NOTE:
Ever since the 1960s feminist professors, lawyers, journalists and government
bureaucrats have been lying to the public about domestic violence. Among the
armada of fabrications floated by these propagandists is the slanderous claim
the society was tolerant of domestic violence against wives in 19th
century and the first half of the 20th. The claims are false, but are still
perpetuated by such respected publishers as Westlaw to this very day. The myth
of social acceptance of domestic violence against women is necessary to keep
alive if the feminist social engineers wish to keep the “rule of thumb” hoax (the
infamous “law” that never was a law) going.
The
following is but one example of 19th century community activism
showing that men treated wife beaters with the exact opposite of tolerance.
***
FULL
TEXT [Logansport, In.] – Bill Gibson, the wife beater, has removed his carcass
to other parts and the citizens of the East End rejoice accordingly. When
William arose yesterday morning he found a piece of pasteboard attached to his
front gate, upon which were a skull and cross-bone and a man dangling at the end
of a rope. Above it all were the words, “A warning to Bill Gibson, the wife
beater.” The cowardly savage was warned to leave the town in haste or make up
his mind to take big medicine from “A committee of husbands in the East
End.”
Gibson
tore down the warning and burned it, and when the proper hour arrived took charge
of a street car and drove one trip. On this trip a copy of the Journal was
placed in his hands. He read the article and straightaway his courage failed
him. He deserted his car,
hastened to his home and excitedly told his wife that he must leave, that he had
not the nerve to remain and face the music. The abused woman was rejoiced with
this piece of information and told him that if he would leave, never again to
return, she would give him $40 to help him
on his way. He took the money, packed his grip, and in less than an hour
was on his way. The miserable wretch all but frightened to death,
fearful that he be caught before he left town. Chicago was his objective point the
he was afraid to remain in the city until train time. He walked from this to
Royal Center, where he boarded the afternoon train tor the Garden City.
The
indignation caused by the publication the details of this case was universal and
had Gibson remained in town over last night he would certainly have turned
himself in trouble. It was one week yesterday since the cur got in his
dastardly work, and those who called at the house to see Mrs. Gibson during the
day yesterday, were horrified at the sight the woman’s face presented. One side
presents a frightful, bruised and discolored appearance, and it will be weeks,
and doubtless months before the marks of the coward’s wrath will have passed
away. Constable Tattle visited the house about noon and wanted the woman to
swore out an affidavit against the man, but she stated that she was afraid he
would murder her if who, in any way, interfered with his departure. She was
satisfied to let him go. If the villain looks to his safety, he will never again
return.
The
next legislature that assembles Indiana should follow in the footsteps of the
little state of Delaware, and establish the whipping post for wife beaters. The
only punishment to fit the crime is a public whipping – a painful humiliation.
If one of Cass county’s representatives wants to place a laurel on his own
brow, let him frame a bill of this kind and work through.
***
NOTE:
The illustration is a 2012 reconstruction of the warning sign described in this
1883 article.
***
►• You have been told that before the rise of feminism in the 1960s that domestic violence against women was tolerated by society as acceptable behavior and was not taken seriously by police and the courts.
►19th Century Intolerance Towards Domestic Violence
► Treatment of Domestic Violence Against Women Before 1960 – this post collects cases classified by the form of punishment or sentencing (whether judicial or through community action)
No, the claim that laws created by males were for the benefit of males is false. Yes, the "Rule of Thumb" myth has been proven to be a Marxist-feminist hoax, taking an ancient English common historical notation published in the 18th century and extrapolating it into unsupported claims that 18th and 20th century United States communities, courts and legislatures (laws on the books) were in agreement with the18th century historical notation (Blackstone).
***
►• You have been told that before the rise of feminism in the 1960s that domestic violence against women was tolerated by society as acceptable behavior and was not taken seriously by police and the courts.
You have been lied to. The people who told you these
lies were paid to tell them you. In most cases you paid your own money (taxes
and tuition fees) to be lied to.
Here is one of countless pieces of evidence that demonstrate
the truth.
►•►• To see more eloquent, vivid
evidence proving the lie and giving you the truth, see:
►19th Century Intolerance Towards Domestic Violence
► Treatment of Domestic Violence Against Women Before 1960 – this post collects cases classified by the form of punishment or sentencing (whether judicial or through community action)
No, the claim that laws created by males were for the benefit of males is false. Yes, the "Rule of Thumb" myth has been proven to be a Marxist-feminist hoax, taking an ancient English common historical notation published in the 18th century and extrapolating it into unsupported claims that 18th and 20th century United States communities, courts and legislatures (laws on the books) were in agreement with the18th century historical notation (Blackstone).
***
“[O]nly since the 1970s has the criminal justice system
begun to treat domestic violence as a serious crime, not as a private family
matter.”
From the entry: “Domestic Violence” on encyclopedia.com
This claim has been proven to be false.
***
[494-10/14/21
***
No comments:
Post a Comment