The figures[13] leave no room for doubt about judicial leniency regarding sex crimes. In 2008, 11,877 cases of sex violations (rape, exhibitionism, procurement, harassment, moral delinquency in relation to minors, solicitation) passed through the judicial system, including 1,684 rapes. This is less than in 2005 (which saw 13,037 cases of sex violations and 1,802 cases of rape), which leads us to ask: Objectively speaking, were there fewer sex crimes or fewer prosecutions? The average sentence for rape in 2008 was eight years in prison which in real terms is about four with remission of sentence.
Over 60 percent of the sentences handed down were for less than ten years (divide by two for remission of sentence). Fifty rapists only got a few months and, note well, 264 rapists were let off with parole, which effectively means they went unpunished. Only 38 were sentenced to more than twenty years and just 4 were handed life sentences. Autres temps, autres moeurs [other times, other ways –Tr.]: let us recall that at the beginning of the twentieth century, a rapist risked losing his head. And yet, women did not have the right to vote....
* * *
So rape is not punished in France like the crime it is. It is true that the Inmate Mental Health Centre in Lyon claims that ‘only ten percent of condemned rapists become repeat offenders’. But this figure with which the system rests satisfied is still too high. The Inmate Mental Health Centre also affirms that the case of a rapist previously convicted and then freed, who goes on to kill his victim in a second rape, does not occur more than twice a year in France, and that cases of rapist-murderers who become repeat offenders (that is, after having been set free, like the murderer of jogger Nelly Crémel in 2010[14]) ‘only occurs once every five years’. So things aren’t so bad, are they? In other words, they are minimising and excusing the fact that a rapist (torturer or killer) may be released to continue his predations. The judicial system only practices its ideology of the Rights of Man in one direction: the rights of victims and future victims count for less than those of their murderers. This reinforces the suspicion that our judiciary and penitentiary systems have gone badly astray, becoming a social service for the benefit of criminals, aimed at ‘reintegrating’ them into society. It is no longer an instrument of punishment, intended to dissuade by example.
This permissiveness, this softness toward rapists, including torturers and murderers, raises a lot of questions. Oddly, the feminisation of the justice system has resulted in greater leniency toward rapists than in the days when the magistrates were all men. I have no explanation of this paradox except perhaps a maternal complex, an understated fascination on the part of women with the rapists’ virility. A man is perhaps much less apt to pardon one of his fellows (and this is exemplified in the prison social system, particularly in the treatment of ‘snitches’) who commits rape than a woman who tries to ‘understand’ the rapist, which is to more or less to excuse him. Let us mention the staggering and scandalous case of the woman accomplice of the child rapist-torturer Marc Dutroux, freed by the Belgian justice system for ‘good behaviour’ in 2011 after just a few years in prison. Let us recall that this woman allowed two little girls, who were being regularly raped by her husband, to die of starvation in her basement. Psychopathological explanations regarding the behaviour of certain judges may be in order.[15]
* * *
The abolition of the death penalty lowered the whole scale of punishment (to prison sentences and fines) and thus encouraged impunity and crime — all the more so in that mass immigration was simultaneously causing all kinds of criminality to soar. Ought the death penalty to be reestablished, particularly for the rape of minors, or rape accompanied by torture or murder? It is a delicate question. To answer it, I shall stick to the principles of Roman law, positive and not subjective, so different from our current concept of ‘human rights’, but at bottom truly humanist: non hominem judicat sed criminem suum.[16] One judges not the man but his crime.
To pronounce judgement on a man is not to judge him as a person, but to punish the crime while protecting society by making an example of him. In this conception, judgement should not have any moral dimension, but be simply practical; one who has committed such-and-such an act is made incapable of harming anyone, both so that he does not commit it ever again and to dissuade others from doing so. For the best form of prevention is the threat of pitiless repression, much more effective than moral ‘education’ (which, beginning from some point before the onset of puberty, is impossible in any case). This is why, in regard to sex criminals and especially rapist-murderers, we must at least reconsider the guillotine or, at the very least, a literal life sentence without possibility of release.
Michela Marzano,[17] a professor of philosophy at the Paris Descartes University, denounces the ‘return to machismo’ involved in the increase in violence directed at women. But like many intellectuals, she is fantasising and failing to see reality. She does not explain the true cause: the behaviour of increasingly numerous young Muslim men.
The Explosion in Sexual Violence by Minors
Rape represents three-quarters of crimes committed by those under the age of eighteen. For those under thirteen — you have read correctly — more than half of those who come before the justice system are accused of sex-related acts. A thousand young adolescents are involved each year in cases of sexual aggression or rape, a figure which has risen by 50 percent in the past ten years. The courts are overwhelmed. And the perpetrators remain unpunished because the legal punishment of minors is hardly ever permitted anymore. 60 percent of sexual misdemeanors by minors involve those between 13–15 years old, 17 percent involve those under 13, and 23 percent those aged between 16–18.[18]
Teachers, doctors, judges and others are at a loss for explanations. They speak of a ‘complete loss of norms’, of ‘emotional deprivation’ (meaningless jargon), of an ‘abdication of parental responsibility’. Since the prisons are full and houses of detention have unfortunately been abolished — the one at Belle-Île-en-Mer is falling into ruin — and have been replaced by a small number of ineffective substitutes, they are trying mandatory medical monitoring (which is a joke), group therapies, legal warnings and other ineffective nonsense.
Of course, as in many other areas, no one dares to point out the true causes of this massive increase in sex crimes and rape among minors. The straitjacket of official ideology forbids us from curing the evil. But the causes can be uncovered by anybody with common sense, no Nobel Prize required: the collapse of the stable family, the crumbling of discipline and educational norms, the disaster that is national education, the rapid mass barbarisation of ignorant minors, coeducation from the earliest years (a disaster for adolescents) and also, obviously, universal access to Internet pornography. This last plays the role of a destabilising stimulant among the young, all the stronger in that many scenes are incitements to rape.
Yet besides these explanations, there is one principal cause which is absolutely taboo to mention, but which we must take note of: most of these rapes and sex crimes are committed by minors of immigrant background, principally Black African. They reproduce in France the behaviour that can be observed in their land of origin and do even more intensely here because (an aggravating circumstance) punishments in France are negligible in their eyes. To this may be added something I mentioned in my old book, The Colonisation of Europe,[19] namely the vengeful and racist spirit of predation against young White victims of gang rape, a phenomenon that our distinguished sociologists obviously have never dared touch upon.
One revealing aspect of these matters is the young age of the perpetrators of sex crimes. This corresponds to the earlier onset of puberty in Africans, a fact well-known to doctors, especially sexologists, but apparently unknown to our intellectuals.[20] In France, before the 1980s, when immigration had not taken on the magnitude that it now has, did we witness this soaring number of sex crimes and rapes by minors? Of course not. The same could be said of other types of cri
me as well. Go make this common sense remark to a journalist or ‘educator’ — he will take you for an ideological criminal. But you will still be right.
Violence and Sexism at School
Up until the 1980s, ‘sexism’ in school — that is, the persecution of girls by boys — did not occur and would have seemed unthinkable in our society. But since mass immigration (largely African and Arab-Muslim) has unfolded across France, the situation has changed. Of course, no one dares to publicly recognise the politically-incorrect truth that it is mostly Arab-Muslim and Black pupils who harass the girls, the latter being mostly native French. Female teachers are also regularly victims of these aggressions as well. A girl in a skirt or tightly-fitting trousers, or one who flirts, is necessarily a ‘whore’ — hence a tendency for girls to wear clothes that mask their figures. Sexist violence has even incited some young girls to convert to Islam and go about veiled.
On 29 November 2009, a seminar (one of the series of Créteil Wednesdays) brought school nurses and teachers together at Maisons-Alfort. As you can imagine, they were nearly all Left-wing and favourable towards the dominant ideology. But they could not keep from weeping over the fact that teachers as well as pupils were increasingly the victims of sexist violence, often physical violence that leaves permanent injuries. The origin of the perpetrators was, of course, never made explicit — thanks to the same old fear of being considered ‘racist’ — but everyone knew perfectly well who was responsible.[21] In the ‘sensitive zones’[22] (wooden jargon), half of the female teachers are on anti-depressants. Their bosses take no action against their aggressors. According to the participants in this seminar, ‘sexism is omnipresent’ in the schools of the Paris suburbs. A male teacher from Val-de-Marne explains: ‘The girls wear pants or dress like burlap sacks; they are not able to show any femininity for fear of being thought badly of.’ But of course, no one would dare to mention the real solutions to these evils: a return to strict discipline, stratification according to ability with rigid principles of selection, abolition of co-education, radical re-evaluative analysis of immigration and demographics, an end to naturalisation, and an end to educating foreigners. People lament the symptoms of the evil and propose only ridiculous cures (‘citizenship courses’) without daring to point to the real causes.
But at the same time, these hoodlum students — beset with hypocritical Islamic prudery and ancestral misogyny — wallow in pornography and trade fake-nude photos of their female classmates on their portable computers, regularly carry out individual or gang rapes, or forcibly fondle girls who are too terrified to complain or resist. A teacher of classical literature (they still exist, the poor bastards) expressed regret, in the course of the above-mentioned seminar, that sex ‘is never a question of love for our adolescents’ (why ‘our’?) and sketched ‘a vision of sex reduced to pornography and the genital organs’. Access to pornography is now universal and free via the Internet; this accentuates a primitive and impulsive conception of sexuality among these adolescents of North African and Muslim origin which is immediate and violent, lacking all eroticism, and which schizophrenically mixes the prudish ancestral prohibitions with an uncontrolled and frustrated libido and a fear and hatred of women — an explosive combination.
We should consider the daily unhappiness of these young girls and adolescent boys (who are mostly though not exclusively native Europeans) who get up every morning to go to school and who have to confront the barbarians, sensing that they are not protected by the authorities of their own country (marshmallows who have abdicated all responsibility) and without the young men of their own nation — unmanly, fearful, unworthy of their ancestors — daring to defend them.
Minors Having Abortions
In 2009, 237,000 abortions were performed in France, humbly referred to as ‘voluntary terminations of pregnancy’,[23] including 15,000 performed on minors. The figures go up every year; there were only 10,772 in 2002. Not to mention, these figures only include legal abortions. This is in spite of all the contraceptive methods available, also anonymously; the ‘morning-after pill’ is freely available from school nurses. I should make clear that abortion is both free and anonymous for minors, so there is no risk of their parents finding out.
In the heat of action, often drunk or under the influence of marijuana, many minors have sexual relations without condoms, and the girls either neglect to take their ‘morning-after pill’ or do not know that it exists. They are afraid to take the classic birth control pill, for it costs money and would come under their parents’ health insurance. We should mention that an adolescent girl is much more fertile than an older woman, and risks pregnancy from the first encounter. Dr Nisand, head of the gynecological service at the University Health Centre in Strasbourg, advocates the anonymous and free distribution of birth control pills to school girls.
As with other matters (immigration, crime, illiteracy, and so on) people prefer to attack the problem downstream rather than to target it at its source. One of the solutions would be to abolish co-education, that product of egalitarian dogmatism instituted in the 1960s. The idea of making contraceptive pills freely and anonymously available to minors, besides what it would cost a health insurance system already on the verge of bankruptcy, is completely utopian, and it is stunning that ‘specialists’ would recommend it. In fact, according to the General Inspectorate of Social Affairs, 40 percent of French women have an abortion at some point in their lives, an enormous figure. These women do not take the precaution of using the pill any more than minors do. So the argument for free access for minors collapses.
To treat the causes of the problem means limiting the possibilities for sexual relations between adolescents — an enormous undertaking. But it is better for a pregnant girl to have an abortion than to become the child-mother of a foreigner’s offspring.
Female Victims of Violence: Organised Dishonesty
‘Violence Against Women’ was declared a great national cause in 2010. A hypocritical pious wish. According to a study by France’s National Observational Body on Crime and Punishment, subsection Quality of Life and Security, and according to another National Study of Violence Against Women (2008), 1.2 million women in France say that they have suffered at least one act of physical or sexual violence, 610,000 of them at home and 310,000 at the hands of their partner. These statistics are obviously underestimates, since the study, based on statistical extrapolations from polls, takes no account of those who declined to respond or who lied out of fear. The rate of reporting is negligible: 8 percent. Half the women interviewed thought: ‘it isn’t serious; there’s no use in lodging a complaint.’ Violence among couples has soared since the 1990s and, of course, the real causes are being concealed.
Half of women who have suffered a rape or forced sexual relations have been victimised in their own homes: 75,000 in 2008 (among those who lodged a complaint). The costs of intimate violence — medical, legal, police, and social costs — is estimated at over a billion Euros per year. A ‘National Supervisory Body on Violence Against Women’ has just been created, another pipeline in the administrative gasworks which will be entirely ineffective;[24] another observational body. Instead of observing what we already know, we would do better to take action.
The two studies cited above assert in their conclusions that ‘[those of] all social backgrounds are involved’, though this is subject to interpretation.
6.1 percent of women studied are victims of violence in their homes and 4.9 percent are victims of conjugal violence. Sociologist Marylène Lieber, in her testimony before the National Assembly, stated that ‘conjugal violence occurs among those of all social backgrounds’. She added: ‘the violent husband may be a soldier, a casual worker, a wine connoisseur, a CEO, a police lieutenant, a truck driver, a physical therapist....’ She forgot, of course, to specify the ethnic and religious backgrounds of the persons concerned, deceitfully disfiguring reality.
For the assertion that those of ‘all social backgrounds’ are involved and affected is based upon a rigged interpretation of the statistics. It is a well-known sophistry which consists in voluntarily confounding the overall picture of the facts or their causes with their arithmetic proportion, and thus to disguise the latter. Two examples will help us to understand this. If I say ‘serious dog bites come from all sorts of dogs, including lapdogs’ I invite people to believe that all dogs can bite equally. But I am neglecting to specify that 90 percent of dog bites come from pit bulls and only 0.5 percent from lapdogs. If I say ‘tornados occur everywhere in the world’, I lead people to believe that they occur everywhere in the world with equal frequency. But I am neglecting to make clear that, while tornados may occur in Flanders, Sussex, or Lombardy once in a blue moon, 90 percent of tornados occur on the North American Great Plains.
The causes of the soaring violence against women, rape, battery, and the rest, are twofold: the increasing presence of foreign populations and the barbarisation of our common culture — the descent into neo-primitivism. For if you superimpose a map of the areas where women are victims of violence and majority immigrant (especially Muslim immigrant) areas, you will find that they coincide perfectly. To insinuate that there are as many beaten women in the VIIth arrondissement of Paris or in a little village of the Vendée as there are in Seine-Saint-Denis[25] smacks of the disinformation usual with official sociology.
The Suffering of Women in Immigrant Neighbourhoods
In urban districts invaded by mostly Muslim immigrant populations, and which are being deserted by native French (those who have enough money to do so, anyway) it is girls and young women who suffer the most, especially those of European stock. ‘The functioning of this milieu is based on violence against women. There is a politically correct discourse which states that violence happens everywhere, but it is worse there’, explains Didier Lapeyronnie, professor of sociology at the Sorbonne.[26] A study which appeared in Le Parisien Dimanche (29 November 2009) stresses the following points: in the suburbs, the sexes do not rub shoulders; girls do not stop on the street, for public space does not belong to them. An unwritten rule prohibits them from smoking on the streets or from patronising bars or cafés. ‘Elder brother’ law reigns: a girl must not respond to a boy in a public place. One girl testifies: ‘if they try to chat you up, you must keep walking; if not, you’re a whore; but if you send him on his way, well, you’re also a whore.’
Sex and Deviance Page 23
