| |
[1. Nov 2026|16:03] |
Kvīru teorijas + seksoloģijas idejas ir viena no labākajām lietām, kas ir notikusi ar sabiedrību. Ir valstis, kā, piem, Vācija, kur dzimtes identitāte ir likumā aizsargāta, kā rezultātā sievietei, kura nosauc vīrieti par vīrieti, vai šajā gadījumā - tiesas prāvā apraksta savu vīriešu izvarotāju, lietojot vietniekvārdu 'viņš', var draudēt līdz pat 10 000 eiro sods, ja šis izvarotājs sevi uzskata par sievieti. (briesmīgi, ka UK ir tik ļoti atpakaļrāpulīga vieta, kurā, spriežot par Equality Act aizsargājamo pazīmju interpretāciju, Augstākā tiesa lēma, ka sieviete un vīrietis ir izprotams kā bioloģiskais dzimums. ļoti nepareizi, jo, kā zināms, dzimtes identitāte, kura var būt fluīda vai nefluīda vai a man, woman, non-binary, demigender, bigender, agender, rabies gender https://lgbtqia.wiki/wiki/Rabies_Pride vienmēr ir svarīgāka par dzimumu. visu pirms - mēs zinām, ka izvarošanas ar lielu pārsvaru veic vīrieši, taču tie, kas paludina sevi par sievietēm, tādas noteikti neveic, jo viņi ir sievietes. ja veic - tad viņi nav 'pa īstam' sievietes un, ja tu to vispār piemini, tu es transfobs, tas arī viss.)
"A teenage girl who was raped by a trans-identified male former police officer in Germany faced questioning from his lawyer after “accidentally misgendering” him in court. The disturbing new detail emerges just weeks after Maja Schmid, a 55-year-old former federal officer from Rosenheim, was sentenced for the heinous crime.[..]
Schmid was found guilty of raping the girl when she was just 15 years old. He was also found guilty of possessing child sexual abuse materials.
During the trial, it was learned that the crime occurred in August of 2025 during a roadtrip between Schmid and the young girl, who was the daughter of one of Schmid’s friends. After stopping at a roadside restaurant, Schmid approached the girl in the women’s toilets, pushed her against a wall, and raped her. According to reports, the teenage victim was in shock after the assault, unable to respond until Schmid left the area, at which point the girl had a “serious anxiety attack” in the bathroom.
Earlier this month, Schmid was sentenced to 3 years and 3 months in prison for his crimes. In explaining the verdict, the presiding judge took into account a letter of apology Schmid had written and his commitment to pay the victim €11,000 in compensation.
In his sentencing remarks, Judge Andreas Bartschmid oddly declared that despite his rape of a child and extremely large collection of child pornography, Schmid was “not a pedophile.” His gender transition was “not a fetish,” Bartschmid added, but simply “rotted in an inner inclination within the defendant.” He also said that his teenage victim had suffered “no long lasting effects” from the attack at the motorway service station, only physical pain during it.
This was challenged by the victim herself, who told Welt that she had suffered tremendous psychological harm from the assault. “If the judge had seen me outside the courtroom on the day I gave my statement, having panic attacks because I was supposed to testify in the same room as Maja, he would have realized that I had suffered harm.”
According to Die Welt, before the trial finished, Schmid’s lawyer, Peter Dürr, sent an official letter from his office questioning the teenage rape victim over her usage of male pronouns for her rapist during her testimony. Dürr said he was looking to “politely inquire whether it is correct that you referred to Ms. Schmid as ‘he’ on the last day of proceedings.”
Replying by email, the teenager insisted that she had had absolutely no intention of “misgendering” her rapist. Speaking to Welt, the girl said that Schmid is a “biological man, a trans woman. But this trans woman has raped someone,” going onto describe Schmid as a “threat to other women.”
In April of 2024, Germany passed the Self-Determination ACT (SBGG), which established “gender identity” as a protected characteristic. This created the potential for citizens to be fined up to €10,000 for referring to a transgender individual’s birth name or sex without their permission. With the implementation of the law, many users on social media became concerned that the letter from Schmid’s lawyer seemed to be a case of intimidation, implying the victim could have fallen foul of the legislation if she did not repent for referring to her attacker with male pronouns."
Outraged at the new revelation, a number of German women’s rights campaigners began a digital chain with the message: “We live in a country where a raped girl is issued a cease-and-desist order if she refers to her rapist as a man. I despise everyone who enacted this humiliating, misogynistic law.” |
|
|
