The Law is an Ass 1 – The Sexual Offences Act

This is the first in the series “The Law is an Ass” – a critical look at Gender bias and sexism in the Sexual offences act of Trinidad & Tobago. Unfortunately this post is quite long, but there is no elegant way to avoid this.

The overwhelming impression one gets from reading the SOA (Sexual Offences Act) – is that women don’t rape, neither do the engage in acts of sexual assault. The only way a woman (other than incest, adopted child or business subordinate) can be charged under this act is if she has sexual intercourse with a minor more than three years younger than herself, and at most she will get 5 years in a nice comfortable women’s prison. The shocking reality is that males, once they are over 12 years old, can receive sentences from 10 years to life imprisonment. These are boys the age entering high school. An overview of the sentences for various charges clearly illustrate the perverted sense of justice and revulsion toward men and boys by its authors. We believe that this act is contrary to, and should be illegal under the Constitution of Trinidad & Tobago Chapter 1 Part 1 Section 4 Sub-section b. The SOA also conflicts with the rights of children under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Quote from Trinidad Express 7 Sept, 2012.

Professor Rhoda Reddock has worked alongside fellow gender advocates and activists over the years in establishing the Caribbean Association for Feminist Research and Action (CAFRA). She also played a part in bringing about legislation related to sexual offences in the Sexual Offences Act and the implementation of the Domestic Violence Act. She remains disappointed that the draft national Gender Policy and Action Plan, which she worked on with Professor Patricia Mohammed, Camille Antoine and the staff of the Gender Affairs Division for two years, never saw the light of day.

We will get back to Professor Reddock – recipient of the Presidents Gold Medal for the development of Women (2012).

This SOA, defines sexual assault and rape, entirely about males (including boys over the age of 12) performing a sexual act on a woman. It considers not only vaginal and anal penetration, but also oral sex and sexual acts using objects. It looks at fundamentally women being ‘forced’ to perform a wide variety of sexual acts – even performing oral sex on the accused. While the act could theoretically apply to males, it is clear that it’s a law written in support of women and not necessarily sexual offenses. The act presumes males to be perpetrators, except where buggery, incest and other ancillary offences are concerned.

We will refer to this practice of writing laws in support of women, under the auspicious declaration of equality in future posts. Why write a law to protect half of the population specifically ignoring the other half? Wouldn’t it have been much easier and less complicated to write a gender neutral law and protect everyone? This is evidence of systemic bias in the Laws of Trinidad & Tobago. How can an accused expect justice under this law, when the law itself is unconstitutional and inherently biased?
Here are some of the conclusions that is obvious from language in the act.

1. The act only protect those who have a vagina to be penetrated. The man is only protected by someone performing anal sex on him. Considering that homosexuals perform anal sex, as a matter of normality, this is not a protection.
2. The act treats act of anal sex on women as sexual assault with penalties similar to that for buggery.
3. Age discrimination for boys and men. Under the act boys can be charged from as young as 12 years. The act only makes provision to charge adult women when they have sex with under aged boys more than three years their junior.
4. The act is obsessed and misguided by equating sexual assault with penetration.
5. The act either ignores or assumes that sexual violence cannot be performed by women – a demonstrably fallacious and scientifically provable fact. This deceptive and irrational absurdity ostracizes boys and men who can be raped and sexually abused. We must assume that a sense of deep hatred of men – maybe retribution because of the malevolent “Patriarchy” boogey man that feminists are obsessed with, lies at the heart of the sexist authorship of this law.
6. The act applies to married couples – where a husband can be incriminated for sexual assault on his wife, but no such reciprocal considerations are given.
7. The consequences for men and BOYS (over 12) found guilty of rape under the act are extremely severe and especially so if there are special circumstances – for example the victim is pregnant – mandatory life imprisonment as with a number of scenarios. The act even provides for severe penalties where people have sex with animals before it affords any protection of the males in society. Only women who have sex with under aged boys, if the case makes it to court she will serve a maximum of 5 years! There are no provisions for sexual assault committed by women unless it’s against another woman.

False Accusation

The act also prevents any information about the reputation or circumstances of the person making the accusation OR the history of any sexual relationship be admitted into evidence – unless the judge thinks that it is “necessary” for a fair trial. If this isn’t a miscarriage of justice I don’t know what is. Sure we don’t want to blame the victim and subject her to further humiliation but doesn’t this law make an ass of itself by assuming that the victim is correct, and she is not lying? But how can justice be served by assuming that the woman is speaking the truth, and have her history hidden? Our desire to protect victims before it can be establish that the person is actually a victim is misguided and prejudices the accused.

Women are known to lie about things like rape, domestic violence in a little hardly discussed phenomenon called “false accusations”. False accusations is predominantly a female behavior. Women who feel justified will cross any boundary to commit this injurious behavior against a man. The problem is that feminists all over support this behavior, and some have even gone so far to say, that men benefit when they are falsely accused or that prosecuting a woman falsely accusing a man will deter other women from filing rape charges. This blog believes that False Accusations for serious crimes that can land someone in jail for an act he or she did not commit and knowingly so, should have mandatory life imprisonment sentences for both the main and supporting perpetrators. In fact we believe it is worse to be the victim of a false rape accusation – where you can be locked up for life in an environment where true “rape culture” is the norm, while the perp is outside “you go girl”ing her friends with hi fives, than to be a victim of rape.

Today in western countries rape is being further defined, where a woman can decide after she has had ‘consensual’ sex with a man, to after the fact decide that it was rape because she “feels” this way. There is no doubt that the feminists in Trinidad & Tobago will want the same thing. So much for the equality argument.

Ignoring half of the problem

We have no problem with strong penalties for sexual crimes. But what is clear from the act, is that the original authors wanted to leave a path clear so that half of the population would be unprotected from sexual abuse while the other half was free to commit these acts, unchecked – in other words the act appears designed to cause sexual predator behaviors in certain segments of the population. We do not make this claim lightly as it would appear that the language is deliberately designed for this – and that necessarily would take a certain amount of effort. These types of laws have a secondary effect. It hides women as sexual predators, and keeps the spotlight on men. If there are no laws and social attitudes against women sexual predators there will be no data, it will be hard to collate data on sexual violence. Are women sexual predators and pedophiles? How prevalent are these behaviors amongst the female population? Well, that’s the topic for another post – but the short answer is yes, it’s a significant problem.

This author believes that feminist written legislation that disadvantages men, are only the first phase of another bigger problem. If you follow the news in the US – there is a colossal debate about sex and consent. There is a powerful drive to take away any responsibility that women have to be responsible for their sexuality. They want to give women the power to come after they have sex with a man and accuse him of rape if she has regrets after. And it is feminists that are leading this drive and drumming up the support of women voters to pressure politicians, who have no choice but to act. US President Obama has already started several feminist engendered policies and legislation aimed at create a privileged class of females. One surrounds the rape issue where despite significantly falling rape statistics, feminist claim that rape is a huge problem and the other surrounds a workplace where women get very preferential treatment for producing substandard work. Already some states are enacting legislation. Private Universities are under pressure from the Department of Education to punish male students even after local police have determined that the sex was consensual. Purely on the basis of the accusation, the accused is prevented from providing evidence or even cross examining witnesses and the standard of determining guilt referred to as “a preponderance of evidence” rather than “beyond reasonable doubt”.

Why do we have laws that are so obviously sexist and bigoted? Because of feminism. Feminist’s claim that all they are interested in is “equality”, but their involvement in this act is proof to the contrary. This is an example that their agenda is clearly about creating a society where women have all the rights and a man can be locked up on a woman’s say-so, without any evidence. And it actually goes further – it fleeces any female antisocial behavior associated with this topic. Rhoda Reddock – “gender studies” expert, with other feminists wrote this law in collaboration with the people you voted for. An article in the Express Newspapers said that she was

“not even a woman when her mother instilled in her the importance of being a proud woman. Her mother’s advice came at a time when restrictions were placed on girls and it played a major part in Reddock’s awareness of women’s affairs and gender equality”.

We are unaware of any regulations other than cultural ones that placed restrictions on girls and what they can achieve since our country gained independence. It’s up to your folks to ignore those cultural norms and institute what they think is best for their children. But the gender bias that is institutionalized in the Sexual Offences Act is real and inescapable bigotry and embedded sexism and should be either rewritten or overturned. We are creating a whole generation of gender based sexual abusers that are falling under the radar, as we will provide data to prove this. Young men and boys are the most vulnerable in our society – they are marginalized and they are the ones that create the most social unrest – who’s to blame – take a good look in the mirror.

Appendix: Quotes from SOA

1. Quote 1 – Section 2: Definition of Sexual Assault
   “grievous sexual assault” means—(a) the penetration of the vagina or anus of the complainant by a body part other than the penis of the accused or third person as the casemay be;
   (b) the penetration of the vagina or anus of the complainant by an object manipulated by the accused or third person, as the case may be, except when such penetration is accomplished for medically recognised treatment;
   (c) the placing of the penis of the accused or third person, as the case may be, into the mouth of the complainant; or
   (d) the placing of the mouth of the accused or third person as the case may be, onto or into the vagina of the complainant;
   Note the language here entirely ignores the possibility of a woman performing any type of “grievous sexual assault”. Under the act, vagina (complainant) is used synonymously with victim and penis is used in conjunction the perpetrator (accused).
2. Quote 2 – Section 4: Rape
   The definition of rape uses the pronouns “he” extensively with the accused while “she” is used for the complainant. Rape is defined according to “grievous sexual assault” as above with this additional wordage:
   4. (1) Subject to subsection (2), a person (“the accused”) commits the offence of rape when he has sexual intercourse with another person (“the complainant”)—
   (a) without the consent of the complainant where he knows that the complainant does not consent to the intercourse or he is reckless as to whether the complainant consents; or
   (b) with the consent of the complainant where the consent—
   (i) is extorted by threat or fear of bodily harm to the complainant or to another;
   (ii) is obtained by personating someone else;
   (iii) is obtained by false or fraudulent representations as to the nature of the intercourse; or
   (iv) is obtained by unlawfully detaining the complainant.
   (2) A person who commits the offence of rape is liable on conviction to imprisonment for life and any other punishment which may be imposed by law, except that if—
   (a) the complainant is under the age of twelve years;
   (b) the offence is committed by two or more persons acting in concert or with the assistance or in the presence, of a third person;
   (c) the offence is committed in particularly heinous circumstances;
   (d) the complainant was pregnant at the time of the offence and the accused knew that the complainant was pregnant; or
   (e) the accused has previously been convicted of the offence of rape,
   he shall be liable to imprisonment for the remainder of his natural life.
3. Quote 3 – Section 7 & 8: Double standard with pubescent sex
   7. (1) Where a male person has sexual intercourse with a female person who is not his wife with her consent and who has attained the age of fourteen years but has not yet attained the age of sixteen years he is guilty of an offence, and is liable on conviction to imprisonment for twelve years for a first offence and to imprisonment for fifteen years for a subsequent offence.
   8. (1) Where a female adult has sexual intercourse with a male person who is not her husband and who is under the age of sixteen years, she is guilty of an offence, whether or not the male person consented to the intercourse, and is liable on conviction to imprisonment for five years.
4. Quote 4 – Section 13 & 14: Buggery & Bestiality
   13. (1) A person who commits buggery is guilty of an offence and is liable on conviction to imprisonment—
   (a) if committed by an adult on a minor, for life;
   (b) if committed by an adult on another adult, for twenty-five years;
   (c) if committed by a minor, for five years.
   (2) In this section “buggery” means sexual intercourse per anum by a male person with a male person or by a male person with a female person.
   14. (1) A person who commits bestiality is guilty of an offence and is liable on conviction to imprisonment for twenty-five years.
   (2) In this section “bestiality” means sexual intercourse per anum or per vaginam by a male or female person with an animal.
5. Quote 5 – Section 27: Boys over the age of 12
   26. A person under the age of twelve years is deemed incapable of committing an offence under this Act.
6. Quote 6 – Section 30: Standard of Evidence
   30. (1) In proceedings in respect of an offence under this Act no evidence shall be adduced by or on behalf of the accused concerning the sexual activity of the complainant with any person other than the accused unless the Court on an application made by or on behalf of the accused, in the absence of the jury, thinks such evidence necessary for the fair trial of the accused.
   (2) Save as provided in subsection (1), no evidence of sexual reputation is admissible for the purpose of challenging or supporting the credibility of the complainant.

References

1. http://sta.uwi.edu/crgs/april2007/rhodareddock.asp
   Trinidad Express – Advancing the Cause of Women
2. http://www.trinidadexpress.com/woman-magazine/Advancing_the_cause_of_women-169005016.html
3. Sexual Offences Act of Trinidad & Tobago – Chapter 11:28 http://rgd.legalaffairs.gov.tt/laws2/alphabetical_list/lawspdfs/11.28.pdf

The Law is an Ass Series

The law is an Ass, and nowhere will one find a better example of this than discrimination written into the law. Because the voices representing men in Trinidad & Tobago are silent on the discrimination men experience daily. This series will look exclusively at discrimination against men, in the Laws of Trinidad & Tobago. We are not saying that discrimination against women don’t or never existed – but if you believe in “equality” of the sexes you must admit our societal norms are anti-male. If you don’t believe that men in Trinidad & Tobago are underprivileged – consider the following:

1. Men make up the overwhelming majority of the homeless. There are virtually no programs that deal specifically with homeless men. The lack of empathy is further reflected in the fact that reliable data on homeless men and women is hard to come by. Far worse an understanding and etiology or even solutions for homelessness in Trinidad & Tobago.
2. Men make up by far the majority of victims of violent crimes in Trinidad & Tobago and it would be ridiculous to have to quote a statistic on this fact. Yet we spend virtually no effort to arrest this. Most of our social programs and efforts might actually be contributing to the demise of men and by extension – wider society.
3. Life expectancy for men is only 67 years vs 74 years for women.
4. According to PAHO (2008), 746 men died of some form of cancer vs 671 women – 11% more than men. Prostate cancer killed 252 men vs breast cancer killing 155 women in the same period. Yet we have never seen very much effort in terms of public events, corporate sponsorship, screening, etc. for prostate cancer. Even the activities of the Trinidad & Tobago Cancer Society show almost no men focused activities, as they prepare to raise awareness with cervical cancer this year. Is it politically incorrect to promote awareness for men’s health?
5. Men face significant discrimination when they try to parent their children after divorce. Family court policies and feminist hate culture that has infiltrated the system are very prejudiced towards fathers and men who try to secure visitation, far less seek custody. Fathers are only seen as an ATM where feminist indoctrinated judges and magistrates apply the “you could wine, you could pay” philosophy toward men seeing fair treatment. At the same time the courts bend over backward to secure the best financial advantage for mothers no matter how incapable they are as parents. The flawed idea of “best interest of the child” which we will post about, is applied only to benefit the mother seeking financial reward from the system. We have obtained stories from fathers who have been denied visitation or even subjected to the worse kind of visitation procedures in order to suit resentful mothers seeking revenge.
6. Men don’t have the right to choose parenthood. Our feminist culture are quick to label men as “deadbeat dads”, but what about the women who have all the rights? Who can give up being a parent anytime without consequence, who can use her children to earn income from the state and children’s father. Men cannot opt out. Consent to have sex is not consent to be a parent. Many women have children by deliberately making their birth control ineffective without letting the father know. We continuously make excuses for her recklessness with the perpetual idea that women cannot be held accountable for their reproductive behaviors, and financially helping them is our only option. Our academic institutions refuse to measure the impact reproductive habits of women have had on the quality of life and the economy. The influence of female violence on boys growing up in certain socioeconomic classes must be a factor contributing to the high levels of antisocial behavior in our youths.
7. A significant number baby boys in Trinidad & Tobago are subjected to the inhumane practice of genital mutilation (circumcision). While a figure of <20% is quoted in various references, as this is a classification of international organizations monitoring genital mutilation, the figure for Trinidad & Tobago is not insignificant. The Children’s Protection Bill (2012) make it illegal to carry out any act of Female Genital Mutilation with a ten year jail sentence for offenders. The Act make no similar provisions protecting baby boys from this barbaric practice. There is no established science connecting male circumcision to any health benefit. This fact debunks the notion that feminism as an ideology is concerned with equality, as it was feminists who put together the Children’s Protection Bill of 2012.

The First Part

This is the first part in a series on Sexism in the Laws of Trinidad & Tobago. We will publish approximately 5 posts dealing with Sexual & Relationship type offences, touching only on marriage as it deals with violence and sexual issues excluding family law.

If one looks at sexual offenses reported and commented upon in the media, it is a very one sided affair. One gets the impression that only Men commit sexual acts. Almost all of stories reported in the media are stories about teenaged girls having sexual relations with males of varying ages. We get the feeling that lawmakers and stakeholders involved in the law think that women don’t commit acts of aggression against boys or men, and that there are no female sexual predators in Trinidad & Tobago. Is this assumption realistic? Or is it that it currently suits our political agenda? All these will be discussed. We will link new posts from this page as we publish them.

This website believes that ANY sexist laws in Trinidad & Tobago are unconstitutional, and illegal under the Constitution of Trinidad & Tobago Chapter 1 Part 1 Section 4 Sub-section b which states:

4.- It is hereby recognised and declared that in Trinidad and Tobago there have existed and shall continue to exist without discrimination by reason of race, origin, colour, religion or sex, the following fundamental human rights and freedoms, namely:-
b. the right of the individual to equality before the law and the protection of the law;

Posts in this Series (links to be updated):

1. Sexism in The Sexual Offences Act: Published 16 September 2014
2. Sexism in The Children’s Protection Bill
3. Sexism in the Domestic Violence Act

References:

1. Office of the Attorney General, The Constitution of Trinidad & Tobago http://www.ag.gov.tt/Portals/0/Documents/TT%20Constitution.pdf
2. Laws of Trinidad & Tobago – Domestic Violence Act 45:56 http://rgd.legalaffairs.gov.tt/laws2/alphabetical_list/lawspdfs/45.56.pdf
3. The Children’s Protection Bill of 2012 http://www.ttparliament.org/legislations/a2012-12.pdf
4. Sexual Offences Act of Trinidad & Tobago – Chapter 11:28 http://rgd.legalaffairs.gov.tt/laws2/alphabetical_list/lawspdfs/11.28.pdf

Have Vagina, Need $$$

More $$$ for having a vagina. The PM announced that she will be releasing a program that “is very close to her heart”. They will set up a plan to give single mothers $500 per month. When last have we heard of a program to help the marginalized men in our society? Like the 90%+ of men that make up the homeless, eating out of dumpsters. The last time this author recalled ‘help’ for men was when the previous PM, Patrick Manning in 2009 “corralled them out of view” when world dignitaries like the Queen Elizabeth, US President Obama and Hilary Clinton visited for the Summit of Americas and Commonwealth Heads of State conferences.

One of the most blatant ways to excuse sexism is when it is perceived to be for a good cause. One of the best ‘good causes’ in Trinidad and Tobago and ways to get money from the state and large corporations trying to be politically correct, is to come up with any project aimed at helping women. Even if it is a project that will cost more to manage than the total sum benefit to the recipients. All of these social programs by the government are riddled with scams and organized crime.

But, Vagina Sells and sells very well in Trinidad & Tobago. Yes we have a vagina and we needs your help. What could be more sexist? Virtually all of these government programs aimed at helping women and especially those aimed at helping mothers never have any accountability. Just like when extravagant sums are ordered for child support the recipient could easily spend those funds on anything she pleases. Just like divorce have become a feminist institution of social justice so that women could get their hands on property and money they never worked for.

Why is it we are only interested in women and especially, especially single mothers? Why not encourage more men to take over the responsibility of parenting? Give men breaks when they apply for custody. Engaged men who consent to parenting make better parents than mothers (future post). But men have no parental rights. Why not teach these single mothers about family planning? And why they should not get pregnant hoping that the dad will stick around. Or why they should not try to have babies with men with money. Maybe the Greeks were right and Hysteria (or the wandering uterus) is not a myth after all. However it gets you an income as and income backed by big business and big government with big guns – so pay up sucker!

References

1. http://www.guardian.co.tt/news/2014-09-07/poor-babies-get-support-year
2. http://www.trinidadexpress.com/news/PM-500-per-month-for-needy-mothers-274237941.html
3. http://www.forbes.com/2009/04/20/america-of-caribbean-opinions-contributors-trinidad.html