MCA-UMNO Press prostitutes are rampant promiscuity and a hypersexualized society.
To my traditionalist friend,
I think we need new language around the matter of love. I would welcome your help in crafting it.
You know how much the world has changed. Fifty years ago, marriage meant not just one man and one woman, but also a public ceremony, the exchange of vows, “till death do us part,” and children. It was the dominant — pretty much the only — paradigm for loving relationships in U.S. culture.
It is still your dominant paradigm. You continue to argue for the “sanctity of marriage,” the notion of “one man/one woman,” even the importance of mothers staying at home. You rail against rampant promiscuity and a hypersexualized society.
Here’s the problem. Fewer and fewer people are listening to you. They consider you irrelevant — a holdover from a obsolete past. In the not-too-distant future, they will stop listening altogether.
If your thinking were across-the-board terrible, this wouldn’t bother me. But I find it sad precisely because your values (quite apart from your specific arguments) have a great deal to contribute to this new landscape. Yet again, the landscape cannot hear you. That brings me back to new language.
As you know, I celebrate many of the changes of the past 50 years. I am glad that LGBTQ people feel freer to be who they are and love whom they love. I believe it is good that people in dead or violent marriages can escape them more readily. Overall, I think it is good that people can shape their life commitments according to their unique nature with less fear of disapproval or reprisal.
But beneath your current language I hear values that our society sorely lacks — and, I believe, needs. Beneath the talk of marriage is a passion for commitment. Beneath the concern with easy divorce is a deep love of faithfulness. Beneath the railing against promiscuity is anxiety of the damage wrought by physical intimacy without spiritual intimacy. Beneath the fear of commitment, which seems to be everywhere these days, is a cherishing of risk.
What if we stopped worrying about the forms that relationships can take — two-parent vs. single-parent families, children vs. no children, same-sex vs. heterosexual vs. polyamorous vs. whatever — and started talking up the values beneath the forms?
What if we embraced all people regardless of orientation or life circumstances, but promoted the value of commitment and intimacy and perseverance? Might it result in healthier, more resilient relationships, more stability for people in a world of disorienting change, happier children? Might it provide the kind of language that would allow you to join the general conversation in a way that you can be heard and taken seriously?
Is it possible that this– and not a particular form of commitment — is what God is aiming at? Is it worth exploring? Would you be willing to try?
JOCELINE TAN the prostitute licking UMNO Cones Why she Hate …
suarakeadilanmalaysia.wordpress.com/…/joceline-tan-the-prostitute-li…
THE MALAY CRONICLE: Dysfunctional Fame Whores : Debra …
themalay-chronicle.blogspot.com/…/dysfunctional-fame-whores-debr…14 Jun 2011 – functional Fame Whores : Debra Chong the prostute with big pussy & Malaysian Insider … Debra Chong also claimed “physical work has yet to start”. ….Read more ANOTHER SEASONED MOTHER FUCKER TRAINED IN HIS …
Rape is Rape.
Rape is rape, regardless of the relationship between the rapist and the victim. It can be a total stranger; someone you recognise by sight, but have never really communicated with; someone you know superficially, a neighbour or a colleague; a friend, a boy-friend or a former boyfriend; a live-in partner, or a former partner; someone you are married to or have been married to in the past.
Rape is a very personal and intimate traumatic experience. Our experiences of and reactions to rape may differ widely, and although there are many similarities in the way that we feel about being the victim of rape, regardless of the relationship between us and the rapist, there are differences between stranger and intimate rape, and in this section I am trying to describe and offer an understanding of some of the specific problems regarding marital rape (or rape by an intimate) as opposed to stranger rape.
Please note that in this page I refer to wives and husbands, however, it can be understood to refer to all rapes perpetrated by an intimate. Also, I am only looking at rape and sexual assault on women, since this is by far the most common situation, though rape and sexual abuse also occur too frequently in same-sex relationships.
THE MAIN DIFFERENCES BETWEEN STRANGER RAPE AND MARITAL RAPE
Stranger rape is usually a one-off, someone you don’t know, with whom you don’t share any experiences or history. When the assault happens, there can be no doubt as to what is happening: that it is Rape (though even in such situations the victim will often wonder what she has done to precipitate the assault and will blame herself). Inmarital rape the circumstances are very different. It is – quite apart from a physical and sexual violation – a betrayal of trust. Here is a person whom you thought you knew intimately, with whom you share a history, a home and quite often children. Here is a person whom you have made love to on a frequent basis often over many years, with whom you have shared your most intimate secrets and fears, and whom you believe to love you, want the best for you, who would never intentionally hurt you. Marital rape is so destructive because it betrays the fundamental basis of the marital relationship, because it questions every understanding you have not only of your partner and the marriage, but of yourself. You end up feeling betrayed, humiliated and, above all, very confused.
“When it is the person you have entrusted your life to who rapes you, it isn’t just physical or sexual assault, it is a betrayal of the very core of your marriage, of your person, of your trust.”
Also, while stranger rape is a sexual act of violence outside (as in: apart from) the victims normal relationships, marital rape has to be understood in the context of an abusive relationship, that is, in the context of emotional and possibly physical abuse.
One of the differences between stranger and intimate rape is that stranger rape will nearly always involve a certain degree of physical violence (one notable exception to this is rape involving the date rape drug) while a lot of cases of marital rape will involve coercion and only enough force to control the victim, known as ‘force-only’ rapes (see below).
Another problem victims of marital rape face is that such instances are rarely a one-off, but a repeated if not frequent occurance. This can be a huge issue to the victim, because she will feel as though she has somehow ‘asked for it’ by staying or putting herself in the situation where it can happen again. Also, once it has been tolerated on a number of occassions, she may question her right to then act upon it.
DIFFERENT TYPES OF RAPE
Marital rape is generally sub-divided into three categories: those rapes which involve a degree of violence, those that use enough force to control the victim, known as ‘force-only’ rapes, and sadistic rapes.
- Violent rape occurs, as the name suggests, when the abuser uses enough physical violence to cause injury to the victim, apart from any injuries due to the rape itself, ie injuries to the genital area or breasts. Examples would include the husband punching his wife or injuring her with a knife – the rape being part of a violent assault, or the violence being a part of the rape. Many abusers will also force their wives to submit to sexual acts after a physical assault, either to prove her forgiveness or to further intimidate and humiliate her – and if the wife should refuse such an act, even the threat of further violence (or a previous experience!) will soon ensure her compliance.
- ‘Force-only’ rape is usually understood to include only enough force used on the part of the abuser to control or hold his wife in position, eg holding down the victim by her arms or wrists to prevent her defending herself or escaping. This form of rape is common where there is a larger contrast between the physical size and strength of abuser and victim, or in abusive relationships where physical violence is infrequent or non-existent (insofar as one does not categorise sexual assault itself as a violent act). In most cases of ‘force-only’ rape, coercion plays a large part. The victim may also be so confused and numbed by constant emotional abuse, that she simply does not know how to act or react when sex is forced on her.
- Sadistic rape is sometimes also present. This tends to indicate that in addition to the rape itself, the victim is either forced to comply with or undergo deeds designed to further humiliate her. Examples of this would be the abuser/rapist urinating on the victim, acting out a fantasy of torturer, or using other object during a rape. Sadistic rape may or may not involve further violence. Some people consider buggery as a sadistic form of rape, since its effect on victim is often particularly humiliating.
It is difficult defining clear-cut lines between the different types of rape, since rape can involve any of the above or a combination of them. For instance, the rapist may use coercion tactics and enough force to control the victim initially, but then use increased violence if the victim struggles. Many victims of marital rape feel guilty for not having struggled more, or have been told that if they did not try to physically fight their abuser and thereby sustained injuries, that it is not ‘real rape’. This can be extremely distressing and add to the trauma already experienced. What has to be remembered is that when you are living with your abuser, you are often very finely tuned to him, employing numerous coping mechanisms to limit the damage to yourself: you may realise either consciously or subconsciously that if you struggle, he is likely to get violent or take his anger out on you in other ways.
“I tried to push him off me, so he grabbed both my arms and flung them above my head, held them there and continued … He held my arms by the wrists with one of his hands and held them so tight and with so much of his weight on them, that they really hurt and then started losing any sensation. When he finally let go I did not make the same mistake again …”
Other reasons a woman may not fight back are so as not to disturb children sleeping nearby, thereby risking them witnessing the rape; shock or confusion at what is happening which paralyses her; and real concern for her abuser, which results in her not wanting to do anything which may harm or injure her rapist even to the detrement of herself.
Research seems to indicate that in the context of an abusive relationship, the woman is most likely to be subjected to rape towards the end of the relationship, or after she has left, though several women have reported that their boyfriends raped them at the very beginning of their relationship – which is reminiscent of the ancient custom of capturing and raping women to be able to claim them as wives. It would appear that where rape starts in an established relationship, that rape is often used by an abuser when other control tactics, such as isolation or emotional abuse are no longer sufficient to maintain his power and hold over her, or to punish her for either leaving or trying to leave. Only too often, this works.
| Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the former chief of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), has been detained by French police as part of an investigation into a suspected prostitution ring.
A prosecutor on Tuesday said Strauss-Kahn is being questioned in the northern French city of Lille as a suspect over alleged cross-border prostitution ring in France and neighbouring Belgium that has implicated police and other officials. Investigators are seeking to discover if prostitutes were paid using corporate funds from a large French construction company. Police have questioned prostitutes who said they had sex with Strauss-Kahn during 2010 and 2011 at a luxury hotel in Paris, a restaurant in the French capital and also in Washington DC. Al Jazeera’s Emma Hayward, reporting from Paris, said that police are looking into claims that the former IMF chief helped bring prostitutes to sex parties that he took part in. “In his defence, he did not know these women were being paid for sex. Here in France it is not illegal to sleep with a prostitute, but it is illegal to procure them,” she said. “So it will be investigated whether he encouraged others to arrange prostitutes to attend these parties.” Prostitutes in sex parties
Two men with ties to Strauss-Kahn have been put under preliminary investigation in France on charges including organising a prostitution ring and misuse of corporate funds. Strauss-Kahn’s name surfaced in the investigation last fall and his lawyer has asked that Strauss-Kahn be allowed to tell his side of the story. One of Strauss-Kahn’s lawyers has said that the former French presidential hopeful did not know that the women at parties he attended were prostitutes. “He could easily not have known, because as you can imagine, at these kinds of parties you’re not always dressed, and I challenge you to distinguish a naked prostitute from any other naked woman,” Henri Leclerc told French radio Europe 1 in December. French newspapers have dubbed the investigation “The Carlton Affair” after the name of the expensive Lille hotel where some of the meetings took place. Previous accusations This is Strauss-Kahn’s latest run-in with police over alleged sexual misconduct. He resigned from the IMF in May 2011 when he was charged with raping a New York hotel maid. New York prosecutors dropped the case against him in August because the woman had undercut her credibility by lying about her background and changing her account of her actions right after the alleged attack. She says she was truthful about the encounter and is pursuing her claims in a lawsuit. The scandal effectively ended his hopes for the French presidency. In a separate case in October 2011, French prosecutors refused to pursue an allegation by a young French writer of attempted rape by Strauss-Kahn. The Paris prosecutor’s office dropped the investigation into writer Tristane Banon’s, claim that Strauss-Kahn tried to rape her during a 2003 interview for a book the then-23-year-old was writing, saying they could not send him to trial because it happened too long ago. |
Perhaps the most despicable matter that has come out of the great debate between DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng and MCA president Chua Soi Lek on Saturday 18 February 2012 is the contemptible lie by a mercenary spin writer of a mainstream English daily that Guan Eng demanded another debate presumably to repair damaged over his scarred image for losing to Soi Lek.
The claim by such a contemptuous writer is certainly deliberately made to run down Guan Eng and present him in bad light among the general public, since it has been known, and even agreed to by Soi Lek a few days prior to the great debate, that Guan Eng wanted a second round to be held for the benefit of the non-Mandarin speaking public since the first debate was in Mandarin.
Furthermore, the paper this mercenary writer writes for has acknowledged and published a brief admission of its error in reporting a statement attributed to Guan Eng that claimed he said “We do not agree the prime minister must always be a Malay because we want the people to decide.” Yet, he repeated the erroneous statement in his comment, either deliberately to perpetually spread the lie, or is an ignorant fool who doesn’t know what is really happening.
Yet when the shoe is on the other foot
The National Union of Journalists (NUJ) has expressed indignation at DAP national election publicity bureau chief Hew Kuan Yau for likening journalists to prostitutes, and demanded that he apologise for the derogatory comment.
Although, I understand the NUJ feeling on the matter, I cannot help but have to agree with Hew’s statement that they are journalists who will sell their principles and souls for material gains. The above mercenary spin writer is a good example.
Many people will recall that back in the mid-1990s, two identical comments on the performance of a company were published in two English dailies under two different by-lines, i.e. names of different writers. It seemed that both established business editors were “selling” their bylines to the company who had assigned a professional ghost writer to churn out the comment, and paid the business editors for using their names in the comment to enhance its value and newsworthiness.
I believe such practices may still be common. If such cases are not press prostitution, what is?
So press prostitution does exist along with …
A few years ago, I wrote a comment on the types of journalists we have, and I have updated it here as I think what I said then is still relevant and significant.
I have worked as a journalist and editor in the mainstream news media since 1975, in the now defunct National Echo, the New Straits Times, the Malay Mail, The Sun, and The Star, and had also served as the NUJ secretary-general in the late 1970s and early 1980s.
Throughout the 35 years in the newspaper industry, I have worked with all sorts of editors and journalists, and have identified five types of journalists in the media fraternity.
First, there are the EEs — Editorial Eunuchs, who take orders from their political emperors, and write and spin stories to promote the emperor’s cause. These political appointees are usually in top and senior positions, not because they are good journalists or great writers, but because of their connection to powerful political godfathers. They are first-class cronies. Many are ghost writers for their political masters. Some are made Datuks or given various civil awards, even at relatively young age. Several have become millionaires.
Secondly, there are the PPs — Press Prostitutes, who have sold their souls and principles to gain favours and privileges from their political and/or business clients. They will write what pleases their political masters. The amount of hampers and gifts they receive during festive seasons is perhaps a good indication of their rising status in their media organization. (Perhaps the Malaysia Anti-Corruption Commission should consider looking at this practice of giving editors hampers, gifts and big fat ang pows during festive seasons).
Thirdly, there are the MMs — Media Marionettes, the puppets who have no brains but are used and abused by opportunists to advance their own political or business agenda. The manipulative opportunists usually feed such journalists with twisted information and deceive these gullible writers to propagate their schemes of things. Our education system has produced many such gullible, unthinking, uncritical, and dumb people; and not a few are found in the media organizations.
Fourth, there are the JJs — Junket Journalists, those who will write anything for the sponsors of their overseas trips. Let me illustrate how some big corporate companies use such overseas junkets to bribe editors and journalists to do their biding. Company A has a product which an NGO considers harmful to the people. The NGO keeps issuing press statements on its research on the harmful product and the newspapers keep publishing the statements. Company A wants to put a stop to such bad publicity of its product. So, it organized a week-long trip for senior editors to visit the product’s factory in Japan. Everything was paid for and provided for, including pocket money for shopping. The editors had a thoroughly good time. On their return, they repaid their wonderful host by stopping all negative reports on its product.
Finally, there are the WWs — Wise Writers, the rare breed who know how to survive through the controlled press situation and get their honest views into print without rousing the suspicion of their media bosses, who are usually political cronies. There are very few such honest writers with integrity and principles, and they are usually not in positions of power. Many of them, like yours truly, retire poor.
Yes, the honest ones retire poor
It was the English author Edward Bulwer-Lytton who coined the famous metonymic adage “The pen is mightier than the sword” in 1839 for his play Richelieu; Or the Conspiracy.
And it was the 18th Century French Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte who confirmed the truth of Edward Bulwer-Lytton’s figure of speech with this profound statement: “I fear the newspapers more than a hundred thousand bayonets.”
We can now understand why the ruling Barisan Nasional federal government is getting jittery, fidgety and paranoid over the increasingly popular news portals in cyberspace published by the various independent-minded journalists and bloggers, and also the component parties of the alternative coalition Pakatan Rakyat.
The massive swing of votes to the alternation alliance during the political tsunami of March 2008 is due in no small measure to the power of the cyber media.
The NUJ plans to hold an EGM on its so-called Code of Ethics for Journalists. I suggest that it should consider asking all its members to pledge not to accept any gifts, money or hampers from any politicians or businessmen, but surrender them to their companies for distribution to the poor and needy in the community.
The NUJ immediate past president Hatta Wahari is a good example of a true committed journalist who made a bold and brave stand in defence of press freedom, and lost his job in the process. It has been a long time since any leader of the NUJ has stuck his or her neck out to speak out against the abuse and exploitation of the media, especially in the mainstream newspapers.
Hatta certainly deserves our accolade and support for speaking out, without fear or favour, on the very fundamental matter of press freedom, despite the very real risk of jeopardizing his career.
An outspoken and crusading journalist is usually a marked person, and a file will be opened to record every little mistake he makes, to build a case against him. There will be trumped-up charges like sexual harassment, etc to get rid of any journalist who dares to stand up and speak out against abuses in his newspaper company.
So, are there press prostitutes among our journalists?
- Posted in: Uncategorized
