http://feministing.com/archives/006859.html#more

"You will not shame me

I have gotten email upon threatening email to rescind what I said last year about the Duke Women's Lacrosse Team and their uninformed support for the accused rapists in the Duke rape case. The case that was mishandled, manipulated and finally dropped on Wednesday.

I usually ignore emails that intend to *put me in my place* but I think we owe it to our supportive readers to say something outside of "black strippers are lying whores" and the "we won" mentality that seems to have overtaken the public imagination with the dreaded interplay of rape and race.

I just want to say first and foremost, I still stand by what I say and have said. It does look bad for people to support accused rapists, at that point we didn't know the facts either way. Furthermore, women of color are in fact OFTEN sexually assaulted and usually the criminal justice system and/or the media either overlook it or mishandle it. Women of color often have a higher burden of proof that they are not lying about rape. Case in point (as Amanda and others stated ): when the lack of DNA evidence was announced -- before we even knew whether the players were innocent or not -- people were quite quick to accuse the accuser of being guilty of lying. So be it.

The charges were dropped. Does this mean that they are innocent? None of us actually know what happened that night. Sorry, unless you were there, you don't know what happened. Now for the rest of you that have such a die hard belief in the criminal justice system and evidence, well quite frankly I pity you. This is a system that arrests a disproportionate number of people of color, subjecting them to unfair trials, inadequate representation and longer sentences (in a prison system that resembles slavery) SORRY, I don't trust the courts. When you're a woman of color who's a sexworker, up against white kids with money that can afford *good* lawyers, the outcome is not looking so good.

They were not found to be innocent, the charges were dropped from lack of evidence..."

So Samhitha at Feministing, Salon'd bylined Jessica Valenti's pal still cannot say that the students were innocent.

Samhitha says they were right all along. Is there any wonder young women flee from the label of "feminist?"

Samhitha also plays the victim card by claiming she received email threats about this. Waah! Waah! And she says explicitly that it was wrong for friends of the students to support the students. And in general she says it looks bad to support those accused of rape.

Fuck the patriarchy control of your minds ladies, Samhitha declared last year that she knew better than the woman's lacrosse team what had happened. She said their support for the men's team was "unthinking."

So yeah, fuck the patriarchy because goddess Samhitha is coming our way.

Is this delusion? Is this arrogance? Is this idiocy? Is this just as intentional as when Bush and Rove deny they did anything wrong and claim loudly that they made no mistakes.

Broadsheet: Does Being A Feminist Mean Never Having to Say You're Sorry? There's your story. Run with it.

how Broadsheet can continue to link to them or blogroll them? Would Broadsheet feel comfortable blogrolling conspiracy theorists? Would Broadsheet feel comfortable blogrolling bigots?

Then why blogroll such a fringe group that clearly has issues with men, and white men in particular?

Broadsheet? Joan?

Are there no feminist websites out there that aren't bigoted? Conspiracy nuts?

What about TalkLeft? Or Cathy Young? Or ifeminists? Or Amy Alkon?

It's very interesting to see the handwringing about Imus and then read that post at feministing. It's interesting to compare the feminist blogosphere's reaction to Kos today and then read that post at feministing.

This is absolutely right, which is why it is ridiculous for you and so many of your feminist bloggers to make claims that fathers rights groups hate women, don't want to be fathers, and just want lower custody payments.

If the average family has two children, what does statistics tell you about the average father? Amongst fathers with two kids, how many of those fathers have at least one daughter? 75%. Amongst fathers with one kid, how many of those fathers have at least one daughter? 50%.

For fathers that grew up in two child families, how many have sisters? 50%. How many of those fathers have mothers? And how many have had one or more serious relations with women?

Now, what is the average age of most fathers of kids 0-18? And how many of those fathers grew up in a family where both mom and dad worked? And how many fathers of young kids grew up after Title IX?

So how can you support irrational arguments that claim that fathers and divorced fathers hate girls and women?

How can you support feminists and bloggers that ignore the claims that divorced fathers want to be parents and state as a matter of fact that they know better, divorced fathers want to abandon their children, beat up on women, and just reduce child support?

And yet, that's what the feminists that you print say. And the feminists on Broadsheet's blogroll. Pandagon, Feministing, etc.

It's an illogical argument that defies the facts, and one you folks and the folks you support roll out on a daily basis. Why is that?

I think this is very exciting science that opens up wonderful possibilities for us all.

If we render all children infertile at birth and make child bearing a right to be won, just think what we can do to society!

We can eliminate violent stupid men, whorish slutty women, short people, fat people, people with genetic disorders. By eliminating either mom or dad we can give children to those people that our science proves will be a good parental unit.

And they will all be blond and blue-eyed and tall.

Woohoo!