Every grade schooler knows, or should know, that under the Western world’s systems of justice, everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
It matters not whether the court of public opinion has already condemned an accused as, for example, in the instance of Jared Loughner who was seen by dozens to have unleashed a mad, homicidal barrage of gunfire in Tucson 10 days ago. He is still an alleged assailant until and unless he is convicted.
So, too, is Julian Assange, the infamous and admitted WikiLeak leaker of hundreds of thousands of classified American government documents, still an alleged terrorist and will be “alleged” to have committed crimes until he has his day in court and is convicted.
Assange has also been accused of other crimes, vicious crimes of raping and sexually assaulting two women in Sweden.
Regardless of the merits of the case against him, and the details are in dispute, the reactions and lack of reactions of America’s Left, and especially of liberal women, to the charges have been very telling and indicative of their brazen hypocrisy. To many such women, if the accused is a fellow liberal, particularly an America-hater like Assange, any sexual offenses can readily be forgiven as peccadillos, if that.
Assange was arrested in Britain and is currently free on bail. His attorney and the liberal Brit press have taken to referring to the victims by the quaint and derogatory British term, “moneytrappers,” what we would “golddiggers,” and his supporters are dismissing the allegations as nothing more than that and as a politically-motivated conspiracy by grasping females to smear Assange.
Anything is possible. The reader may review the sleazy specifics here: http://tiny.cc/b6yzf
More to the point of the new morality in America is the evolution of Leftist thought on rape, particularly when the accused rapist is their new darling. The article, “Assange Rape Allegations and the Left’s Abandonment of Women’s Rights” by Mike McNally cites examples of that ideologically-driven abandonment.
McNally cites the usually fruitcake-y Michael Moore who initially downplayed the rape charges as ”hooey,” which is understandable given he is Michael Moore. Less explicable is the lack of outrage of what Rush Limbaugh aptly calls “Feminazis,” chief among which is the self-described “long time feminine activist,” Naomi Wolf, who went so far as to release the identities of the alleged rape victims.
Anonymity of such women was long demanded by feminists and is mandated in England.
Author of The End of America, which seems to relish that end, as well as books such as Promiscuities, which sought to re-define adolescent virgins and whores, the aging Wolf downplayed and distorted the Assange allegations and deservedly caught flak from other, confirmed Feminazis.
They themselves have cut slack for other, always liberal, notables but drew the line with Assange and with Wolf’s forgiveness without proof.
Ted Kennedy, Bill Clinton, Nelson Mandela, Roman Polanski, former senator John Edwards have escaped feminist excoriation for abusing, raping, and, possibly, drowning wives and lovers. Julian Assange has now joined that tainted pantheon of high crimes and misdemeanors against women, and girls.
Whoopi Goldberg famously excused Polanski’s confessed rape of a 13 year old by saying, “I know it wasn’t ‘rape’ rape. I think it was something else, but I don’t believe it was ‘rape’ rape.” There must be some fine distinction in Whoopi’s fine mind, as in Wolf’s.
Amy Siskind of the women’s advocacy group The New Agenda claimed that Wolf had “trivialized these women and rape generally.” In an interview with The Daily Caller, Siskind also said “it seems as if these women are meant to be roadkill so that the people on the left who view what Assange did as heroic can celebrate him:” http://tiny.cc/f81in
Some things, including Assange’s “heroism,” are simply more consequential to some feminists than abusing women.
What may or may not be a related sidebar to the Assange-Wolf debacle is a story on Salon.com, “The Modesty of the Porn Generation,” which contradicts common media perceptions toward today’s woman and pornography.
Salon staff writer Tracy Clark-Flory contends that not all modern women in their 20′s and 30′s have become porn addicts, ”taking pole-dancing classes, waxing our nether regions and sticking our tongues down each other’s throats for show . . . ’having sex like men’ and ‘screwing like porn stars.’ “ Some still are, says, Ms. Clark-Flory: “There is some truth there–yet many young women are remarkably unfamiliar with actual porn, and a gulf still remains between the sexes in talking about it.”
I have no idea whether Julian Assange and/or his two victims are porn aficionados but the article’s conclusion may be relevant to that case. “Porn may be more present and popular than ever, Clark-Flory says, ”but, clearly, sexual relationships are still filled with shyness, fear and vulnerability. Which is to say that, fundamentally, sex really doesn’t change all that much:” http://tiny.cc/5dms1
Sex obviously didn’t change much in Stockholm where Assange might have been better off confining his lust to viewing pornography and his victims might have been better off being shy, fearful, and vulnerable rather than associating with him.