Insult to Injury

Philly.com
That's a link to an absolutely outrageous story wherein a judge determined that a prostitute was not raped by 4 men, but was the victim of "theft of services." The judge--a woman!--said "she consented and didn't get paid. I thought it was a robbery." Riiight. Except she consented to Guy #1, not his three buddies who showed up and had sex with her at gunpoint. In perhaps a small nod to human decency, Guy #5 declined to join the "party" when he determined why the victim was crying, and then helped her to get dressed and leave.

I'm speechless. Speechless. First, that a sexual assault could be treated so cavalierly by the justice system in 2007. Proof positive that we are still in the dark days where rape is the one crime where the victim is not immediately presumed by all to indeed be a victim. Secondly, that somehow being a prostitute entitles all men--any men--at any time to have sex with you, with or without your consent. Hellooo? A man can indeed rape his wife and a man can indeed rape a prostitute. To declare otherwise removes the personhood of the woman involved.

I can't write very articulately on this at the moment because I'm so stunned. All I can say is that "theft of services" is a cruel joke on someone (yes, even a hooker) who had something far more fundamental and irretrievable stolen than the judge in this case cares to ponder.