העורך Editor

(Found here.)

Note: Our rabbinic counsel allowed showing this.

In the news reporting of the recent spate of regime-encouraged Hamas pogroms, rape is commonly described as solely a crime of violent aggression (of a piece with murder, looting, etc.), and not due to lust.

This is not just about tainting Hamas, it’s the feminist idea of encouraging female irresponsibility and promiscuity.

(I hope this discussion doesn’t appear insensitive.)

I don’t pretend to know the truth (could it be both aggression and lust? A third option?) but note well: the origin of this counter-intuitive claim is the fevered neo-marxists (*) who call themselves “feminists” (to learn more, input: “crime of lust” “crime of violence” in a search engine). So why should we give this notion any credit (the Genetic Non-Fallacy)?

Also, here are some counter-arguments:

1. Why are females at greater risk than males (except in prison, I think)?
2. If attraction has nothing to do with it, why the added risk of “date rape” (debatable)?
3. Why are females aged 16-19 at disproportionate risk?
4. Don’t Chazal imply the opposite regarding Dinah bas Yaakov (and other places)?
5. If it’s purely about violence, how come we never even encounter the ukimta of “נתקשה לאשתו”? Violence and intimacy appear to simply be two distinct bodily functions among many, alternately taking over (in non-violent intimacy the “control” (והוא ימשל בך) can be mere metaphor).
6. Here’s one study claiming that if prostitution were legalized in the United States, the rape rate would decrease by roughly 25% (for a decrease of approximately 25,000 rapes per year). Why would that be?
7. If you hate someone, would the hatred increase or decrease after beating them up? Decrease (if anything). Then why did Amnon hate Tamar so much davka after the assault? And see commentaries.
8. Lastly, a weaker, but perhaps still valid question: If the attacker’s intentions are solely violent, why would there ever appear a “יצר אלבשה” effect in the victim? Wouldn’t pure violence “kill the mood”?

Note: I can’t do effective research due to the subject matter.

(*) “Marxist” as in the notion it’s all “systemic”, you have no individual agency, and your puny disagreement with the comrades based on immediate introspection or the Five Senses is invalid, unscientific, and counter-revolutionary because you are helplessly conditioned by “Society” into dangerous falsehoods (we have elsewhere highlighted the fatal contradiction of knowledge in that idea).

הרב יודל שפירא זצ”ל מתלמידי החזו”א פעם אמר שזה לא הולך על בן גוריון וכיו”ב אלא על המנהיגים שלנו.

גילוי דעת – לנצחון ישראל

(מצאתי ברשת)

From the Times of Israel:

Israel is reportedly weighing an option of not killing Hamas leaders in Gaza Yahya Sinwar and Muhammad Deif, if and when the opportunity arises, handing them immunity of sorts and deporting them to Qatar or another country as part of a solution that would secure the release of all hostages held in Gaza and end the war against the terror group.

…

Another source is quoted as saying that “deporting the Hamas leadership abroad doesn’t contradict the war goals.”

Right.

Except this was already tried before by Y. Rabin yemach shemo. He deported some murderers and was pressured by the American government to take them back.

Some excerpts from Daniel Greenfield here:

The year was 1992. The Clinton administration was trying to get Israeli Prime Minister Rabin and the PLO’s Yasser Arafat to sign on the dotted line of the Oslo Accords to create a terror state inside Israel. In the name of peace. Unfortunately, Hamas kept killing Israelis.

15-year-old Helena Rapp had been stabbed to death at a bus stop on the way to school. A few days later, Rabbi Shimon Biran, a father of four, was similarly murdered by an Islamic terrorist.

Fed up with the latest killings, Prime Minister Rabin put 417 Islamist terrorists on buses and dumped them in Lebanon. The monsters he deported included top Hamas terror leaders.

On the six buses were current Hamas leader Ismael Haniyeh, Hamas co-founder Abdel Aziz al-Rantisi, who would vow, “by Allah, we will not leave one Jew in Palestine”, Abu Osama, who helped draft the Hamas charter calling for the extermination of the Jews, Hamas co-founders Mohammed Taha, Hammad Al-Hasanat, and Mahmoud Zahar, who threatened “They have legitimized the killing of their people all over the world by killing our people”, Hamad Al-Bitawi, who proclaimed that “Jihad is a collective duty” along with Abdullah al-Shami, the head of Islamic Jihad, and many other present and future Islamic terror leaders deported to Lebanon.

The New York Times headlined its coverage, “Ousted Arabs Shiver and Wait in Lebanese Limbo”. Newsweek also sympathetically described how the Hamas terrorists were “shivering in the cold.” The Washington Post lingered on their handcuff “welts”. The Associated Press provided detailed coverage of their cases of diarrhea turning the bowel movements of Islamist terrorists into an item worthy of international coverage.

…

The Red Cross, which after over a month had failed to pay a visit to the Israeli hostages, including children and old women being held by Hamas, was quickly on the scene with “three truckloads of tents, food, blankets and bedding”. The aid organization set up tents for the Hamas terrorists who were apparently too lazy or incompetent to set up their own tents.

…

Amnesty International organized a letter writing campaign whining that the Hamas deportees were “living in tents in freezing conditions” and demanding the “safe return of the deportees to Israel.” B’Tselem, a pro-terror ‘human rights’ group operating inside Israel, denounced the deportations as a “a flagrant violation of human rights”. During the Oct 7 attacks, Vivian Silver, a B’Tselem board member, was killed by the terrorists she had spent her life advocating for.

B’Tselem had been one of the pro-terrorist groups that had originally challenged the deportations in Israel’s leftist Supreme Court in a bid to keep Hamas inside Israel.

…

They refused to even pretend they would pause killing Jews temporarily!

Prime Minister Rabin had only temporarily deported the Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists for two years to improve his domestic image and buy some quiet time for peace negotiations. His coalition of leftist and far leftist parties was soon divided between him and future Prime Minister Shimon Peres’s far leftist cabinet coalition. “No one is enjoying the suffering of these people,” Peres said. “Israel deported them, but it did not mean to hurt them.”

The leftist coalition Meretz party called deporting Hamas “a gross violation of human rights.”

Under pressure from the Clinton administration, which warned that it would not protect Israel from UN sanctions, and members of his own leftist coalition Rabin offered to allow the Hamas terrorists back if they promised to “desist from terror and violence for the duration of the peace negotiations”. The terrorists refused to promise that. And so he agreed to take in over a hundred of them now and the rest in a year. Hamas began returning to Israel in 1993.

Read the rest here…