In India, where politicians are out trying to make themselves popular, one guy said a surprising thing.
In a bizarre and grotesque statement, the state Samajwadi Party (SP) chief Abu Azmi said women who were raped should also be punished. The statement came after this reporter questioned Azmi about SP chief Mulayam Singh Yadav’s comments on rape.
Yadav had, at a rally in UP, said that the death sentence, as punishment, for rape was too harsh. “Ladkon se aisi galtiyan ho jati hain, to iska matlab yeh to nahi ki unhe phaansi de di jaaye (Boys make mistakes, but this doesn’t mean you hang them),” he told the gathering.
When this reporter asked for Azmi’s comments on his chief’s statements, he replied that rape was punishable by death in Islam. “Rape is punishable by hanging in Islam. But here, nothing happens to women, only to men. Even the woman is guilty.”
Let’s apply that across the board. Murder? Punish the killer and the corpse. Robbery? Punish the robber and the person robbed. Assault? Punish both of them.
Or maybe not. But then why do that in rape cases?
He further added, “In India, if you have sex with a person with consent, it’s fine. But if that same person complains, it’s a problem. Nowadays, we see a lot of such cases. Girls complain when someone touches them, and even when someone doesn’t touch them. It becomes a problem then, and the man’s honour is ruined in this. If rape happens with or without consent, it should be punished as prescribed in Islam.”
Yes, that’s right. That’s exactly right. If you have sex with a person with consent, it’s fine. But if that same person complains, it’s a problem. That’s how rape is defined. If you have sex with a person with consent, it’s sex. It’s fine. Sex with consent is fine. See how that works? If, on the other hand, the person “complains” i.e. says there was no consent – then that’s rape. That’s what that word means. It’s not fine to have sex with someone who does not consent. So the rest of that paragraph is all nonsense. There’s no such thing as rape with or without consent – it’s rape only if it’s without consent.
But it’s all right; he explained.
When asked for a solution to the problem of rapes, Azmi had this to say: “Solution is this: any woman if, whether married or unmarried, goes along with a man, with or without her consent, should be hanged. Both should be hanged. It shouldn’t be allowed even if a woman goes by consent.”
Oh. People who have sex should be hanged. Hmmm…I’m not sure Abu Amzi has thought this through.
But seriously – it actually just sounds like some guy thinking about women being able to charge someone with rape and getting all hot under the collar about it, as some guys do. When in doubt, call for women to be punished or killed.
I think something is being lost in translation here. The mention of ‘married or unmarried’ kind of implies to me that he is condemning the woman for having sex with a person who is not her husband (you know, her owner) regardless of whether she consents.
Why would he be doing that? The subject is rape, not non-marital sex.
No, this is not a case of lost in translation This fellow has made similar comments on the Delhi gang rape, too:
– http://www.samachar.com/Women-should-not-venture-out-with-males-who-are-not-kin-Azmi-nbivM7eaaie.html
While that might be in play I think this is more of an indication that his viewing of issues of sex and rape through the lens of his religious beliefs renders him incapable of differentiating between sex and rape. They are one and the same to him, hence his “If rape happens with or without consent” remark. At least outside of marriage at any rate though he may not even see the latter as possible in that situation.
What an idiot!
Why not force the men to stay indoors and only them out when wearing handcuffs and accompanied a by at least TWO female relatives?
To him, rape is a crime against a man who owns a girl/worman (i.e. her father or husband). When he says rape with or without consent, he means with or without consent of the woman. The woman’s consent is irrelevant to the crime. If she consented to the rape (i.e. sex without her owner’s permission, with someone other than her owner), she is guilty, if she didn’t consent, she’s still guilty because of her negligence (being somewhere that she was vulnerable or accessible to another man). In either case, she must be killed to redeem her owner’s “honour”.
@5 Because men are people, women are chattel.