I saw a fantastic interview on PBS with Leymah Gbowee who was the leader of the group of women who helped bring Taylor down through their non-violent protest campaigns. It was amazing to see how the women would stand together and shame the men who committed and authorized these atrocities. From the Liberian women to the women protesting in Iran, I'm so inspired by the fact that despite forces doing everything to keep them quiet they continue to speak out (seriously, check out the doc Pray the Devil Back to Hell).
"... but I am still alive and I hope one day something will be different and I will be a good person"
This. Is so hard. The idea that she was raped on a regular basis and forced to go to war as a child is bad enough. But to be made to feel like *she* is a bad person because of it?
The global rise in child soldiers is, I believe, one of the most major setbacks humanity has seen in ages.
If people want to learn more (or donate!) I'd suggest starting here: http://www.child-soldiers.org/contact/members
Also UNICEF, obviously. As horrific as the stories above are, there are lots of people working on reintegrating former child combatants into society. Its just really incredibly difficult and complex.
There is no punishment severe enough for Charles Taylor. I, for one, will respectfully refuse to read or hear any of his testimony in his defense, as I expect the substance of it will be a full-bore assault on reason and common dignity.
Taylor ran (successfully) with the election slogan of "he killed my ma, he killed my pa, but I will vote for him", and the defense says he was a BROKER OF PEACE?
I can't even process that. Some people are indefensible, and Taylor is one of them.
@haguenite: I wouldn't wear any metal, if I were youl. If there is a God, I can only imagine he'll be throwing down some mighty lightning bolts around that time.
When I close my eyes, all I can see is the war. I often think about taking my own life. It would have been better if I'd died in the war, but I am still alive and I hope one day something will be different and I will be a good person.
I'm glad the study was done in Swaziland, but do they make any recommendations? How can women use the knowledge that most rapes aren't committed by strangers? I guess if they are embarrassed/afraid of reporting someone they know because they think it only happened to them, this will help them speak out.
Although I hold that the belief that, in state and federal courts, the death penalty should only be used in cases where a life was taken. I am coming around to the belief that rape that is a war crime should carry a penalty of death at least for those that encourage or direct it. I.e. the leaders of men that commit rape on a systemic basis...and even the participants too.
Don't get me wrong, Rape is a horrible, horrible crime in general and I believe the penalties for this crime in the US have not entirely been commiserate with the atrocity of rape, but it seems that rape goes to a whole new level of depravity and evil when it is used as a weapon of war to terrorize.
@Tangy.Nihilist: I get what you're saying. I think rapists should be traumatized in some horrific manner. Once they are found guilty they should be hauled out of the courtroom and not told what their sentencing is, taken to prison and left alone for a period of time, then on some random Tuesday they should suffer some horrific fate and have to live with it for the rest of their lives. To me that is justice. So, I guess it is good I don't make policy.
@PinkSoxHat: Labeling something a "war crime" unfortunately doesn't mean it will be treated as such. Words have little power when fundamental changes are not made.
Look at the "war crimes" committed by some in the Bush administration in the form of torture (waterboarding). Those responsible will not be held accountable. The Geneva Conventions mandates have only the power our leaders are inclined to give them.
But I understand your need to see a positive because I feel it too.
@JerseyGrrrl: yeah, this may seem weird but I'm not sure where I stand on the rape-as-war-crime issue. I had considered it pretty cut and dry, but reading "Culture of Lies" (excellent book with a feminist take on the disintegration of Yugoslavia, particularly the Croatian perspective), I think Dubravka Ugresic makes some interesting points.
Mainly the idea that rape during the war is treated as this big awful thing (which obv it is) in the midst of the very patriarchal Slavic culture with the mentality of (and I'm quoting the book here) "if you're going to get raped, you may as well lay back and enjoy it", and there's something off with the idea that woman raped by random paramilitary during the war = victim but woman raped by her date during peacetime = well, did you see what she was wearing?
in other words, she seemed to view rape during the war, not as a product of the conflict, but of a manifestation of misogyny inherent in her culture, which the war gave people more opportunity to act upon.
And I can understand the message that hauling a guy off to the Hague for war crimes for rape might send: "you can't rape people during a war" but the message should actually be "you shouldn't be raping people EVER" and men in that society aren't going to be getting the second message from the international "community" and they certainly don't get it from their own culture. (I don't mean to bag on the Slavs here - there are plenty of other cultures where this is true. I'm more familiar with that particular culture so I feel more comfortable commenting on it)
Whether it is intentional or not, distinguishing between rape during war vs. rape during peace time creates a dichotomy of "worthy" vs. "unworthy" victims, and the idea that rape in one circumstance is somehow worse and deserves more punishment than in another. I definitely am not comfortable with assessing whose experience was more traumatic, or somehow ranking the degree to which scenario is "worse" than the other. What's worse, being raped by a stranger during a war, or being repeatedly raped at home by a relative or family friend? I dunno, they both seem pretty horrible to me.
@PinkSoxHat: It has been illegal for decades, but the standard isn't always applied; The Russians made it a policy to "rape their way through Germany" at the close of WWII, to punish the Germans for their cruelty on the Eastern Front.
This was clearly illegal, and yet it was an answer to the Germans' illegal abuses, so it is an often-overlooked page in history.
07/14/09
"Charles Taylor should burn in hell, and it should be soon."
07/13/09
07/13/09
This. Is so hard. The idea that she was raped on a regular basis and forced to go to war as a child is bad enough. But to be made to feel like *she* is a bad person because of it?
07/13/09
If people want to learn more (or donate!) I'd suggest starting here: http://www.child-soldiers.org/contact/members
Also UNICEF, obviously. As horrific as the stories above are, there are lots of people working on reintegrating former child combatants into society. Its just really incredibly difficult and complex.
07/13/09
07/13/09
07/13/09
I can't even process that. Some people are indefensible, and Taylor is one of them.
07/13/09
*Googles "molotov cocktail"*
07/13/09
07/13/09
That just broke my heart.
07/13/09
Sadness.
05/12/09
05/12/09
Don't get me wrong, Rape is a horrible, horrible crime in general and I believe the penalties for this crime in the US have not entirely been commiserate with the atrocity of rape, but it seems that rape goes to a whole new level of depravity and evil when it is used as a weapon of war to terrorize.
05/12/09
05/12/09
05/12/09
Look at the "war crimes" committed by some in the Bush administration in the form of torture (waterboarding). Those responsible will not be held accountable. The Geneva Conventions mandates have only the power our leaders are inclined to give them.
But I understand your need to see a positive because I feel it too.
05/12/09
Mainly the idea that rape during the war is treated as this big awful thing (which obv it is) in the midst of the very patriarchal Slavic culture with the mentality of (and I'm quoting the book here) "if you're going to get raped, you may as well lay back and enjoy it", and there's something off with the idea that woman raped by random paramilitary during the war = victim but woman raped by her date during peacetime = well, did you see what she was wearing?
in other words, she seemed to view rape during the war, not as a product of the conflict, but of a manifestation of misogyny inherent in her culture, which the war gave people more opportunity to act upon.
And I can understand the message that hauling a guy off to the Hague for war crimes for rape might send: "you can't rape people during a war" but the message should actually be "you shouldn't be raping people EVER" and men in that society aren't going to be getting the second message from the international "community" and they certainly don't get it from their own culture. (I don't mean to bag on the Slavs here - there are plenty of other cultures where this is true. I'm more familiar with that particular culture so I feel more comfortable commenting on it)
Whether it is intentional or not, distinguishing between rape during war vs. rape during peace time creates a dichotomy of "worthy" vs. "unworthy" victims, and the idea that rape in one circumstance is somehow worse and deserves more punishment than in another. I definitely am not comfortable with assessing whose experience was more traumatic, or somehow ranking the degree to which scenario is "worse" than the other. What's worse, being raped by a stranger during a war, or being repeatedly raped at home by a relative or family friend? I dunno, they both seem pretty horrible to me.
05/12/09
This was clearly illegal, and yet it was an answer to the Germans' illegal abuses, so it is an often-overlooked page in history.
05/12/09