February 4, 2016

The Oslo accords

described an interim arrangement intended to be a precursor to a final settlement. The Oslo accords did not create a Palestinian state or describe its final borders. It was a plan to facilitate the process of arriving at a viable, non-fragmented, autonomous state for Palestinians, with its own military defense, control of its own population registry et al through further negotiation, one that created temporary institutions like the PA to prepare for complete self-determination at some future time and give the Israelis formal institutions to negotiate that future state with on behalf of the Palestinian people.

Since Oslo, Israel has all but abandoned any pretense of negotiating a fair and final dispensation for the Palestinian people, settled nearly 400,000 settlers (IIRC) in areas understood at the time to be part of the planned Palestinian state, further divided and fragmented control of the land and resources intended at the time of Oslo to belong to a future Palestinian state and destroyed tens of thousands of homes, along with business and agricultural infrastructure. It has turned even the area under what were intended to be temporary and limited Palestinian self-governing structures into an archipelago of fragments that cannot constitute a viable, autonomous state, making the subsequent and quite different final settlement anticipated by the Oslo accords impossible to achieve.

The signees to Oslo weren't dumb, but they were wildly optimistic. They negotiated what was meant to be a transient condition and a preamble to a full and fair settlement and autonomy. In the intervening years since it was negotiated Israel has killed any chance of the final settlement envisioned under Oslo ever coming to fruit. The West Bank has become a de facto Bantustan. And the configuration of Israel and the occupied territories has become de facto Apartheid.

Mentally challenged idiots think that a temporary, wildly inadequate arrangement intended only to facilitate negotiation of a permanent, just, equitable and lasting arrangement indicates that the temporary arrangement was the final, desired outcome, or that anyone involved in negotiating that intended the de facto state of Apartheid that currently exists to be permanent, when it is easily demonstrated that they intended the exact opposite.

January 5, 2013

says a great many sources

http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/199211/round-rapists

http://www.amazon.com/Men-Who-Rape-Psychology-Offender/product-reviews/0738206245/ref=la_B001K7TY04_1_1_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

http://www.nytimes.com/1991/12/10/science/new-studies-map-the-mind-of-the-rapist.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm

"Its only about violence" and "its only about dominance" are largely the fruit of speculative feminist theory. And in fact some studies have tested these propositions:

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00224498309551170

and found them wanting.

A few simple statistics also dispel the idea that every woman is equally at risk. For instance, while victims range from infants to octogenerians, in the USA:

15% of victims are under age 12
29% are age 12-17
44% are under age 18
80% are under age 30 (SOO, 1997, 1999 NCVS)

so 65% of all victims are between puberty and age 30, an age range that constitutes 35% of the population, according to the 2011 census. Coincidentally, its also the age range from which men are most likely to find women desirable. This isn't rocket science