UN ignored Congo rape warnings

I picked this up yesterday via Women’s eNews on Twitter, and I’m glad to see it’s now getting some coverage in the msm. Apparently the original claim that the UN did nothing to prevent or intervene in the horrendous rapes of women and children in Luvungi in the Eastern Congo a couple of weeks ago because “they didn’t know it was happening” is wrong: UN officials did in fact know what was going on, they just chose to ignore it.

The New York Times reported yesterday:

“According to an e-mail sent within United Nations agencies on July 30, as the attack was unfolding, United Nations officials knew that the rebels had infiltrated the area and that at least one woman had been raped.

“The town of Mpofi, 52 kilometers from Walikale, has just fallen into the hands of the F.D.L.R. A woman was raped there,” said the e-mail, which was sent by the United Nations’ humanitarian office in eastern Congo to several other United Nations agencies and private aid groups. “Humanitarian workers are said not to go there,” the e-mail continued.”

Now the Guardian is reporting that:

“Community leaders begged UN officials for protection days before rebels raped more than 240 villagers in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, they claimed yesterday.

The attacks took place over several days, with victims ranging from a month-old baby boy to a 110-year-old great-great-grandmother.

The number of reported rapes between 30 July and 4 August has grown from initial figures of 179 and now stands at 242.

I understand Nanjala Nyabola’s argument on CiF the other day that it’s too easy to blame the UN for this atrocity, when it is in fact “the evolution of a conflict that has been ignored and allowed to fester over decades with little interest until fairly recently.” Although I would add that while it’s easy to blame the UN, the only ones who can really be blamed for the rapes are the men themselves, the ones who chose to rape.

However, I think in light of these more recent revelations it’s fair to say the UN, once again, has got a lot of explaining to do. UN forces may not be responsible for the rapes, but by the looks of it they’re certainly responsible for not doing enough to prevent them.

For more on the appalling situation for women in the Congo, the following link is well worth a click:

Eve Ensler Reads “Congo Cancer: My Cancer Is Arbitrary. Congo’s Atrocities Are Very Deliberate”.

Provocation?

Okay, so I know I wasn’t in the court to hear the evidence. I know all I’ve got to go on are media reports, and they’re not always completely reliable. But. I still can’t get my head around the verdict in the Ronald Tyler case. I mean seriously, how the fuck can someone with a history of domestic violence like this:

The Old Bailey heard Julie McKinley had reported her husband to police 24 times during their 16 year relationship.

Only four ever made it to court while the other 20 were not pursued after she withdrew the allegations.

In January 2004 she claimed Tyler had punched her in the stomach and throttled her until she momentarily blacked out.

She obtained a non-molestation order later that month which was renewed for 12 months on March 16, 2004.

Two months later she withdrew the complaint and they were reconciled.

In April 2006 she made another complaint and Tyler was convicted of using threatening or abusive words or behaviour.

He made subject to another non-molestation order in April 2008 following another attack and in November 2008 was convicted of common assault.

She said Tyler told her: ‘If you stop me seeing my kids I will finish you off.’

He was given a suspended prison sentence but the following year was convicted of breaching the non-molestation order.

Tyler was jailed for a year on July 28, 2009, but was released from jail just three months later in October 2009.

kill his wife and end up with a verdict of “manslaughter on the basis of provocation”? How?

The jury should be fucking ashamed of themselves.

And so should the police, who are now appealing “for victims of domestic violence to come forward and “break the cycle of abuse” after a man who strangled his wife to death was convicted of manslaughter.”

Why on earth would the outcome of the Tyler case prompt any victim of dv to come forward? Come forward for what? So they can be told they provoked the violence too?

Tell you what, how about the police put out an appeal for the perpetrators of domestic violence to come forward instead, so they can break the cycle of their fucking abuse.

And here’s just one example of why victims don’t bother coming forward. Because even when they do, nothing happens:

“Days before her death, Ms Stubbings told police her house had been burgled, that she believed Chivers was responsible and that she feared for her safety.

Chivers already had a conviction for murdering a previous girlfriend and had also been jailed for assaulting Ms Stubbings.

But officers took days to respond to her calls for help.

When they visited her home a week after the first call she was already dead, her body hidden in a downstairs bathroom. Chivers was at the house and told the police she had gone away.

Maria’s brother, Manuel Fernandez, has told Radio 4′s Face The Facts he is astonished they did not probe further.

“How can a convicted murderer open the door, with her car on the drive, her keys in full view and her phone not being answered?

“Her friends had made frequent phone calls to the police, really deeply concerned for her safety, and they left him a calling card and said ‘Well if she comes back, let us know.’”

The following day, officers returned to the house and discovered Maria’s body. In December 2009, Mark Chivers admitted murdering Maria and was jailed for life.”

The IPCC report into the Maria Stubbings case is due to be published any day now. Meanwhile Essex police have apologised for the mistakes its officers made.

Well that’s okay then.

What a hoot

As you may have seen from the recent press, the oh-so-tasteful-and-not-sexist-in-any-way-at all restaurant chain Hooters have put in an application to open up a new branch in Cardiff. You may also have seen that there’s been some opposition to the application, especially from feminists. There’s the Say No to Hooters in Cardiff Facebook group here for example (if you’re on Facebook, just click to join, it’s dead easy), and there’s the Say No to Hooters in Cardiff petition here (again it’s really easy to add your name – all you have to do is click on the link and fill out a couple of boxes).

So how have Hooters reacted to fact that some people have spoken out against the proposed new restaurant? Have they respectfully argued the case for how and why they don’t think they’re particularly sexist for example? Or have they perhaps argued that at least they’re providing jobs and helping boost the local economy and how that can only be a darned good thing in the current dire economic climate?

No, of course they bloody well haven’t: this is Hooters we’re talking about ffs, not some ethical yoghurt weaving company that actually gives a shit about not offending people. No, instead Hooters, or should I say Hooters’ fans, because of course there’s no evidence to suggest that the proprietors themselves are actively involved in the let’s heap scorn on the humourless femnazis and show what a bunch of sexist homophobic tossers we truly are in the process campaign that’s now firmly under-way, have pulled out all the stops.

Here’s an extract from a piece on the Brew Wales website for instance, entitled “Rug-Munchers moan about new Cardiff bar” (and no, I’m not linking)

“Last week it was announced that an American theme bar by the name of Hooters wants to open in Cardiff, causing much outrage and even a protest from the rug-munching-denim-overall-wearing-not-using-imac-brigade. Okay darlings, we supposedly live in a free-market economy – if a company wants to open a perfectly legal business then they should be allowed to. What happened today in Cardiff, outside the John Lewis Department store, was that the objectors to the opening of the perfectly legal business were soliciting autographs from shoppers in order to present a petition to Cardiff Council Licensing Department to stop Hooters from being allowed to open, without explaining any of the facts about the comapny.”

See what they did there? They called feminists the “rug-munching-denim-overall-wearing-not-using-imac-brigade” Hahahahaha! ZOMG stop me now before I split my fucking sides from laughing so much….

Continue reading

“That’s alright because I like the way it hurts”

Trigger Warning

If you’ve been asleep for the last couple of weeks (or, like me, away on holiday), you might have missed the news that Eminem has a new single out. With Rihanna. About domestic abuse.

And you might also have missed the debate that the song, Love The Way You Lie, has provoked across the blogosphere and beyond.

Well fear not. ‘Cos I’m about to wade into/rehash some of the debate with my own take on it here, and not just on the song, but also on the official music video that’s just been released online.

So to kick things off, here it is:

Powerful stuff isn’t it? By which I mean, it certainly provokes a response in the viewer. In my case though, I suspect it’s not quite the response that was intended.

Because no matter how many times I watch this film (and I’ve watched it almost on a loop now for the best part of a day in a desperate bid to find the big important meaning that a lot of people have been ascribing to it), my reaction is always the same, and that’s: “What the fucking fuck was Rihanna thinking of getting involved with this misogynist piece of shit?”

The song that is, not Eminem. Although having said that…..

Continue reading

I’ve got a new blog….

I’ve just finished setting up a new blog, Away from the Fray, which I’ll be using from now on to post book reviews and book related stuff on. So if I’m not here, or on CiF, or Twitter, or one of the gazillion and one other places I lurk on t’Internet, you’ll probably find me there.