2: And in early 2009 Kommissarie F. Curiosa of Sweden's English-language The Local said
With one of the highest birth rates in Europe, the Swedes seem to be pretty prolific when it comes to making babies, but even after six plus years of living in Stockholm, I'm still not sure how Swedish relationships actually happen.
The only obvious explanation seems to be massive quantities of alcohol. In other words, Swedish babies wouldn't exist without Finnish booze cruises and Systembolaget.
In recent months, The Local has reported that Swedes are much less inclined than their European counterparts to spend vast sums of cash in their efforts to find a mate. This didn't surprise me at all. That's because they spend it all on alcohol trying to get themselves drunk enough to talk to a member of the opposite sex.
I know that it will seem ungrateful to be accusing my host country of being a nation of stingy alcoholics, and I'll be the first to admit that a few drinks can be a fantastic social lubricant. It's probably also a case of “it's not the Swedes, it's me,” but Swedish mating and dating rituals (and usually in that order) appear to be a very slow process that go nowhere (except the bedroom) fast.
In a nutshell, it goes something like this:
A) Meet at a mutual friend's party.
B) Get really, really drunk.
C) Make out. Sex is optional.
D) If you're lucky, you are sober enough to save the other person's telephone number in your mobile, AND to put it under the correct name.
E) Send a text message along the lines of "last night was nice. Shall we have a coffee sometime?"
F) Spend hours analyzing the various ways in which aforementioned text message could be misinterpreted. Get your friends involved.
Source: The Local
Item #3: Via of Echidne of the Snakes
Sweden is the Saudi Arabia of feminism. I fell into a hornets' nest of revolutionary feminism. -- Julian Assange
Source: Echidne of the Snakes
Yeah, Sweden's such a "feminist Saudi Arabia" that Assange was easily able to hook up for casual sex with two separate, consenting Swedish women in less than 24 hours.
My understanding, actually, is that it's approximately as easy to have heterosexual sex in Sweden as it is to have gay male sex in San Francisco. I.e. pretty bloody easy. And for approximately the same reasons: however many class or income barriers might exist in San Francisco, since everybody having gay male sex is... well... male. And so on a gender level they're pretty much going to treat each other as sexual equals.
The intent of all those ferocious Swedish feminists is to... create an environment where sexual equality between heterosexuals there is as routine as is equality between homosexuals here.
M'kay. Now. Let's posit a little scenario. One that takes the San Francisco analogy a little further. Let's say Julian Assange is gay instead of straight. And let's say Assange had dropped into San Francisco instead of Stockholm last year. And let's say Assange hooked up with an anally topped two men in 24 hours. And let's say that in one case he "accidentally" neglected to use a condom, and in the other case he didn't use a condom when, after properly condomed sex he penetrated his partner a second time without a condom while the partner was asleep.
In those circumstances would a hypothetically gay Assange's male partners have any cause for complaint? Fucking right they would! In fact I believe in quite a few states they could file criminal charges, and in a few others prosecutors might file charges even if the partners themselves said it was no big deal.
Here's the even bigger trick, though. If these hypothetical partners of a condom-tossing Assange kicked up a fuss would we say "oh boy, are those gay guys politically correct?" Would we call them militant homosexualist? Would we call California, or New York, or... Illinois, Missouri, or Oklahoma(!) militantly homosexualist for their "knowing transmission" laws? Why that would be no.
With that little thought experiment out of the way, what do Assange's antics look like now? A charismatic if somewhat narcissistic young man kites into Sweden, easily arranges consensual sex with two women (at least! remember only two women complained!) And due to their intensely egalitarian upbringing the young women felt as comfortable hooking up for sex with a man as a gay man in San Francisco would. But also like San Francisco men those women expected to be treated with equal consideration.
And when all he did was skip condoms when he, and they, knew he was sperm-positive and could knowingly transmit pregnancy they went all "feminist Saudi Arabia" on him?
Dudes! Do you have any idea what kind of heterosexual casual-sex paradise America, England, or, say, Germany would be with the kind of "feminist Saudi Arabia" values Assange was carping about?
Seriously?
Sweden?
Still not convinced? Let's put it another way then, hmm. Let's say you're a sex-loving heterosexual in a culture where casual heterosexual liaisons between social equals are as easy as arranging casual gay ones because by both custom and law all parties, women and men, have equivalent or equal degrees of faith and trust in the system. Then along comes some coarse Aussie dork who's used to the idea of sex as something that has to be purchased, extorted or otherwise "scored" off of women... and he thinks that's a good thing because any sheila who didn't have to be extorted into sex is either a slut or a whore. Oh yeah, and he thinks it's of zero consequence to him if he gives a sex partner a STI or an unwanted, unplanned pregnancy and when he gets to your town instead of picking up on the handful of social rules and basic hygiene that keep your very-mutually-beneficial sex lives humming smoothly he basically goes out of his way to avoid using condoms even when his partners expect him to use them.
Even if for some reason you didn't think this was unacceptable behavior on strictly egalitarian grounds would you be happy with this guy peeing in the community water supply like that? No. You'd want him called out on the carpet so fast his comb-over toupee would still be hanging in midair like Wylie Coyote.
Now. Does this have any bearing on whether the charges against Assange are trumped up? No, not really. If Sweden's applying it's laws unevenly that's a nuisance. But is there a problem with the laws themselves? I'd argue, forcefully, that for sex-loving heterosexuals, particularly for sex-loving male heterosexuals the answer has to be no. Because, seriously, Sweden? We're talking about a country where (according to the aforementioned post from The Local) it's far more common to fret about asking for a romantic date after the third time you've had sex than vice versa! And you know one of the biggest reasons it's so easy to have that kind of casual sex in Sweden? Because feminism won! Assange just didn't get the memo and thought he could treat Swedish women like the 2nd-class pieces of shit Australians grow up getting away with. And he got busted for it. (I'll ask the question once again: what possible incentive would even deeply anti-feminist Swedes have for letting foreigners screw up their sexual gravy trains? None? Right in one.)
Kasheesh! Like we should all have those problems Swedish men have!
Tags:
Since I'm not the devil
Submitted by Eurosabra (not verified) on Mon, 2010-12-27 20:44.Since I'm not the devil incarnate, I've never knowingly put anyone at risk of pregnancy or infection, but I do sympathize with the Anglosphere's male pathology of getting one over on the Sheilas as a sad little ideological artifact. Assange has been said to have replied "I'm wearing you" when asked by one woman if he was wearing anything, the counterpoint to that is informing one's partner that "Yes, it IS like showering with a raincoat." I suppose that men who are used to easy sex with lots of women in the Anglosphere are more likely to be boundary-pushers than egalitarian Swedes or men who regard sex as scarce in the Anglosphere. So Assange is a horrible person who has my entire sympathy regarding (his feelings about) the mandatory condom use and my total condemnation regarding the "surprise sex." You grumble inwardly and use the condom and don't rape anybody in order to be a decent human being. I of course am a shockingly indecent human being, but that is not news to anyone on this blog. Hugh Ristik tried to dig into the "collaborative performance model of sex" from the perspective of a scarcity-model believer in the comments section of the Yes Means Yes blog, which leads me to the conclusion that it's too much of a leap. Sweden does not exist. There is no spoon.
"I've never knowingly put
Submitted by vsaluki (not verified) on Sun, 2011-01-02 22:47."I've never knowingly put anyone at risk of pregnancy or infection, but I do sympathize with the Anglosphere's male pathology of getting one over on the Sheilas as a sad little ideological artifact. "
The sad pathology belongs to the Swedish women who feel that they have the right to use rape charges for after the fact revenge in cases where an affair did not turn out to their liking. These women who were stalking Assange belong in jail.
Figleaf - thank-you, spot on.
Submitted by schnee (not verified) on Tue, 2010-12-28 19:10.Figleaf - thank-you, spot on.
The scope of your thinking is
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 2010-12-29 14:26.The scope of your thinking is simply 'ease' of sexual encounter, which is irrelevant to the issues of Feminism and Saudi Arabia to which Assange was referring.
Interesting point of view,
Submitted by figleaf on Wed, 2010-12-29 15:01.Interesting point of view, Anonymous. I don't share it, though, in part because it doesn't seem as though Saudi conventions empower women to comfortably make their own sexual decisions... let alone empower them to expect that their decisions will be respected. Let alone that they'll be respected and backed up by society.
Those expectations seem kind of inextricably linked to the comfort Swedish women feel towards engaging in autonomous sexual activity in the first place... and thus the "ease" of sexual encounters outside of long-term relationships there.
fl
Assange's is drawing an
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 2010-12-29 15:32.Assange's is drawing an ironic parallel between forms of oppression extremism/fundamentalism. In terms of 'empowerment', the women accusing Assange are adults and were fully empowered to say 'no'. They did not. As it stands, it's a personal grievance using Interpol under the banner of Feminism, which damages a legitimate cause.
Um, you're probably a troll
Submitted by notlaika (not verified) on Mon, 2011-01-03 14:01.Um, you're probably a troll and I should probably ignore you, but they did say no. That's not really in question. There's suspicious things about the case, but if Assange did what he's accused of that's absolutely assault and illegal under our laws as well as Sweden's (as figleaf covered quite well in his post, thanks fl!)
"but they did say no. " No,
Submitted by vsaluki (not verified) on Tue, 2011-01-04 19:09."but they did say no. "
No, they didn't.
"That's not really in question. "
Yes, that's exactly the question.
"but if Assange did what he's accused of that's absolutely assault and illegal under our laws as well as Sweden's "
And what do you imagine he is accused of? I'm not talking about the bottom line charges, I'm talking about the reasons for those charges.
Feminism is not a form of
Submitted by schnee (not verified) on Wed, 2010-12-29 16:15.Feminism is not a form of either oppression or extremism. Nor is it in play here. The Swedish laws protect women, not feminists per se. I believe his (Assange's) intention here is to imply that the Swedish laws defining rape and sexual assualt are so wide in definition that it is hard for anyone to have sexual intercourse.
The police reports (statements by the two women, 'Miss A' and Miss 'W'), show that both women asked Assange to use a condom, which he was reluctant to do, and that in the case of the first woman, Miss A, he pinned her arms and legs to stop her from reaching for a condom. She had also made it clear that she didn't want to have sex with him earlier on. Miss W had awoken to find him having unprotected sex with her. In both cases, consent is at issue, not because Sweden is some kind of sexually oppressive state, but because their laws respect women and their rights to be protected during intercourse and to have their wishes respected with regard to the act itself.
"Feminism is not a form of
Submitted by vsaluki (not verified) on Sun, 2011-01-02 22:42."Feminism is not a form of either oppression or extremism. Nor is it in play here. The Swedish laws protect women, not feminists per se. "
Swedish laws were designed by feminists to give power to feminists. And it is a form of extremism.
"I believe his (Assange's) intention here is to imply that the Swedish laws defining rape and sexual assualt are so wide in definition that it is hard for anyone to have sexual intercourse. ""
It's easy to have sexual intercourse. It's also easy to get charged for rape when there was none. This means that most Swedish men are scared about having sex and Swedish women are big consumers of dildos and trips to Turkey.
Certainly consent is at
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 2010-12-29 17:03.Certainly consent is at issue. They are adults. If they did not consent they could have said 'No'.
If, at one point, I say I'd
Submitted by Woman (not verified) on Wed, 2010-12-29 18:35.If, at one point, I say I'd prefer we use a condom, then I have sex without a condom, that is my fault. To try to call that rape is quite ridiculous, and oppressively extremist.
I categorically agree that if
Submitted by figleaf on Wed, 2010-12-29 21:01.I categorically agree that if you say you'd like sex without a condom, and then you say what the heck and have sex without a condom then cool, more power to you.
I think the issue in question, though, is that if, at one point, you say you prefer to use a condom, you discover your partner is about to enter you without putting on a condom, and when you reach for a condom he tries to pin your arms and legs it's safe to say it's not your fault.
fl
And they did say no. They
Submitted by schnee (not verified) on Wed, 2010-12-29 18:43.And they did say no.
They both said 'no' to unportected sex and Miss W may well have said no again, had she had the opportunity, but unfortunately she was asleep.
Neither of the women said no
Submitted by vsaluki (not verified) on Sun, 2011-01-02 21:39.Neither of the women said no at any point. They may have expressed the wish that he wear a condom, but they did not refuse him for not wearing it. Their desire to bag a rock star and brag to their friends about it was too great to refuse him for not wearing a condom.
The idea that you can penetrate a sleeping woman before she wakes up is idiotic.
So why did they have
Submitted by Woman (not verified) on Wed, 2010-12-29 19:22.So why did they have unprotected sex if they didn't agree to it?
Miss W says she was 'half asleep' and continued.
Miss A had reached for a
Submitted by schnee (not verified) on Wed, 2010-12-29 19:53.Miss A had reached for a condom several times, but he pinned her legs and held her arms. Eventually he let her go, and agreed to use a condom, but she says he did something that resulted in the condom being ripped and he did not withdraw.
Miss W, who had repeatedly asked him to wear a condom, said she had awoken to find him having sex with her. When she asked whether he had used a condom, he had said no. Both women asked him to be tested for STDs and he refused. Miss W's ex-boyfriend said that in the two years of their relationship, they had never had unprotected sex.
And with apologies for pasting so much of the original post, this point that Figleaf makes, is, I feel, very pertinent.
"Let's say Julian Assange is gay instead of straight. And let's say Assange had dropped into San Francisco instead of Stockholm last year. And let's say Assange hooked up with an anally topped two men in 24 hours. And let's say that in one case he "accidentally" neglected to use a condom, and in the other case he didn't use a condom when, after properly condomed sex he penetrated his partner a second time without a condom while the partner was asleep.
In those circumstances would a hypothetically gay Assange's male partners have any cause for complaint? Fucking right they would! In fact I believe in quite a few states they could file criminal charges, and in a few others prosecutors might file charges even if the partners themselves said it was no big deal.
Here's the even bigger trick, though. If these hypothetical partners of a condom-tossing Assange kicked up a fuss would we say "oh boy, are those gay guys politically correct?" Would we call them militant homosexualist? Would we call California, or New York, or... Illinois, Missouri, or Oklahoma(!) militantly homosexualist for their "knowing transmission" laws? Why that would be no."
"In those circumstances would
Submitted by vsaluki (not verified) on Sun, 2011-01-02 22:12."In those circumstances would a hypothetically gay Assange's male partners have any cause for complaint? Fucking right they would! "
I've seen this idiotic example four times. If a gay man didn't want to have unprotected sex with another gay man he would have given an unambigous no to the sex and he would have pushed the other man away. Then there wouldn't have been any sex. In the case of the two Swedish women, they desperately wanted to have sex with Assange. They may have wanted him to wear a condom, but they were not going to refuse him if he didn't. The simple truth of this matter is that consent was never withdrawn after it was given. If consent had been withdrawn, then the condom issue would be mute and it would be a straight rape case - which it clearly is not.
Also, let's remember that Ms. W had already woken up that morning, gone out, come back and then returned to bed with Assange. The idea that he had penetrated an unlubricated and uncooperating, sleeping woman without waking he is absurd.
I don't know, Vsaluki. For
Submitted by figleaf on Mon, 2011-01-03 09:23.I don't know, Vsaluki. For both men and women receiving penetrative sex it's just not that easy to tell if their partner's wearing a condom. Otherwise, for instance, why would they have to ask? Or why wouldn't they notice the condom broke? (Leave aside for a moment just how unlikely it is that a man wouldn't instantly notice the difference if his condom broke or slipped off.)
And if, as was the case with this guy Rick, his partner was very intoxicated. In Assange's case his partner asked if he was wearing a condom *after* he was inside her.
Seriously! Haven't you ever had real-world sexual relationships with short-term partners where one partner was more forceful, emphatic, or charismatic than the other? *Imagining* what you'd do is usually very different from what one actually does. And when it comes to sex anyway, especially when combined with cross-cultural ideas about romance, privacy, obligation, discretion, or even hospitality, things can get even more messy. Which makes transgressions actually kind of amazingly easy to get away with... but with the result that everyone else becomes really low-trust. Which in turn sometimes leads to calls for otherwise-unneccessarily draconian rules, regulations, and conventions.
Since I'd like to increase trust, and since I think the benefits would be enormous, I think it's all the more important to get this condom-wearing business nailed down hard. You're not just "getting away with it" when you bully or lie your way out of using a condom, you're fucking it up for everyone else too. That's what it sounds like Rick and Assange have done, respectively, and that's why I think they deserve absolutely zero slack.
fl
Thank you for simply
Submitted by Woman (not verified) on Wed, 2010-12-29 20:24.Thank you for simply repeating the author's post. Reading it a second time has made me change my mind entirely!
It was absolutely no trouble
Submitted by schnee (not verified) on Wed, 2010-12-29 21:19.It was absolutely no trouble at all, I'm so glad it made a difference :)
Best possible approach to the
Submitted by figleaf on Wed, 2010-12-29 21:37.Best possible approach to the situation, Schnee. :-) Thanks!
fl
I mean, most of the MRA
Submitted by Eurosabra (not verified) on Wed, 2010-12-29 22:01.I mean, most of the MRA chatter has focused on the fact that Assange could only hook up with two women in 24 hours because he is an international celebrity who can collect groupies, and one other story indicated that he enjoyed the dominance game of "taking away" an American journalist's girlfriend at a gathering, and made threatening gestures to make the man back down when confronted. The rest of the chatter is about how the essential limitation of men's sexuality under feminist ideas of consent means that even a godlike rock star-level international celebrity cannot negotiate real, pleasurable condom-free sex, and his groupies are just still average-looking Swedish female academics anyway. And, y'know, condoms DO suck compared to condom-free sex for many, many heterosexual men. And to a certain extent, given that Eivind Berge, Aaltopahvia and other Scandinavian MRA-inflected (Aaltopahvia is pro-feminist, I believe, but my Finnish is weak and rusty) bloggers talk about how hard it is for Scandinavian men to build relationships in that context of empowered women (and thelocal.se blogging about how Swedes bumble into drunken sex and undefined relationships), I am willing to believe that a large number of straight Scandinavian men have the same frustrations as the American MRAs who blogged on Assange.
Why is a woman's preference
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 2010-12-29 22:34.Why is a woman's preference to use a condom privileged over a man's preference not to use a condom? If there is no harm, no one is pregnant, no one has HIV.... do we really want a Judiciary to settle what is really a domestic dispute between adults?
Because when she makes condom
Submitted by Eurosabra (not verified) on Wed, 2010-12-29 23:11.Because when she makes condom use a condition of consent to sex, and he penetrates her without one anyway, that is rape, whereas when he makes it a condition of sex and she would still prefer sex without it, she simply forgoes the sex, having a female sex drive, and feels no biological frustration as a result.
"Because when she makes
Submitted by vsaluki (not verified) on Sun, 2011-01-02 22:34."Because when she makes condom use a condition of consent to sex, and he penetrates her without one anyway, that is rape,"
They never said "No". There was no rape.
"she simply forgoes the sex, having a female sex drive, and feels no biological frustration as a result. "
Maybe you are talking about your own sex drive. I have had female partners that were very frustrated at times when I had no interest.
But clearly she did not make
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 2011-01-04 01:42.But clearly she did not make it a condition of consent for sex or she would not have had sex.
She did not say 'no', and there is no suggestion of force or threat. The sex was consensual.
So then, why should somone's (a woman's?) preference to use a condom be privileged over another person's (a man's?) preference not to?
Hi Anonymous. The first half
Submitted by figleaf on Thu, 2010-12-30 00:03.Hi Anonymous. The first half of Eurosabra's response is completely correct. If one party insists on any aspect of sexual behavior that is unacceptable for the other party then they should each seek a partner who better suits their preferences. That's as true for condom use (or non use) as it is for anything from needle play to for-reproductive-purposes-only marriage.
Also, not to seem thick or anything but if there was really no reason to be concerned about STIs or pregnancy why would anyone wear a condom? In Assange's case there was no way to know, and in the Daniel Ricks case there was no question whatsoever as he knew he was HIV positive and had recently infected a previous partner. In both cases your hypothetical would be moot.
fl
Yes, I was trying to find
Submitted by Eurosabra (not verified) on Thu, 2010-12-30 00:27.Yes, I was trying to find some way around the biological lopsidedness of the act by trying to do the equivalent of multiplying a positive number by a negative number, such that one could see it as having one's partner's explicit permission to NOT have sex while NOT using a condom rather than not having permission for condom-free sex, but that's spin. And I do site the difference in real biological difference rather than socialization, unlike fl, because I have experience only of communities in which the vast majority of men are indiscriminate in partner choice and the vast majority of women are highly discriminating, and I am unwilling to consider that an artifact of the socialization of those communities. Life's just like that.
"I have experience only of
Submitted by vsaluki (not verified) on Sun, 2011-01-02 22:27."I have experience only of communities in which the vast majority of men are indiscriminate in partner choice and the vast majority of women are highly discriminating, "
Where? On another planet? What if have seen is just the opposite.
"And he got busted for it.
Submitted by vsaluki (not verified) on Sun, 2011-01-02 22:23."And he got busted for it. (I'll ask the question once again: what possible incentive would even deeply anti-feminist Swedes have for letting foreigners screw up their sexual gravy trains? None? Right in one.)
Another dumb comment by Echidne. There is no sexual gravy train in Sweden. First of all, the "two women in twenty four hours" has everything to do with many women being star fuckers and nothing to do with the ease of getting sex in Sweden. And while many women in Sweden may be willing, the men are scared shitless of being tagged by the absurdly broad rape laws. Sex is anything but free in Sweden. Every Swedish male knows that any sexual encounter with a woman there is always a threesome, himself, the woman, and the public prosecutor. False accusations of rape are numerous in Sweden and they are never prosecuted. If a woman manages to make one of these false accusations stick, she is given two thirds of a year's salary from the state. The man is then forced to pay the state back.
The phenomena of social
Submitted by vsaluki (not verified) on Sun, 2011-01-02 23:02.The phenomena of social networking through the internet and mobile phones constrains Swedish authorities from augmenting the evidence against Assange because it would look even less credible in the face of tweets by Anna Ardin and SMS texts by Sofia Wilén boasting of their respective conquests after the “crimes”.
In the case of Ardin it is clear that she has thrown a party in Assange’s honour at her flat after the “crime” and tweeted to her followers that she is with the “the world’s coolest smartest people, it’s amazing!”. Go on the internet and see for yourself. That Ardin has sought unsuccessfully to delete these exculpatory tweets from the public record should be a matter of grave concern. That she has published on the internet a guide on how to get revenge on cheating boyfriends ever graver. The exact content of Wilén’s mobile phone texts is not yet known but their bragging and exculpatory character has been confirmed by Swedish prosecutors. Niether Wilén’s nor Ardin’s texts complain of rape.
But then neither Arden nor Wilén complained to the police but rather “sought advice”, a technique in Sweden enabling citizens to avoid just punishment for making false complaints. They sought advice together, having collaborated and irrevocably tainted each other’s evidence beforehand. Their SMS texts to each other show a plan to contact the Swedish newspaper Expressen beforehand in order to maximise the damage to Assange. They belong to the same political group and attended a public lecture given by Assange and organised by them. You can see Wilén on the YouTube video of the event even now.
Of course, their celebrity lawyer Claes Borgström was questioned as to how the women themselves could be essentially contradicting the legal characterisation of Swedish prosecutors; a crime of non-consent by consent. Borgström’s answer is emblematic of how divorced from reality this matter is. “They (the women) are not jurists”. You need a law degree to know whether you have been r-ped or not in Sweden. In the context of such double think, the question of how the Swedish authorities propose to deal with victims who neither saw themselves as such nor acted as such is easily answered: You’re not a Swedish lawyer so you wouldn’t understand anyway.
"Proposed reforms of Swedish
Submitted by vsaluki (not verified) on Sun, 2011-01-02 23:06."Proposed reforms of Swedish rape laws would introduce a test of whether the unequal power relations between the parties might void the sincerely expressed consent of one party. In this case, presumably, the politically active Ardin, with experience fielding gender equity complaints as a gender equity officer at Uppsala University, had her will suborned by Assange’s celebrity. The prosecutor coming as she does from a prosecution “Development Unit” could achieve this broadening of the law during Assange’s trial so he can be convicted of a crime that didn’t exist at the time he allegedly committed it. She would need to. There is no precedent for it. The Swedes are making it up as they go along.
A great deal more damning evidence is yet to be revealed about what passes for legal process in Sweden, such as Assange’s lawyers having not received a single official document until November 18, 2010 (and then in Swedish language contrary to European Law) and having to learn about the status of investigations through prosecution media announcements but make no mistake: it is not Julian Assange that is on trial here but Sweden and its reputation as a modern and model country with rules of law. "
"At Wilen’s home, after
Submitted by vsaluki (not verified) on Sun, 2011-01-02 23:21."At Wilen’s home, after having, as previously agreed, consensual sex with a condom (which did not break) they fell asleep in the same bed. Assange woke up with an erection and pressed it into Wilen’s back. This is not unusual behavior the world over for a couple who have made love a few hours before, but it one of the charges Sweden wants him extradited for. It is described on the charge sheet as molesting her in a way “designed to violate her sexual integrity.” She still went out and bought breakfast, accompanied Assange to the railway station in Enkoping and bought him a ticket back to Stockholm. "
A few days later Wilen
Submitted by vsaluki (not verified) on Sun, 2011-01-02 23:27.A few days later Wilen contacted Ardin and told her that she had been sleeping with Assange. Ardin, who thought she had a special relationship with Assange was in shock. She contacted Julian Assange and told him to fetch his things and move out of her flat. Here things get murky. Earlier it appeared that Ardin was the one pushing Wilen to lay a rape charge, but if the story of the SMS communication between the women is true, then Wilen could have been leading the emotional Ardin on.
These SMSes are critical in the extradition hearings, but Sweden is not bringing them to court as the whole case will then be laughed out of court.
Soon after the women visited the police, the news was leaked to a Swedish newspaper, the Expressen, and an hour later, the prosecutor confirmed it. This does not happen in a normal case of this nature in Sweden.
Very quickly after this Wilen efficiently removed traces of herself from the Internet, or she had help in doing so. Ardin on the other hand tried the same, but in an amateurish way, not being aware of the viral nature of Facebook and Twitter, she left a trail behind her, which showed her in a bad light in the context of the rape accusations. Especially the blog post where she described how to exact revenge on a cheating lover by using the legal system.
"Sweden’s prosecutor Marianne
Submitted by vsaluki (not verified) on Sun, 2011-01-02 23:31."Sweden’s prosecutor Marianne Ny has turned a prosecution into a persecution. Marianne Ny knows the women made this story up. Ardin and Wilen “sought advice” from the police. This is a technique used in Sweden to avoid being accused of making false complaints. They sought advice together, having worked together and tainted each other's evidence beforehand. Their SMS texts to each other show a plan to contact the Swedish newspaper The Expressen beforehand in order to maximise the damage to Assange.
As Assange’s Australian lawyer, James Caitlin, puts it:
Thank you for a very good
Submitted by Ellie (not verified) on Mon, 2011-01-03 11:51.Thank you for a very good post =)
I'll just add that the quite dystopian picture that vsaluki tries to paint of Sweden is rather far from the truth, but I gueass you all got that already. I haven't seen any of my male friends shivering with fear for the evil feminists recently.
"I haven't seen any of my
Submitted by vsaluki (not verified) on Mon, 2011-01-03 12:41."I haven't seen any of my male friends shivering with fear for the evil feminists recently. "
Shivering in fear is not what they do. Avoiding women at the margins and being disgusted with them is what they do. I've already seen many posts from Swedish men about how Swedish sex laws are sexist and heavily stacked against them. There is a reason why Sweden has the worlds highest divorce rates. There is a reason why 40% of Swedish women never marry. There is a reason why Stockholm is a city of single people living in small apartments. There is a reason why the state has to bribe people to reproduce in Sweden.
Thanks,Ellie! I don't want
Submitted by figleaf on Mon, 2011-01-03 12:43.Thanks,Ellie!
I don't want to give the impression that Sweden is any kind of paradise either. A society where a local paper can quip that a romantic date is more difficult to arrange than a sexual hookup is no more ideal than the reverse. But yeah, neither is it the dystopian nightmare either reflex anti-feminists or equally-reflexive Assange supporters would have us believe.
Or, to put it another way, based on stories of my own deeply dour Swedish-immigrant great-grandparents, the relationship-related, and often-humorless problems that befall Swedish culture appear to predate anything resembling feminism. By generations! So single out feminism as if it were the primary source of all sex and romance-related problems there?
Thanks,
fl
"I haven't seen any of my
Submitted by vsaluki (not verified) on Mon, 2011-01-03 19:06."I haven't seen any of my male friends shivering with fear for the evil feminists recently. "
I told you about the testimony of some Swedish men that I had seen on the net recently, well, here are a couple:
Nils:
Excellent article! I am a Swede and unfortunately in this country, a male. Allow me to fill in some facts you non-Swedes probably aren't aware of. The women's lawyer mentioned in the article is well known in Sweden as a rabid feminist (although a male himself). A woman who accuses a man for rape in Sweden risks nothing. Even if it is proven beyond any doubt that no rape, or sex, occured, she is very unlikely to get punished for false accusations. But she can, if the accused man is found guilty, get an economic compensation. That compensation is in the vincinity of about 2/3 of a normal yearly salary. The State pays her and hits the man with repaying to the State. Som drug addicts have used this as a way to get some easy cash in the past. The method to ruin someone with rape accusations has been used earlier. Most Swedes old enough remember the case of Billy Butt. Mr Butt was of Pakistani extraction and got accused to have raped a bunch of aspiring starlets. He was a record company executive. The accusations came all at once, but severals years after the alleged rapes. Mr Butt was sentenced and the explanation to why the court believed the girls more than him went like this; "It is unlikely that young Swedish women would willingly have sex with a person with Mr Butt's appearance." If the court had just gone out on a city street and observed what creatures Swedish women willingly had sex with, they would have kept their mouths shut. I had the opportunity to hear one of the women's own description of the rape on the radio. It went like this; "He (Butt) was naked on his back. I mounted him. It was disgusting." Doesn't sound much like rape to me. Someone here mentioned that Sweden was like America with regards to feminism. That's correct, but there's more. Sweden is like America, but only in its most leftist, deranged feminist, Politically Correct, Commie ways.
Stay away from here. Not even the sex is any good.
Karl: "I must state this
Submitted by vsaluki (not verified) on Mon, 2011-01-03 19:11.Karl:
"I must state this regarding Julian Assange. Clearly very few Swedish people have a clue how much the two evil-doing girls and the insane Swedish In-justice system has damaged the Swedish National reputation in the eyes of the civilized world. Maybe a disaster waiting to happen? I'm ashamed of being of Swedish origin living in Australia near where Julian was born. This is because of what a corrupt Swedish injustice system is doing to the new International information hero of the century. All Australians and other people I have met understand that it is a set-up and not about a real crime. A man that created Wikileaks that has become the foremost source of relevant general political information on the planet. I am motivated because I once knew an Assange in Uppsala who was brutally assassinated in his sleep next to where I lived 1979. He was killed by a former girlfriend because he had met a younger companion. She faked acute hysteria during a party and he said bye-for-now to his girl and staid to lend X some help and protect her from doing something stupid. Later in his sleep she jumped on top of him and with donas trapping him went to work stabbing him to death. The murderess fled and was hiding with a friend for a week before handing herself in. Without any evidence (like little sperm amongst the blood-soaked bedding) the murderess CLAIMIED SHE HAD BEEN RAPED, and the Uppsala prosecutor said: Well, I suppose it is OK then. No charge was ever put to a court for testing of evidence etc. Because I knew a little of this story from the inside, as a healthy single heterosexually active young man I could no longer feel safe in my country of birth. I did not leave Sweden just for this outrageous example of a insane sexist Swedish legal system, but sure -it had some influence."
"My advice to Julian Assange is to stay far far away from the Swedish In-Justice system at any cost because it is populated by too many unhappy weird radicals with a sexist anti-male agenda. In other areas the Swedish law may be OK, but a male on sex-charges have as much hope as any of the 40,000 "witches" burnt alive annually during the worst period of the medieval Catholic church. Upon closer examination like reading ancient transcripts of court room proceedings you will probably be amazed how similar the process was at the medieval church-courts and in Sweden today - it is all about HEARSAY now and in past medieval times.(Maybe just opposite to traditional Muslin Sharia Law where a male statement outdo two female statements. Same same but different...) HERE FOLLOWS THE MOST TRUTHFUL and as anyone that has been ANYWHERE at any time will immediately recognize, as the most plausible account of the true events concerning Julian. I'm sure you too have met some girls like Anna Ardin and Sofia Wilén as well, maybe even many times? Please consider donating to WikiLeaks struggle against politically motivated witch-hunts by the increasingly exposed Political Cardinals in power today!"
One more thing that is really
Submitted by vsaluki (not verified) on Mon, 2011-01-03 12:49.One more thing that is really strange about the Assange rape case is the flouting of legal proceedure by the Swedish feminist prosecutors.
1. They have never given Assange's lawyers access to the evidence against him.
2. They have never filed formal charges against him, and yet they have ordered him to be arrested.
3. After Ms W and Ms A leeked the story to the Swedish media, the feminist prosecutors in the case confirmed the information for the press. This is illegal in Sweden.
4. By discussing their story between them before going to the police, the two women had cross contaminated each others testimony. But the prosecutors had no problem with this.
5. The feminist prosecutors were willing to take Ms A's testimony by telephone. But they are not willing to question Assange by telephone, or video conference, or to go to England and conference with him directly. Assange has already agreed to all of these things. It's clear that these Swedish feminist prosecutors are trying to bully Assange much more than they are trying to get to the bottom of the case.
6. There is evidence that the feminist prosecutor knows about text messages that were sent by Ms. W. to her freinds that would essentially clear Assange of the rape charges by Ms W., and yet the prosecutor refuses to turn these texts over to Assange's defense team.
7. There is no record of Interpol ever being used to hunt down a person accused of rape in Sweden. The Assange case is history making in that respect.
Again, all things point to Swedish feminism being a reverse sexist ideaology that has everything to do with grabbing power and nothing to do with achieving equality.
I should add this to the
Submitted by vsaluki (not verified) on Mon, 2011-01-03 13:01.I should add this to the previous list.
8. The Swedish feminist prosecutors had no problem with Ms A and Ms W erasing information from both the internet and from their text messaging that was relevant to this case.
Flinders University sex
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 2011-01-08 05:37.Flinders University sex crime law expert Dr Mary Heath has made the following comments:
“Practically speaking, I would not like the chances of the prosecutor on charge 3 — pressing his erect penis into the complainant’s back … legally speaking I would have to suggest the chances of conviction would be slim for any Australian offence where both accused were adults. Proving non consent might be difficult but proving awareness of non consent would be even harder.
“Charges 1 and 2 (holding partner down, and unsafe sex despite earlier expressed opposition to such) involve contexts where there would be room for defence argument about consent. On charge 1, when is one person ‘holding down’ another person lying beneath them, and when are they simply having consensual sex in a position involving one person being on top of the other person? Is this force or just rough but consensual (compared to cases I’ve read, the allegation would hardly count as rough).
“On charge 2, prior unwillingness is not enough, the complainant must not be consenting and the accused must be aware of this ‘at the time of intercourse’. Did complainant one change her mind? Did Assange believe she changed her mind, and perhaps on reasonable grounds the charge does not disclose?
“On charge 4 (sex while complainant was sleeping), recent experience in South Australia suggests this also could be difficult to prove if there was any kind of sexual interaction prior to the complainant falling asleep, which might give the defence a plausible argument that belief in consent was present. I was deeply unimpressed by the level of protection the courts (let alone public attitudes) offered to people who are asleep or unconscious due to drugs/alcohol.
“… The one thing that is clearer, perhaps, is that the charges may turn on withdrawal of consent once a sexual act had commenced. The law of almost every jurisdiction in Australia would recognise withdrawal of consent after a sexual act commenced as rendering that sexual act non consensual (and therefore rape). As for proving it … I reiterate what I said about proof previously.”
http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/12/09/rundle-r-pe-case-complainant-has-lef...
Oh there's almost universal
Submitted by figleaf on Sat, 2011-01-08 19:18.Oh there's almost universal agreement that Assange would go free on all or nearly all charges. As you say, even in Sweden the law strongly protects the rights of the accused against the rights of the accuser. (And, as you say, ever so much more so in Assange's native Australia.)
And of course if all you're doing is applauding society's entirely laudable deference to those who are accused then that's fine. If instead you were defending items #1-4, above, as anyone's right, or decrying anyone else's right to object strenuously should it be imposed on them, then... that's not fine at all.
Especially since, as I've mentioned, such behavior really, seriously screws up prospects for all heterosexuals, male and female by reducing trust, increasing wariness, reducing enthusiasm, and increasing frustration.
fl
figleaf: "Especially since,
Submitted by vsaluki (not verified) on Sun, 2011-01-09 19:35.figleaf: "Especially since, as I've mentioned, such behavior really, seriously screws up prospects for all heterosexuals, male and female by reducing trust, increasing wariness, reducing enthusiasm, and increasing frustration.
I don't see the real world evidence for this. The coarse males who respect women the least are the ones that women seem to choose over those that defer to their every wish.
And you might want to keep in mind that trust is also reduced when women decide to cry rape on after the fact events, like they have clearly done in this situation.
In any case, the very broad rape laws that Sweden has enacted seem to have done nothing to enhance sex in Sweden. If anything it has made the men feel like they need the presence of a lawyer and a formal consent agreement every time they want to take a chance on it.
If it is obvious that Assange
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 2011-01-10 15:45.If it is obvious that Assange has committed no crime then his persecutors should be charged as vexatious litigants.
You can't run to Interpol just because someone don't want a relationship with you.
"If it is obvious that
Submitted by vsaluki (not verified) on Tue, 2011-01-11 12:32."If it is obvious that Assange has committed no crime then his persecutors should be charged as vexatious litigants. "
I agree. But Ms. A., having a background in feminism and sex laws, was smart enough to avoid that trap by claiming to only go to the police "to ask questions". She then let the police suggest the rape charge.
"You can't run to Interpol just because someone don't want a relationship with you.
You can; but you can't say that is why you did it.
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 2011-01-11 06:06.DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTION MARIANNE NY, SWEDISH PROSECUTION AUTHORITY, SWEDEN (A SWEDISH JUDICIAL AUTHORITY)
-v-
JULIAN PAUL ASSANGE
PROVISIONAL SKELETON ARGUMENT ON BEHALF OF MR. ASSANGE
"if the Complainant’s own evidence that she was “half asleep” has been bolstered in the EAW into an allegation that she was fully asleep, in order to support the making of a rape allegation, then this would in itself constitute prosecutorial abuse."
"I’ve been thinking about
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 2011-01-11 06:14."I’ve been thinking about some revenge over the last few days..."
7 Steps to Legal Revenge by Anna Ardin
January 19, 2010