She said: "Religious freedom" no justification for sexually assaulting children
By Kyra Hoggan
The first half of this he-said/she-said debate can be found in Rob Leggett’s Right to the Point column, in the Op/Ed page of the Castlegar Source.
Rob and I have had some difficulty, lately, in finding an issue on which we passionately disagree. He solved that problem, however, with his most recent column on Winston Blackmore (leader of polygamist community Bountiful).
Due respect, Rob …what a load of bunk.
First, let me take exception to your reference to “female circumcision”. What a vile term – it’s “female genital mutilation”, thank you very much – and using euphemisms to paint it in a less horrific light is like calling a brutal rape “non-consensual sex”. It belittles the victim’s experience, while legitimizing the crime – and female genital mutilation is against the law in the vast majority of First World countries – with ample justification.
“Blind eye”, my foot.
Male circumcision in no way impairs a man’s ability to have or enjoy sex, nor yet poses lifelong health risks beyond those inherent in the procedure itself.
Female genital mutilation, on the other hand, first removes the labia and clitoris to diminish a woman’s sexual pleasure (the thought being that this will induce more chaste behaviour). It also involves sewing the vaginal walls together, leaving only a small hole for urination. Women are thus torn to shreds (for the second time) when they become sexually active and often find the sex act extremely painful for the rest of their lives. Furthermore, the mutilation can cause internal tearing between the bowel and vaginal walls during childbirth (the baby’s natural form of egress being destroyed), called “fistulas”, through which fecal matter and urine leak uncontrollably, and the women – the VICTIMS of this filthy practice – end up outcasts in their own communities because of the embarrassing odours and discharge that result. It’s considered shameful – on her part. How fundamentally twisted and repugnant is that? They often are unable to walk, move or sleep properly, become victims of internal infection, and likely will die young.
The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics has even declared an International Day of Zero Tolerance of Female Genital Mutilation. As they specify on their website, “In 2008, the United Nations released a joint statement supporting the elimination of female genital mutilation and calling for its eradication within a generation. Ten agencies were in support of this statement including UNIFEM, UNICEF, UNFPA, UNECA and UNHCHR, UNESCO, UNAIDS, OHCRH and WHO.”
This, to you, is acceptable religious practice?
Even publishing the words “female circumcision” offends me to my core, no matter who penned them.
It’s hateful and goes infinitely beyond religious freedom, landing squarely in the realm of child abuse, subjugation, and codified assault – just like Bountiful.
I think most modern-day Canadians can agree that what happens in the bedroom between consenting adults is no one’s business but the participants’.
But that’s not what polygamy is about, is it?
If it was only women over the age of 18 choosing to be one of many bits of chattel for some old lech with an over-developed sense of entitlement, I think we could all accept that – no matter how distasteful we found it.
But the practice of polygamy goes far beyond the taking of multiple wives – this has been proven time and again, in every community the world over that engages in the practice. Just ask the United Nations – they have the guts to oppose polygamy, unlike Canada.
Little girls are brainwashed from birth to accept their subservient position within the community – look up the scientific foundations of brainwashing and, to the best of my understanding, you’ll find few principals that are not applied in Bountiful. Girls are kept away from the larger society and given limited education, so even those few who can break free of their programming are utterly unable to be self-sufficient outside the confines of Bountiful itself. Worst of all, they’re married off long before they reach an age and maturity sufficient to allow them to decide this is not, after all, the life they would choose for themselves – at which point, they’re held hostage by the fact they’ve already borne children – more effectively chaining them to the community than would a gun to the head.
Using the love of a mother for her children as shackles to enslave her – it makes my stomach hurt.
Then-Attorney General Wally Oppal told me, a year ago, that it was almost impossible to charge the perpetrators with child sexual assault because the girls themselves would lie about their ages and familial affiliations (who their husbands and children were), being made complicit in their own abuse by a lifetime of coercion and brainwashing. Further, because so many of the children of Bountiful are born outside the constraints of regular Canadian society, gathering accurate information about their dates of birth and parentage is almost impossible – so good luck proving underage marriage, no matter how certain we are it’s taking place.
In Canada, the age of sexual consent is higher when the adult in question is in a position of trust, power and authority – a cop, a priest, a community leader – because we recognize that coercion comes in many forms – as does helplessness. Even Oppal couldn’t explain to me why Blackmore is apparently exempt from this law, as both the religious and political (and often legal) final authority of every woman and child within that compound.
You speak of Blackmore’s religious freedoms – what about the freedom of those little girls, Rob? For that matter, what about their basic human rights, to grow up free of sexual assault, to make choices about their own bodies, and marital status, and child-bearing, and …?
We have all these laws – why can none of them protect these girls? And if they can’t, why the hell aren’t we writing new laws?
The good men of Bountiful reject the values of the country in which they reside – but they have no problem accepting our money; for funding their own schools; for welfare … so I’m not just having to live beside this abomination (to use one of their favourite words), I also have to bankroll it with my tax dollars?
And you think that’s Blackmore’s right?
Polygamy isn’t about religion, Rob. It’s a blueprint for sexually assaulting female children, then locking them into roles of life-long servitude and subjugation.
If a Satanist decided to kill babies in service of his “religious freedoms”, we’d nail the freak to the nearest wall. Explain to me how Blackmore is any different? If anything, I’d say he’s worse, not only victimizing these girls and women, but also forcing them to assist, to be complicit, in their own victimization.
We accept, as a society, that some actions are not to be tolerated, regardless the belief system driving them (think 9-11). Why in God’s name are we tolerating this?
Thursday night, at 6:15, will see the Take Back the Night march here in Castlegar, beginning in the Canadian Tire parking lot. I can’t speak to other marchers’ motivations – but I can tell you that I’ll be there, marching in protest on behalf of the little girls of Bountiful.
Hope to see you there, Rob.
Comments