Friday, July 23, 2010

Punished for impersonating a human

An Arab worker in Israel convicted for telling a girlfriend he was actually Jewish.
In tune with the public, Kashur's judges assumed, rightly, that the woman would not have gotten into bed with Dudu were it not for the identity he invented. She also might not have gotten into bed with him if he had told her in vain that he was available, that he was younger than he really is or even that he is madly in love with her. But people are not prosecuted for that, certainly not on rape charges.

Now the respected judges have to be asked: If the man was really Dudu posing as Sabbar, a Jew pretending to be an Arab so he could sleep with an Arab woman, would he then be convicted of rape? And do the eminent judges understand the social and racist meaning of their florid verdict? Don't they realize that their verdict has the uncomfortable smell of racial purity, of "don't touch our daughters"? That it expresses the yearning of the extensive segments of society that would like to ban sexual relations between Arabs and Jews?

It was no coincidence that this verdict attracted the attention of foreign correspondents in Israel, temporary visitors who see every blemish. Yes, in German or Afrikaans this disgraceful verdict would have sounded much worse.

3 comments:

Saskboy said...

This would totally shock me, if I hadn't seen how easily racist people can be with a bit of training and apathy.

deBeauxOs said...

Let's just say that on principle, a man trying to get into a woman's pants shouldn't hide his HIV status, pretend that he's his twin brother, or deliberately lie about his ethnicity or marital status in countries where women can and have been killed for having sex with the wrong stranger.

However, if a man lies about his gender and has sex with an heterosexual man under the pretext that he's a women, that doesn't give his sex partner permission to kill him in a rage of "homosexual panic."

The criminal code in Canada allows for men and women who deliberately use fraudulous means and subterfuge to have sex with someone, to be charged for sexual assault, since there is an important legal issue regarding informed consent.

Cliff said...

Thinking about this a few days later, I absolutely see your point and even the writer of the Haaretz piece I'm linking to admits the guy is a liar and a lech - but the issue is the double standard that with the roles reversed no charges would have been filed and the nasty overtones of old south miscegenation law bigotry to the whole affair.

Recent Posts

Popular Posts