Attack of the 5-foot woman

She had it coming?

A heart-breakingly innocent account of domestic violence was in the news after a 7-year-old girl’s testimony was used in an attempted murder case.

“I tried to get my dad’s hand off of my mother,” she said. “I got on the bed and screamed, ‘Stop it,’“ said the 7-year-old in her videotaped interview.

“Then my mother ran away and my dad took a knife out of his pocket.”

“I was scared. . . He was putting it (knife) on my mom. I said stop, don’t fight.”

“I don’t really want to talk about it. I won’t sleep in night,” she said.

The girl, who is not being identified, was injured in the attack. “I don’t know how I got cut. . . Mom went down on (the) floor - something quick happened.”

The jury is now deliberating on whether or not the man intended to kill his estranged wife, who had recently filed for divorce.

The defence is claiming the man’s wife repeatedly “charged” and “punched” him like “a mad animal” while he was holding the knife.

Does that remind anyone else of the Cell Block Tango lyrics; “Then he ran into my knife. He ran into my knife ten times.”?

The defence is doing what lawyers often do in cases like this, trying to paint the victim as a harlot. “She told him his daughter wasn’t his!” “She’s seeing another man!” “She wants support from him but has $70,000 in the bank with her new man!”        

As though any of that is justification for pulling out a knife. 

I’m glad the woman got to the hospital before she died but I'm haunted by that young girl's words and what affect all this will have on her.

Obviously misogyny is profitable

Once upon a time, I accidentally went one of the most misogynistic movies ever committed to celluloid. That repulsive, sexist, racist film was called Crank.

Imagine my joy at finding myself expected to laugh at the public rape scene (the victim... oh sorry girlfriend, decides she’s up for it part way through).

Or finding the “bad guy’s” (were there any good guys?) balcony decorated with swimsuit models in plastic bubbles. Then when the fight breaks out the swimsuit models can’t get out and several get killed in the crossfire.

Or finding that Chelios’ mission seems to center around killing every minority group in LA.

Raw awesomeness.

The only thing in that movie that was remotely enjoyable, from my feminist perspective, was watching the main character fall to his death from a helicopter at the end.

Well, didn’t the bastard live.     

Of course, the only thing that can bring me more joy than my initial viewing of Crank is learning that they’ve made a sequel.

It’s being released this spring, and if the trailer is any indication it promises to deliver the same level or cartoon-like violence partnered with caveman sexism.

I’d love to believe that it’ll be a total box office flop, but I don’t think we’ll be that lucky.

Can’t hardly wait.

The celebrity face of domestic violence?

Despite the recent coverage of financial hardship leading to more cases of domestic violence, this recent case illustrates how women of all income levels are vulnerable to abuse at the hands of their partner.

Most victims of domestic violence don’t have their names published in newspapers and magazines but, because she’s a pop-star, Rihanna has become the very public poster woman for domestic violence.

If found guilty, maybe Chris Brown (the alleged attacker) should be the celebrity face of domestic violence rather than Rihanna.

If any good can come from this, hopefully she can be an inspiration to other women to call the police rather than suffer in silence.

It's Super Hymen to the rescue!

I saw ‘Taken’ over the weekend, the action packed movie where Liam Neeson’s daughter is kidnapped. While the retired spy was tearing down Paris looking for her, there were some very interesting undertones catching my attention.

Spoiler Alert - If you haven’t seen the movie yet, you may not want to read this until after you’ve gone to the theatre.

Let me start by saying all of this was incredibly subtle. For a film that handles such a heavy topic as human sex trafficking, it manages to be exciting without being gratuitous.

But I was uncomfortable with how the 17-year-old daughter’s virginity is such a prominent factor in her surviving being kidnapped by the sex trafficking ring.

The hussy friend who was not a virgin end up sold to a brothel, jacked up on drugs, violated and dead from choking on her own vomit within two days of disappearing.

Neeson’s daughter’s “purity” is “certified” by the sex traffickers - despite the girl being a horseback rider and horseback riding being a very hymen unfriendly pastime.

Thanks to her purity, the girl is spared the brothel and instead sent to be sold at auction to the highest bidder.

This gives Neeson time to run around torturing and killing people to save her and her virginity.

To be fair to the story, it makes sense that Neeson’s character has to find the friend dead to excuse the body count that follows. There has to be something that saves his daughter from the same fate, I guess her virginity is the only thing that would make sense.

But it’s all just a little too purity ball-ish. It reminded me of those creepy religious celebrations in the States where young daughters pledge their virginity to their fathers until they are married, and fathers pledge to protect their daughter’s purity.

An entire ball around Dad’s ownership of young girls’ sexuality is really creepy. It’s also feeding these young girls the myth that their entire worth is based on them not having sex.

That ideology should be long dead by now.

Years ago when I was visiting a friend I hadn’t seen in a long time, her mother asked me if I was “still a good girl”. I said “Ya, I guess” and started telling her about my grades, after-school activities and volunteering. “No, no,” she clarified. “Are you still a virgin?”

I hadn’t realized that being a “good girl” was as easy as keeping your legs closed.

Facing justice

A sexual assault victim, who could be forced to remove her niqab while testifying against her assailant, has become the centre of an intense debate about religion and the law.

While I’m no fan of the head scarf that covers everything but a woman’s eyes, I don’t have to wear one and I don’t.

What these things always come down to is personal choice, and this woman chooses to wear a niqab for modesty and honour. That’s her call and it’s not right to make her take it off to literally “face” the accused in court.

Some people agree with me on that and some don’t, but what we think really shouldn’t matter. People arrive in court dressed however they want (especially if they’ve ignored the advice of their lawyer). If she wants to wear the niqab she should be able to, I don’t see why anyone else gets a say.

A 1984 study found that one in four Canadian women will be sexually assaulted during her lifetime. The majority of those sexual assaults won’t be reported. According to Statistics Canada, only 6 per cent of all sexual assaults are reported to police.

Exact statistics aren't kept in Canada but of the sexual assaults reported, very few cases will make it to court, those that do make it to the courtroom have a very slim chance of resulting in a conviction.

I can’t imagine how frustrating it must be to so many women who fight for their day in court, re-live the traumatic event while testifying on the stand, and then still see their assailant get away with it.

When the system fails so many women, I don’t know how the court can possibly claim that ‘assessing her demeanour was of “critical importance”’.

Maybe if everyone testified nude, they could better assess our demeanour.