The two top stories on the news tonight provide such a startlingly clear image of
the disparate treatment of male vs. female criminals.
The two stories involve recently released sex offenders Curtis Thompson and
Mary K. LeTourneau. Thompson raped at least 4 women and attempted at least a
fifth known attack. His attacks were extremely violent and harmful, nearly fatal. "
In one incident, he cut a woman's arm from elbow to wrist, raped her with a
broomstick...." He has been classified as a "sexual sadist," which is one of the
most terrifying terms used in criminology. Prosecutors pushed heavily for his
sentence to be continued, producing experts testifying that he was nearly 100%
certain to reoffend.
A jury chose to release him in October 2003.
LeTourneau's crime pales in comparison, to say the least. She was involved in a
relationship with her "victim," who was a victim only by virtue of his legal age. She
initially only served six months for the statutory rape, but after her sentence was
completed, and the first child born, she was arrested again for returning to the
relationship. Shortly thereafter, the second child was born. Now that she is out of
prison for the second time, her "victim" is 21 years old and has been petitioning
the court to lift the no-contact order against her so they can be together.
A community meeting was held at which residents of LeTourneau's new
neighborhood spoke out in fear of her! Somehow, they believe she is likely to
reoffend, which is contrary to any logical evaluation of the situation in which the
original "crime" occurred! They're talking about how it seems dangerous to have
her living near to elementary schools, as if she were a random molester of
multiple children, rather than a participant in a long-term relationship with one
regrettably young man.
The only explanation for the vast difference in how these registered sex offenders
are viewed and treated is the absolute basis of sexism that runs like groundwater
through our collective unconscious. A man commits an act of sexual violence, and
he is not seen as really out of the ordinary! He is doing what men do, just maybe
a little more intensely, with less camouflage. Rape is equated somehow to
joyriding, in men's eyes; unless the car never gets returned, or gets sold off for
parts, no real damage is done...and unless the woman is visibly scarred or fatally
wounded, it's just a little extra mileage, right?
So a man who has violently and sadistically inflicted vicious pain on women who
were complete strangers...this is someone we owe a second chance to, and we
should allow him to live in anonymity and prove himself to society.
But a woman who was clearly deeply committed to a relationship with a young
man who was (despite his legal incapacity to enter into such a union) there by his
own choice...this is someone we need to keep a close eye on, really watch and
make sure she can't have anything like a normal life again. Why? Because any
woman who is seen as a sexual predator in any way is so unnatural, unfamiliar a
creature, she is terrifying. A man, though? He's just following his natural
inclinations.
Yeah. And Thompson has already been rearrested for attacking two young
women and ordering one of them to strip, or else he would "kick her head through
the wall."
The only silver lining here is that this will be strike three for the evil fucker, so no
jury will have the opportunity to intervene their moronic optimism on his behalf.
Why we don't just kill the type of vicious fiend who could even think of let alone
do the action quoted in an above paragraph (which is, I might add, a
characteristic weapon and act chosen by sexual sadists), I can't make any sense
of. Why we are forced to walk around in the presence of violent and evil men
whose predatory natures are KNOWN and PROVEN to authorities, but we are
never given the benefit of that knowledge...why that choice is made for us, to
expose us to that level of danger...can anyone explain? I am out of answers.
the disparate treatment of male vs. female criminals.
The two stories involve recently released sex offenders Curtis Thompson and
Mary K. LeTourneau. Thompson raped at least 4 women and attempted at least a
fifth known attack. His attacks were extremely violent and harmful, nearly fatal. "
In one incident, he cut a woman's arm from elbow to wrist, raped her with a
broomstick...." He has been classified as a "sexual sadist," which is one of the
most terrifying terms used in criminology. Prosecutors pushed heavily for his
sentence to be continued, producing experts testifying that he was nearly 100%
certain to reoffend.
A jury chose to release him in October 2003.
LeTourneau's crime pales in comparison, to say the least. She was involved in a
relationship with her "victim," who was a victim only by virtue of his legal age. She
initially only served six months for the statutory rape, but after her sentence was
completed, and the first child born, she was arrested again for returning to the
relationship. Shortly thereafter, the second child was born. Now that she is out of
prison for the second time, her "victim" is 21 years old and has been petitioning
the court to lift the no-contact order against her so they can be together.
A community meeting was held at which residents of LeTourneau's new
neighborhood spoke out in fear of her! Somehow, they believe she is likely to
reoffend, which is contrary to any logical evaluation of the situation in which the
original "crime" occurred! They're talking about how it seems dangerous to have
her living near to elementary schools, as if she were a random molester of
multiple children, rather than a participant in a long-term relationship with one
regrettably young man.
The only explanation for the vast difference in how these registered sex offenders
are viewed and treated is the absolute basis of sexism that runs like groundwater
through our collective unconscious. A man commits an act of sexual violence, and
he is not seen as really out of the ordinary! He is doing what men do, just maybe
a little more intensely, with less camouflage. Rape is equated somehow to
joyriding, in men's eyes; unless the car never gets returned, or gets sold off for
parts, no real damage is done...and unless the woman is visibly scarred or fatally
wounded, it's just a little extra mileage, right?
So a man who has violently and sadistically inflicted vicious pain on women who
were complete strangers...this is someone we owe a second chance to, and we
should allow him to live in anonymity and prove himself to society.
But a woman who was clearly deeply committed to a relationship with a young
man who was (despite his legal incapacity to enter into such a union) there by his
own choice...this is someone we need to keep a close eye on, really watch and
make sure she can't have anything like a normal life again. Why? Because any
woman who is seen as a sexual predator in any way is so unnatural, unfamiliar a
creature, she is terrifying. A man, though? He's just following his natural
inclinations.
Yeah. And Thompson has already been rearrested for attacking two young
women and ordering one of them to strip, or else he would "kick her head through
the wall."
The only silver lining here is that this will be strike three for the evil fucker, so no
jury will have the opportunity to intervene their moronic optimism on his behalf.
Why we don't just kill the type of vicious fiend who could even think of let alone
do the action quoted in an above paragraph (which is, I might add, a
characteristic weapon and act chosen by sexual sadists), I can't make any sense
of. Why we are forced to walk around in the presence of violent and evil men
whose predatory natures are KNOWN and PROVEN to authorities, but we are
never given the benefit of that knowledge...why that choice is made for us, to
expose us to that level of danger...can anyone explain? I am out of answers.
