Editorial note: the following is digested from the latest edition of That Bitch: protect yourself against women with malicious intent, which also goes by the title The Dark Side of Venus.–DE
She Did WHAT?
The man, a grandfather, worked nights taking home the drunk and the occasional disorderly character, the noisy, those who threw up inside his cab, and those who dropped cigarette butts that burned holes in his upholstery.
At about 3am he picked up two women in their early twenties outside a well-known nightclub. He dropped the first one at her home and took the other to her home, a couple of miles away. The moment he stopped the cab she ripped open her blouse and bra and screamed at the top of her voice: “Rape! Rape! I’m being raped!” Two men heard her screams and rushed to her aid. They dragged the driver from his cab, punched and pinned him to the ground, while one of them called the police.
The cab driver was taken in handcuffs to a police station. His cab was impounded while he was kept in custody for days being interviewed for hours on end. All the while he protested he had not touched the woman. The police didn’t (or couldn’t be seen to) believe him.
From that moment, nobody else seemed to believe him either.
News spread. This man was now a rapist. He explained to a colleague that the idea you are innocent until proven guilty was a myth. It may apply to other crimes he said, but not when a man is accused of rape.
Out of the blue he was told that all charges had been dropped. The police would not be prosecuting him for rape, or any other crime. “Why?” he asked.
The father of the first woman had asked her what she knew. He persisted when she clammed up. Eventually she burst into tears and said: “Dad, all she did was try to get out of paying the fare. What’s wrong with that?”
The cabbie has never driven his taxi since.
Warren Blackwell, a 36-year-old father of two, came off even worse. He was arrested, convicted and jailed for sexual assault and rape. He always maintained his innocence. His wife stood by him throughout. He served three years as a convicted rapist. Then in July 2006 he was released after a detailed investigation by the British Criminal Cases Review Commission concluded he was innocent all along.
Who can imagine the horrors he had to endure because of the evil actions of the woman, whose identity was protected under British law while his name was published repeatedly in the national press? Even the woman’s mother described her as “A persistent liar, very manipulative and a bully.” It emerged that the woman had a history of making serious false allegations. To date she has not been prosecuted.
How many other innocent men have had their lives wrecked because anonymous accusers make false allegations and get away with it?
And how many of these dishonest women make it even more difficult for genuine rape victims to secure convictions against their vicious attackers?
In early 2007 Emma Golightly was jailed for two years in Newcastle upon Tyne in the UK for conning men out of $500,000. She was described as a serial liar who created the perfect illusion of everything a man would want from a woman, specifically to extract cash from them. In an article in The Mail on Sunday, Stephen Keenan, her 24-year-old fiancé said: “I couldn’t believe my luck that someone with her background would be interested in an ordinary working man like me – I really thought I had hit the jackpot.”
She was not what she claimed. She created a web of lies to deceive various men. She said she had a highly paid job and was the daughter of a millionaire High Court judge. She said she was born in South Africa and educated in Dallas, and attended university at 16 because she was so intelligent. In reality, she lived in a shabby apartment in a poor part of Newcastle. Golightly also had a child that she didn’t mention. She told Keenan she had been married but her husband raped her at the age of 17, that she was pushed down some stairs and lost her twin babies.
To another man she claimed to be a millionaire but was suffering from terminal cancer and wanted to marry before she died.
One of her victims recounted that many of her stories related to highly sensitive, personal matters, which no decent man would ever insist she prove.
Like so many women of this type, she played the sympathy card almost perfectly. When Keenan attended court the day she was sentenced, he is reported as saying it was like attending a funeral. The difference was that the woman he had loved had not died – she had never existed.
Golightly broke the law and went to jail for it, but it is still possible to extract millions from men when you know how to use the law to your advantage.
In 2007 one of the highest-profile divorces in the UK was between Heather Mills, and Sir Paul McCartney, the British music icon. Who will ever know the truth about their relationship?
Men who grew up listening to The Beatles are prepared to accept that McCartney is a highly gifted “good guy.” Could he possibly be the ogre Ms. Mills has claimed he is in the tabloid press? Or is she the true ogre of the piece?
Ms. Mills’ father, who once served a prison sentence for fraud, has described his own daughter as a liar for making unsubstantiated allegations of sexual abuse against him in her autobiography. Ms. Mills has also been criticised by the police for making too many unnecessary emergency phone calls. Did she make up the stories? And how economical with the truth has she been while using the legal system to extract as much money as possible from McCartney?
Morality and fairness have no place in matrimonial law, it seems.
In December 2014, Reuters reported “Billionaire hedge fund manager Chris Hohn has been ordered to pay his estranged wife Jamie Cooper-Hohn 337 million pounds ($530 million) in the largest divorce settlement in British legal history.”
Because of some of these astronomical financial settlements being handed out in the divorce courts, how many ordinary, honest, decent, and ambitious young men are concluding that marriage isn’t worth the financial risk anymore? After all, 45% of Canadian, 51% of American and 57% of British marriages now end in divorce.
No entrepreneurial man would invest in a business start-up in which the risk-reward ratio was so stacked against him. It’s worth remembering that according to the law marriage is a business partnership, and when divorce breaks it in two, the partners must share all the wealth created while it was intact. Is it any wonder that more men are questioning the idea of making a commitment to a woman when he has potentially so much more to lose than she does?
Research conducted for the UK Marriage and Relationship Counselling Service (MRCS) in 2006 found women are more likely than men to perpetrate domestic violence. This report, based on a survey of 530 MRCS clients, found mutual violence accounts for 33% of domestic cases, female-perpetrated violence 41%, and male-perpetrated violence 26%. Some women’s organizations need to perpetuate the myth that all men are a threat to women, just to qualify for the vast sums of public money to fund their work. If they do not maintain the victim status of women, the cash will stop. By refusing to acknowledge the true extent of violence perpetrated on men by women, these organizations effectively deprive male victims of the help they need and deserve. They too, are abusing innocent men.
United States Department of Justice statistics for 2005 show that 1510 people were murdered by ‘intimates’, which means a spouse, ex-spouse, boyfriend or girlfriend. The statistics are surprising. When men and women are asked “How many of those were men?” the average answer is “probably just a few”. They aren’t even close. The accurate answer is 329. Still a minority, but more than 21%, which is not insignificant.
These women do not destroy the lives of just their victims:
“I am a mother. My heart is broken. My handsome son was the victim of domestic violence. His long-time girlfriend of seven years murdered him on July 7, 2002. He was aged 25 years. He had suffered severe violence at her hands prior to his death but was too ashamed to admit to it openly.
She was sentenced to three and a half years in prison, having pleaded diminished responsibility.
She served 21 months for her crime and is now walking the streets without remorse knowing she beat the system.”
The victim was a young man named Peter. His sister wrote about the story in a UK Cosmopolitan article in November 2004.
She described how Sonia, the girlfriend, was something of a loner thanks to a difficult childhood. She seemed angry at the world in general and became guarded, prickly and agitated whenever she was challenged by a question, however innocent. She was insecure, distrusting and jealous; Peter took on the role of “looking after her. “She made him feel sorry for her but he was not happy. The guilt became the glue that held them together. Despite his kindness and caring attitude she would snap at him, scream and constantly berate him over the most insignificant things. Once he arrived at the family home covered in cuts and bruises.
Sonia convinced herself that Peter was seeing other women, even though he wasn’t. She threatened to stab him if she discovered he was cheating on her.
Peter’s father tried to warn him off by saying that such people never change. If she was causing him grief then, it would happen again and again. But Peter continued to defend her and make excuses for her behaviour.
In July 2002 she stabbed him through the heart with a 4.5 inch kitchen knife. She was arrested but released without charge, claiming the killing was self-defence. However, forensic evidence disproved that because of the angle of the wound. That’s when she changed her plea to guilty of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility.
In court she was described as volatile with a jealous temperament and claimed to have attempted suicide twice since the stabbing. Doctors gave evidence that she was not responsible for her actions before she was found guilty and sentenced.
Poison also seems the weapon of choice for many murderesses. Incredibly, they are not always discovered because these “loving” women aren’t considered as murder suspects by the police.
Without wanting to pump up the figures of women killing men further, here are two more factors to be added into the mix: suicide and contract murder.
We received a call from a distraught male friend. He is intelligent, in his forties, successful, and divorced with three children he adores. He had met a woman via the internet and fallen in love. Initially, things were absolutely fantastic. They were both head-over-heels, even though everything happened more quickly than he would have liked. It was exciting and passionate. He got on famously with her children, and she loved being with his. An instant family of five children. So what was the problem?
His exact words: “She is driving me crazy. One minute she’s all over me, the next she’s calling me every name you can think of – and I haven’t done anything wrong. I have tried to reason with her. She goes from hot to cold to hot again. I have no idea where I am with her. One minute she wants us to move in together, the next minute she doesn’t. She’s really doing my head in.”
He continued for half an hour talking about her and how and why he was besotted with her. He was certainly under her spell. Then he added “I felt quite sorry for her, too. I’ve really tried to help her get over it. She’d been with a guy for a couple of years. It was tragic really. He committed suicide.”
He was quietly asked to listen very carefully to what he had just said. There was a loud silence. The penny had dropped.
Who will ever know for sure whether this woman made her former partner’s life so miserable that the pain of living was worse than the pain of dying? This friend needed no further convincing. He realised something similar could happen to him. He forced himself to withdraw from the relationship. But the backlash was severe. She turned on him even more viciously than when they’d been “in love.”
From a website for fathers who have been excluded from the lives of their children in the United States comes a tragic end to a story in which an angry mother and the courts unwittingly colluded against an ordinary, normal, average, hard-working guy. Randall Couch, a Phoenix architectural consultant, went through a divorce and got poor advice from his lawyer, including giving sole custody of their child to his wife and an ever-increasing child support agreement. A few years later a new attorney got a revised order in which Randall got a large percentage of each week with his son and eliminated the child support payments. Unbeknownst to him, the order was never officially filed with the court. You can guess what is coming. Several years later the ex-wife went after him for over $28,000 in back child support, plus attorney’s fees. The court ruled in her favour. His bank accounts were seized and his car was taken from him. He was ordered to pay $1,500 by noon the following day. Money he did not have. He shot himself in the head. The wife never got her $28,000, and deprived her own son of his father in the process.
How many other innocent men have resorted to suicide to escape the clutches of a woman who has made their lives unbearable?
And then there are the cases when a woman doesn’t want to do something herself, but she is able to convince someone else to do it for her.
Anthony Riggs, known as Slowpoke to his friends and colleagues because of his gentle demeanour, saw military action in Operation Desert Storm in the Persian Gulf in 1991. He fought for his country, but soon after returning he was gunned down and killed outside his own home. His 22 year-old wife, Toni Cato Riggs, appeared distraught. The police caught his killer: his wife’s younger brother Michael.
This woman had persuaded her brother to murder her husband in return for half the $20,000 insurance pay-off. This is just one of many horrific examples of women who commit murder recorded by Patricia Pearson, a highly acclaimed feminist writer, in her controversial book, When She Was Bad: How Women Get Away with Murder. Pearson tells many thoroughly researched, publicly documented stories of women with malicious intent, and articulates fascinating insights into why society, the courts and the media fall into the traps of what she describes as “chivalry justice.” On the subject of female aggression and the multiple ways women tend to get away with it, this is a must-read book.
Clearly, men are not the only perpetrators of violence. But society doesn’t want to acknowledge that women kill more children than men and that mothers are statistically more likely to abuse their children. Men are statistically the least likely to abuse their children, but try convincing a family judge of that when a mother has falsely alleged that ‘her’ children (not ‘their’ children), are unsafe with the father even when he has no history of such behaviour.
In Poestlingberg, Austria, a horrific story emerged in October 2005. For seven years a divorced mother kept her three daughters locked up in almost complete darkness. As a lawyer, she successfully won custody and did everything she could to ensure her former husband, a local judge, could never see them. Despite his own detailed legal knowledge, the father repeatedly failed in court to win the right to see his girls. The local authorities allegedly received repeated complaints from neighbours but they were ignored. The mother outmanoeuvred everyone.
When the authorities eventually removed the girls and took them into care, they found indescribable filth at the house, excrement at least a meter deep and no running water. Floors and pipes had been corroded by rodent urine. The girls were six, 11 and 13 at the beginning of their ordeal. Even after prolonged specialist therapy, the development of these young women is described as “truly catastrophic.” Experts fear that the eldest is so traumatised that she will never recover. During their ordeal the girls learned to communicate in their own language. In care they could not bear sunlight and huddled together under a kitchen table for protection.
Could these examples be dismissed as non-representative of the “truer” picture, in which men are always the aggressors and women the victims, as perpetuated by so many feminist groups?
No.
A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices. William James (1842-1910)
