Presence of Rape II.

By Eva-Lotta Lisander

       As I explained in the first part, in a gender-based patriarchal society, rape of women is completely legitimate, that is, it is not a violent act, and not a crime - a woman only fulfills her duty to men as a means of sex. Let us continue to see 'rape as punishment'. Since the right to sex and sexual enjoyment is exclusively for men, female sexuality is a sin. Those who have sexual desires, have also needs and choices, are not satisfied with one partner throughout their life.  It is not by chance that men keep trying to  prevent women in every way to discover their own sexuality and to strengthen the theory of the toy of men's sexual pleasure. Men systematically do perish the idea of a woman with self-sexuality with the help of fire, iron, religion, banning, education. Any sexual expression by women is punishable by stoning, burning, sowing, excommunication, scarlat letter, swearing, imprisonment, and the most cumbersome, cruelest, most debilitating method: castration! FGM (Female Genital Mutilation), means mutilating the female genital organs, ie cutting the clitoris of women between 0 and 17 years, usually around 8 years of age. Six to eight adult women capture the unfortunate sacrifice with force, and without any anesthetic with a blade or knife, they cut the clitoris and even the large part of the labia of vulva, and then roughly  sew up with needle-thread. This is the becoming adult for a girl in Yemen, parts of North Africa and some Islamic countries. It concerns approximately 160 million women in the world and every day 6000! mutilations are still taking place today. Some of the victims / girls are dying of blood loss, some of them into infections or complications. Those who stayed alive will never know what they are robbed of forever, irreversibly by the cruel male society.  These women will never be able to enjoy sex, they will not even know what is at all, and when the husband wants to intercourse at a wedding night and later and breaks up the sewing healed with meat, they suffer cruel tormenets. We do not even talk about many childbirths and the accompanying pains. This brutal method was designed by men for women to "protect them" from immorality; so that they will never think about prostitution! And let them never leave their husbands for another man, for the sake of another love, but to serve the same man obediently to their death, no matter how bad their destiny is.

       If this can be further enhanced, it has already been done in India by legislating the raping of women / girls, as one of the only forms of justice in women, with the involvement of the village men, in the comission of any insignificant or significant error, crime. In this case, the old men of the village - all men - meet and make the "just" judgment for the woman in question, even if she is a child.  In this case, the old men of the village - both men - meet and make the "just" judgment for the woman in question, even if she is a child. A few months ago there was a great deal of trouble when a council of the old men in India, a small village, sentenced a 12-year-old and a 20-year-old sisters to a group rape, because their brother escaped with a girl they wanted to marry someone else! Fortunately, normal parents left the village with their daughters during the night and asked for help from the police - international legal organizations are now trying to act on their case, to make it clear that they will abolish the punishment. There is no word and it is totally incomprehensible from Europe that one can punish someone for the sins of others (if it is a sin that two lovers want to be together), in such a cruel way that has nothing to do with the truth, destroying the body and soul of a person, causing even eternal infertility, truncation. How does this constitute as crime when girls to be condemned to rape, when it is legally used as a legitimate justice, and it is used by the ones that to be needed to  punish it? It is more than likely that men wanted to combine "pleasure with the profitable" long time ago, so they were determined to punish women by rape. They might even want to alleviate the lack of women in this way, since all the males of the village / community were implicated in the "execution of punishment" - so women were also punished and the men did well. It is no wonder that, in New Delhi, men take "justice" in their own hands and, by shrinking women number, they raped every girl in the street on public transport vehicles who are arbitrarily "guilty" by them.

       It is also related to the fact that women themselves also name the rape as the only and most terrible punishment, torture. In any situation - kidnapping, hostage-taking, secret service interrogation, mafia torture - are convinced that the only "torture" mode for a woman is rape, what it can not be more terrible, at most when many men do it simultaneously, perhaps make their faces ugly by cutting with a blade. They do not even think of flashy times that men can tear women's nails in the same way, brush their teeth, tear off their tongues, and much more.

       It all started with the appearance of the property. The source of all the troubles, as Rousseau noted in his dissertation on proper: “The first man who framed a piece of land and said it was mine, found and so simple men who believed it, that man created the Civil society”. And as a result, natural equality was replaced by social inequality. I would add that the combination of property and gender discrimination has led to subordination over all areas of life (master-servant, strong-weak, rich and poor).

       With the appearance of property, which may coincide with the emergence of early gender discrimination, it resulted that men began to accumulate wealth and property, and thus their inheritance to their offspring became vital. Since there was no DNA scan or blood test at the time, the only way to ensure that offspring is securely own created is marriage to virgin women. Only in this way could it be ensured that the first child, the heir would be the man's own. It was not by accident that the firstborn was named heir... From this moment on, a woman's only and supreme value was the virginity and it was kept trying to achieve with the cruel rules that prevented the freedom of girls. Men have been able to pay a lot for a virgin girl child and they can do it today. Girls also became well-sold items, whose virginity was guarded by parents in seven locks, society. To this end, girls had to be married in childhood, preferably before puberty, because later on when the hormones were robbed (so they all knew it, but no one would admit it), it was very difficult to preserve virginity despite all sorts of threats and practices; they had to be educated in the house so that they could not contact the boys, to have no unclean thoughts; sexuality was declared a deadly sin for girls; with all sorts of threats and getting to hell to achieve that female sexuality should be accepted only and exclusively in marriage for the purpose of childbirth; It was necessary to achieve for women to be ashamed also in marriage when it comes to sex and to offer their sinful souls to God for the next five minutes!  Many women are still thinking about it today and even trying to keep their virginity in marriage. Who knows how many thoughts men had pronounced the Virgin Mary paradox, according to which Jesus was conceived without sexual intercourse - because God, who made the man out of nowhere, suddenly needed a woman's womb for creation - so he was not conceived in sin, unlike all other people who did. Why? Because it had to have even a woman and sex is sin for women! This is about as intelligent as God's ways are unfathomable. In addition, by ordering the purchase of virgin children, men created and legalized paedophilia!
        The birth of twins were a huge crime and shame for the women, and the birth of triplets or more especially, because it meant that a woman living in a decent marriage had not had enough of her husband that night once, but wanted sex more or more times! For this reason, the twins were trying to keep the most secret, they were often dispossessed or put out on the other side of the country, into the woods, or brought up and educated there, and never knew who their true family was. For centuries, it was forbidden for the girls to bathe until their wedding night so that they would not touch themselves and realize anything.
         Women have been cruelly punished for the possible cheating on because they have warned the world and other women that they are also people with healthy sexuality. See Lorca: The house of Bernarda Alba, where the woman who committed the crime was punished by her own loving mother by dropping hot iron on her daughter's genitalia - equal to mutilation - to never be able to enjoy sex again. Bernarda Alba and similair women who had been brainwashed had agreed and agreed with the men to this day that this source of joy is prohibited for them, but only for men. Awesome. It is astonishing when women turn against themselves, they are against their own interests and cruelly.

        The prohibition of female sexuality has been targeted the same by education, law, religion, as the mutilation in Islam. Prevent at all costs that a woman leaves her husband for another one sake and that her husband loses his servant, along with her the wealth he has issued for her and needs to buy a new one. According to men, prohibition - like mutilation - is in the interests of women, since the ban prevents women from becoming potential prostitutes – to wit "defending" them. But who asked for their protection? Especially because prostitution was called by men!

        To date, a lot of older and / or religious women still think in developed countries that a fair woman can only have a sexual relationship in marriage, and only when her husband wants it and approaches her, and the fact that the sexual act is only good for the man, the wife is obliged to lie obediently under her master commander three times a week. The Arabs also state that the wife can never refuse her husband's approach, even on a camel. Because this is about the contract, I want to say the marriage: I, the man,  keep you, and you obediently serve me in every field. To this day, a lot of women forced to marry in their teens have their lives so that their husband will never make her joy in bed. These women are robbed by men the same way, just as they are deprived of an important thing like mutilated women.
      It does not help in the struggle for the total destruction of rape, but it is even more worse off, spoiling that regrettable  fact the women - aware that they are weaker, fewer than men, and only men's objects of use - still play on this and use sex, their bodies as a tool against men, or to gain access to something. There are humiliating manifestations that women's "weapon" is nail polish or lipstick, and the like. It is remarkable that this is all the things women have to protect themselves or to achieve something, Although it is no wonder, what to expect from a sexual device unless it is to shake something out of the men with sex or withdrawal sex, or on the contrary: she rewards a man with sexual act if he does something for her. And unfortunately, men do everything they can to get sex in some way. It is sad that there are men who just wash dishes or buy grocery because they get sex after, and not because they are considered normal when a husband is active in the household, in child rearing. This is pure prostitution with blackmail! Not to mention in such cases how humiliating the men themselves, justifying that they are not more than animals, though they are the world's lords. It is unbelievable that women treated as objects agree with it and can still use themselves voluntary as a tool to sell their own bodies to reach something because they are not able other way and DO NOT HAVE ANYTHING! Here is the root of the problem that a woman can not otherwise be affected, which is purely a result of gender discrimination, which leads to women being subjected to males and their downgrading. To quote from a movie in which a talented woman had sex with grass-wood because "business is for men, but we are what they need in bed!" How humiliating! We are needed just there (and in the kitchen) and we can only make our ways through the bed, through a man's penis! Women have only one thing left to use, their bodies. And whoever sells her body voluntarily and singing to anyone who pays well is obviously not led by the enjoyment of the sexual act, so women do not really have sexual desire because they are not having sex with the men for joy. Women are unwilling to do anything for sex, can live for many years without that, so it is legitimate to believe that women are only the means of sexual pleasure, not the "benefactors". This further strengthens men's conviction that - because women do not enjoy sex and no matter who they sex with if they pay for them or marry them – for a disobedient or want-to-much woman "sex can be the best punishment" in the form of rape, for which no remuneration is paid; this is the real punishment for them, not the violence itself. For a  prostitute in a street corner or in a porn movie who has sex with whatever for a given amount money in any way and yet is bored during, why it would be bad if someone is doing it violently because it is his wish? And if she goes into it and does not object to it, why would it hurt her to sex with her without her consent? It is not violence, but one of the ways of achieving a sexual act, which delights the man, satisfies his needs, and it is the essence, isn't it? Why should a sexual object agree to it or something else? The hammer does not give permission to drink an angle with itself. This is just one more “round” for her and a small financial loss. The point is: violent sexual intercourse is only a form and version of sex, a completely natural and normal phenomenon, which can be applied evenly, possibly as punishment, retribution, justice. It only depends on men, not on women, because for men, all forms of sex just make fun.
      What sells, is sold, it can be taken away by force, if it does not go well. How the world works, this is the order of nature - the stronger takes away what it needs. Women should strive physically, not to always be the weaker ones, from whom anyone can take anything at any time. Men in our male-virtuous, patriarchal world "just" take what they need, including sexual needs. And where does anyone take from if is hungry, thirsty or want to copulation? From "source"! A source of nutrition can be a meadow, the source of a drink is a puddle, a lake, a river, a "source" of mating is female, even though only the female selects the couple in the nature, not the other way around! Above all, it is unfortunate and humiliating that in the term of ecology, females are also only "sources", not as a full member of the given species, and no one has ever thought to object to it. Needless to say, the ideology of women marked as "sources" from which men are "take" when it comes to, what harm causes people in the minds, in the way of thinking, since if females only "resources" in the known 1.5 million species of animals, why would the human race be an exception, because we belong to the animal kingdom. If women are just "sources" for men, but men are not that for women, as the demand for mating, of course, only to men, then how would females be equal? Not at all. That's why women can be bought like bread. Every such and similar gender discriminatory manifestation and the sex discrimination itself, include a lack of reciprocity! There is no equality without any reciprocity, be it anywhere! If a woman does not interact with a man, then what would be equal to him?
     Even a road to rape has been attributed to men claiming that “she was pointing provoking” herself and deliberately doing it because she was trying to get someone / anyone in an intimate situation. Yes, but then why would it be necessary for rape? Because she has changed her mind and has no right? Smart men are accustomed to saying that "women are worshiped when raped" because violence, rabies is a sign of true masculinity, hardness, women want a "real man," love sex "roughly", and they flirt and flourish in honour to bring the animal out of the men. Well, there is no doubt that there are such people, and some who have sex with dead, and with children or sadists, masochists, perverters, but unintelligent to make  perversion as the basis, the starting point, and the general. A normal, intelligent person assumes no other sexual perversion from other people.

     But let's get back to "sexy attire". A dress - anyway - by itself, basically NOT self-pointing, on the contrary, serves to cover certain parts of the body. Many indigenous tribes wear only a lumbar spine and women uncover their breasts. Is this now "self-pointing" or "covering up" ? The last one. There was a long time to get people to feel shame for their nakedness, but before that there were practical reasons for clothing. Unfortunately, nowadays men do   think not by accident that dresses that are not full-bodied are “self-pointing” and “sexy”, especially after burqa and creating prostitution, since those who did it for living had to somehow have to attract attention, have to attract men's desire. That men then mingled the changes in dress patterns with prostitutes' working clothes, and looked at all half-naked women as prostitutes offering sex, I have highlighted its causes for the previous part of my essay. At first, the ice age required some kind of protective clothing, which for a long time was made from the hair and skin of the animals that had been killed as food. People so well trained could protect themselves and the coldest parts of their body from cold, they became less sick and lived longer. Later on, it served as a champion of hunting talent, for he who was successful in hunting was able to pack lots of furs on himself. Later on, it became a symbol of wealth, and after sex discrimination broke into this area, women's clothing and men's clothing were separated. The purpose of this was to make the weak women unknowingly confused with big and strong men, and then continuing to think of it, they began to put on clothes for women, which were cumbersome to move and move around, could have been sitting in it on a horse and so on. They also emphasized and intensified by it the secondary, subordinate role of women, their inertia, their vulnerability to men.  To do this, the making objects of vulnerable women came when men - and even in some countries -  have sold women like cows, horses, hens or tools. Things that could be sold and bought were needed to be desirable, partly to make men buy from that family not from their neighbours and free them from the burden, partly because the more desirable the goods were, the more saleable it was, the higher price paid by men so the family of sales was better off. Later, women also realized that if they can not choose a husband because it does not depend on them, at least the husband will be rich in compensation. To do this, however, they had to be "beautiful, attractive", but many of them were not that, so "decorative packaging" appeared; namely, sexy dresses, corsets with thin waist and high breasts, lace ups, silks, make-up which makes face nicer and different, hair dyes, liftup boobs, deep décolletages, ankle flashes - a taste of what a buyer can buy. And men did bought the "most beautiful" ones. Today they do the same. While a female was young and beautiful, she had plenty of "buyers" - some of them have become a famous "coquette", because many people wanted to get a buy-ins. Today they do the same. Women too. Many women are living with a rich man who she does not like. In the last century, the beauty industry came to her mind and began to ride the desire of women wanting to seem more beautiful, who came to earn their own earnings after the war, and began to spend money unprofessionally on beauty goods so that they could get married to a rich man and "enforce" in his shadow or in order to "keep" the rich husband. Today, the model of the "real woman" has emerged. "Be a real woman!" We hear and read from everywhere, several times a day! With this slogan, anything can be sold to women for whatever reason - and for men by crowd of women in the entertainment industry as a "sex symbol" (ie as a sexually-accessable item) - who earn much by selling their bodies, but not as a traditional prostitute, nor do they want to be other than sellable goods. Sex can be sold all because sex is for men, money and power and men's hands !!! Sex can be sold all because sex is for men, money and the power to get sex in the hands of men!!! Nowadays, entertainment based on sex and the objectification of women is not reduced but grows year after year. Women are spending billions of dollars for not being anything but men's sex toys! The "real woman" is nothing more than an over-made-up, usually painted to blond - in the Roman Empire, the hair of the whores was painted on platinum so that men could see from far away to find worthy of money - silicone boobed, silicone mouthed, botoxed-filled-up, over-plasticated, dressed as a prostitute who transports to men with their appearance to "come and fuck me, that's why I'm, I'm ONLY for that!" And the "real woman" will be happy if all the men who are facing him will want to have sex with her! And men, of course, rightly believed that everyone and everything is just because of them. Are we still amazed at the existence of rape? Women's sexuality - including women's homosexuality -, must exist independently and not serve male sexuality, and be subordinated to it as a "pleasure-raiser". Female sexuality does not function as a part of male sexuality!

       I would also like to draw attention to the fact that opinions on female sexuality are so distorted and not just in the minds of men, but unfortunately, in the minds of women hat the experts dealing with it describe a number of cases - a book about it - when women, especially those of the older age group, imagine themselves in a situation when a man will be attracted to them where they are victims of rape by the wanted man while they "protested fiercely". This is the most common female sexual fantasy that is terrific. The basis of this is the condemnation of female sexuality, the proclamation of sin and often the repression of it. Intimidated women do not even dare to admit that they feel something for a pretty young man, they are terribly ashamed of their feelings, feeling guilty and cripple between desire and shame. Removing the problem is fantasy about rape, when the desired man makes them his despite their fierce protest, oppose. So women can be fair, the man will be guilty, while women yet get the man they wanted. Exceptions are women who live in a country where rape is a shame of women. Unfortunately, many women in real life are playing a fierce protest just to keep the man from thinking of an easy-to-buy whore (because the existence of female sexuality for men is equal to prostitution), and creates a situation in which it seems to be vigorously protesting, screaming, screaming, and a few minutes later she is the initiator herself. Dozens of movies depict such situations, so is it wonder, if the not-brains-trust men are convinced that women's protests, oppositions are just a play or rather a "foreplay" and just a lashing up of desires?

    How could it be changed in the perception that women are only objects and the property of men, so they can do anything with them? It should start at the stove. First of all, women should be regained of consciousness - that would be the most important step -  to realize that they are primarily humans, not women, and as a human have the same rights as men, they are equal with men, and they are not in the world to make men's life more beautiful, make it easier. Their rights, which are deprived of them, are not to be asked from men and waiting for men to despise women, but to be taken back. First, women should become a new person who are able to defend themselves, who will no longer assume the role of the vulnerable victim, and physically do not to be so forever. They can then begin their own independent lives to finally be full members of the human race. Unfortunately, reaching 3.5 billion women and convincing them seems impossible. We are still very early in the process. But it is certain if women are unwilling to wake up to take their fate in their own hands and control their lives and do not go beyond the subordinate female role, then nothing will happen for centuries because for men it is good as it is now, this is the world of men, in which women are only extras in the background, and all that few women come to grief by this who want to live independently and not serve men. It only depends on women that they will stay extras forever, or this world will be theirs, too.