i thought it was only open season on women's bodies under the bush-cheney-halliburton axis of evil? hussein ended the patriarchy, didn't he? mmm. mmm. mmm. unicorns roamed the land dispensing cotton candy, mylar ballons, love, and equality, did they not?
"Cash-Strapped Topeka May Stop Prosecuting Domestic Violence
Funding spat has allowed offenders to walk
Cash-strapped Topeka, Kansas, has decided to stop prosecuting domestic violence casses in order to save money.
The City Council announced the proposal Oct. 4, after the Shawnee County District Attorney's office announced it could no longer prosecute misdemeanors, including domestic violence cases. The city's maneuver may even require repealing the part of the city code that bans domestic battery. "
it's no crime for real humans, being men, to beat and perhaps kill their love and sex OBJECTS, who are not fully human, but their possessions they may do with as they wish. in the great liberal democrat socialist future private property may be illegal but not to worry- you can still own your bitches outright.
wasn't slavery outlawed? oh, except the owning of women because that's sessy and ' empowering' for everyone involved. nothing says equality for women like allowing men to beat the crap out of them legally- perhaps with a gang rape or bukkake session with his bros thrown in for good measure. and film it- why not turn a profit as you do with your thing as you desire? post in on fucking youtube- you won't be the first to have done so. because that's free speech- massive amounts of amateur rape and snuff porn predicated on hating and humiliating women flowing through the internet unrestricted , lovingly wanked off to. because that's equality for women- wanting to be gang raped and face raped and loving every second of it, viewing it as de facto liberation not as crass exploitation. commodification, and dehumanization. as the marquis de sade said, " tis to be fucked, she was born.", might as well squeeze a dime or some jizz from the evolutionary facts of female existence.
one supposes next up is doing away with the laws that made it illegal to rape your wife.
"One in every four women will experience domestic violence in her lifetime.
85% of domestic violence victims are women.
Most cases of domestic violence are never reported to the police.( oh, surprise, just like with rape. so let's discourage women from reporting being physically assaulted- because nothing will be done anyway. this will lead to more homicides, actually, technically femicides. yes, let's not prosecute domestic abuse cases- real cost saver, that. who cares about saving the lives of objects aka females.)
Nearly 7.8 million women have been raped by an intimate partner at some point in their lives.
81% of women stalked by a current or former intimate partner are also physically assaulted by that partner; 31% are also sexually assaulted by that partner.
Almost one-third of female homicide victims that are reported in police records are killed by an intimate partner.
The cost of intimate partner violence exceeds $5.8 billion each year, $4.1 billion of which is for direct medical and mental health services.
There are 16,800 homicides and $2.2 million (medically treated) injuries due to intimate partner violence annually, which costs $37 billion."
because only republicans hate poor and black people, right?:
"people with lower annual income (below $25K) are at a 3-times higher risk of intimate partner violence than people with higher annual income (over $50K)... residents of urban areas experienced highest level of nonfatal intimate partner violence." Bureau of Justice Statistics
it's near impossible to find the party affiliations of the topeka city council (for those in a media haze of valium induced coma, when a republican does bad , the headlines scream REPUBLICAN. when a democrat does bad, it's near impossible to find his party mentioned in any news article.) but word from locals is the council is not majority republican and that it was democrats who made the suggestion to decriminalize violent assault on personal she- property . it's not the D or the R after the name that counts- it's whether or not the elected creature is male and/ or supports male privilege and superiority over women. feminist people need to start judging the actions of their elected officials- not the blather that comes out of their pie holes because they want votes. stop giving them a free ride according to their party affiliation. that women who considered themselves feminists got behind( more closely- got under or got on their knees before) rapist bill clinton, offering him free blow jobs for him giving them a right or two, is the proof enough that democrat men are largely not feminist in any sense of the word and women are fucking stupid, willfully or not, about the ways they are manipulated by the left to basically ensure their subordination to the agenda of leftist men, being a thoroughly heterosexist male dominant agenda. democrats do like sending dick pics to women though- so that must mean they just love and respect women so so much. at least you get dick picks and abortion rights- even if they'll never give you full human rights or actual equality with men. and that's all you get from democrats- dick pics and abortion rights. why don't you think you deserve more?
everyone knows that the only way someone can tell if a man respects them as an equal human is if he emails them an out of focus self portrait of his junk. that used to be called flashing or open and gross conduct and it used to be a crime in the real world. dirty old pathetic freaks with trench coats showing their willies in public was a sign of deep respect , a revolutionary act in support of female equality- who knew? as with bill clinton, you should want to blow him for his solidarity with women.
and women in the white house now report that the hussein obama administration treats "its'" women like shit. (i could have told you that in 2008, doormats for change, the hos behind the bros, last in line for any real political power.).
"Claudine Dombrowski, whose partner once beat her in the head with a crowbar and sent her to the hospital with two broken wrists and 24 stitches in what was labeled a "misdemeanor" domestic abuse case, is among residents fighting the city's decision."
if, say, a white male had beat, say, a black person or gay person or latino person (or anyone with whom he had not had sex with) with a crowbar, it would be construed as at the least a hate crime . it would further be considered a grievous enough assault( with a deadly weapon no less. when you're not pounding the tar out of a woman you have known biblically even a shod foot can be considered a deadly weapon)- to be considered a felony.
and that's the point. even if this is a big fucked up manipulative political football thrown by the county DA at the city council to stop them playing pissing match budget games with the safety of women , it shows how little we care as a society for women, particularly women who can be posited as belonging to a particular male. as the country falls into graver and graver economic turmoil, aided and abetted by the policies of the sitting president and his totalitarian socialist demo-weasels, as usual the first victims of the budget cuts are those who are considered the least worthy of human rights and human dignity- things that belong to men to use as they see fit- women, particularly poor, disenfranchised woman more of whom are likely to be the victims of domestic violence . crimes against woman are hate crimes and statistically they suffer more violence at the hands of men universally and in every culture at the hands of every skin tone and ethnicity, than any special victim class currently ' 'protected' by hate crimes laws.
and we allow it.
emancipation of slaves happened in the late 1800's- and only the male ex-slaves got the vote. lincoln was a republican, the slave owning south was thoroughly democrat. women including white women had to wait until 1920 (women's suffrage was first introduced in the senate by aaron sargent, a republican) to participate in american democracy. the early civil rights acts in 1957 and 1960- protecting voting rights , targeted at systematic african-american disenfranchisement in the democratic south- were championed and signed into law by eisenhower, the republican president who also removed red hunter joseph mccarthy from power. he forced integration at washington dc schools after brown vs.board of education to make of it an example for the rest of the nation. he federalized the arkansas national guard, infuriating a democrat governor who was using them to stop black children from going to high school. in contrast, vietnam war escalator supreme lyndon johnson had to cajole his fellow democrats ,in his first speech before congress as president, demanding they stop blocking the 1964 civil rights amendment. this doesn't all quite fit the liberal narrative about republicans does it? the original equal rights amendment was proposed by 2 republicans in 1923. it languished in committee. in 1958, eisenhower asked congress to pass it as from 1940 until the evangelically tinged year of 1980 the ERA was part of the stated Republican platform. they declined. traditionally, democratic/socialist labor unions have always been against the equal protection of women under the law in america- whatever they may say now. until the 1960's the major supporters of women's equal rights were wealthy conservative women,followed by republicans, not the democrats.
why do we still not have equality legislation enshrined in our constitution affirming the rights of women? because our political classes and elected representatives on both the left and the right do not in the 21st century believe that women are equal to men. much is made of race in this country- how many seem to believe, if not regularly opine, that the country is as racist as it was in 1860s let alone the 1950s. yet today we have a man of partially kenyan descent in the office of president. yet the american congress has passed heaps of civil rights laws, affirmative action laws, has waged ' war on poverty' since the great depression. yet we still do not have an amendment that supports the ideal that woman are included in the ' all men are created equal' boast of our declaration of independence. our country is far more sexist than it is racist and the proof is in the laws and the manner in which women who seek higher political office are treated by the traditional slave owning class as well as those descended from the slave classes. how's that bro working out for you? do you wish you had nominated the ho instead? at least hillary isn't a fucking fascist.
why is the hatred of women coded into and supported by our alleged rule of law? when are we going to march for women's rights instead of the rights of a bunch of snotty whiney pasty white emo hipster brats to be able to afford macbooks, iphones, PBR, cruelty free hemp panties, and organic tempeh while not having to work for a living?
because the entire oppressive structure of our civilization is built on the backs of women and not even liberal porpoise loving socialist, communist, democrat, and manarchist men are willing to give up possessing , hating, using, and raping their woman-things. they are certainly never going to give up their male privilege, their rights over others. because i guarantee somewhere right now in topeka kansas some MRA is simpering about how men are always falsely accused of domestic violence anyway and how "straight men are victims toooo!!!!". you sad fucking cunts.
and what's sadder are the women who claim to be feminists who support and agree with these patriarchal hypocritical ignorant tools who always seem to be saying " me me me" when discussing the situation of women, or a specific woman, in a society that despises and denigrates the female gender with an unsurpassed religious fervor. and that's the tell: mention something negative being done to women, a woman by men or a man- and some male who thinks he's sensitive and a egalitarian will pipe up with something about himself or how "men are ( fill in the blank) too" and we should all get together and at the very least stop calling men out on misogyny because we have to love everyone equally or it's sexism against the poor men or something. funny how with woman's rights and women's issues men who claim to be the allies of women are always derailing the conversation to focus back on their own sweet selves. because even they know and believe- it is all about them, it's all about their male supremacy and their male privilege which they in no way are compelled to give up.
since domestic violence is no longer a crime, maybe more women and abused gay men should start battering the living fuck out of their husbands, bfs, and mens with crowbars- because it's only a misdemeanor anyway and no one's going to prosecute the assault as an actual, real crime. or will it be a real crime because it's done to an authentic human with full rights? and that's the other tell: if the act is a serious crime when committed against a man but a budget breaking trifling non-event when committed against a woman or socially feminized male.