20/2/00

Nigella Lawson

Discussing rape ...

... the significant fact is not the relationship between penetrator and penetrated, but the nature of the threat. After all, most victims of murder are killed by those known (and often related) to them. Is anyone seriously going to suggest that this makes the homicide a lesser crime?

Yes!

For example, one woman slaps her husband when he returns home late one evening with some other woman's lipstick on his collar. Is this equivalent to another woman going out into the street and slapping a complete stranger?

If Lorena Bobbit had gone out into the street and cut off the penis of a passing stranger, would this crime be equivalent to what, in fact, actually happened?

It is ridiculous to suggest that relationships between individuals should have no significant bearing on such issues.

Indeed, feminists are constantly trying to get murdering women out of prison on the grounds, basically, that they had terrible relationships with their murdered partners.

After all, should such terrible relationships be ignored, and the murdering woman be sentenced in exactly the same way as if she had killed a passing stranger?

Surely not!

But feminists also say that if a man rapes, kills, or, in any way, assaults a woman, then the facts concerning their relationships should NOT count at all. 

The relationship is irrelevant!

And so, for example, if a woman assaults a man, perhaps kills him or cuts off his penis, then feminists DEMAND that the nature of their relationship MUST be taken into account. In fact, the relationship AND ITS WHOLE HISTORY are seen as highly relevant. And many women are even spared prison on precisely such grounds. 

But if a man was to do something equally heinous, then the relationship should count for nothing!

Also see, ...

Ignoring Relationships In Rape