Fucking creepy.
Prosecutors charged a real estate agent Monday with the rapes of three women, including two he met through a Web site claiming to be the largest online dating hub for millionaires, authorities said.Joseph Garcia, 47, of Irvine appeared in court, although he did not enter a plea to six counts of forcible sodomy and one count of forcible rape. His arraignment was scheduled for Nov. 3, and bail was set at $1 million.
Prosecutors said Garcia sexually assaulted three women, ages 22 to 42, between March 2005 and Oct. 18. He met two of his victims on MillionaireMatch.com and the third at a post office, said Susan Kang Schroeder, a spokeswoman for the Orange County district attorney's office.
Although the Web site claims its clientele includes professional athletes, celebrities and models, it also says "you don't have to be rich or famous" to sign up.
Or "you can be a rapist. . ."
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Who wants to be raped by a millionaire?.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/4181
Hopefully some legal action can be taken against the company for virtually promoting and legitimising rape. And hopefully activists in that area will organise some sort of demonstration or direct action. Both here and in the US, popular culture and opinion still has a very flippant attitude towards rape and this is actually getting worse rather than better. And, most distressingly, every poll and survey shows that young women are more ready to make excuses for rape, or blame the victim, than men are.
Paul,
Do you believe that all online dating sites promote and legitimize rape, or is there something special about this particular site that you know about? There doesn't seem to be any indication from the article that the site did anything more than arrange an ordinary match.
Very creepy.
Side notes: "forcible rape" is redundant and ridiculous. Why do we have separate charges for "forcible sodomy"? Why not classify it all under "rape" and, if need be for legal reasons, list the acts?
b.D.-
If it makes the motherfucker serve more time, I'm all for having a seperate 'forcible sodomy' charge.
I don't think the dating site actually promotes rape. I also don't think people are going to find their soulmates on something called MillionaireMatch.com.
I also wondered about the 'forced rape' (like there's another kind?) and 'forced sodomy' charges. This took place in California. Does California have anti-sodomy laws still on the books?
I don't take issue with the use of "forcible sodomy" because the implied opposite would be "consensual sodomy."
"Forcible rape" on the other hand is redundant.
Rape by definition = force, coercion, or lack of consent.
Statutory is a reasonable qualifier for "rape" because it indicates that while the sex may have been consensual, it is nevetheless illegal. "Forcible" is not.
"Forcible rape" makes about as much sense as "fatal death."
bittergradstudent: I'm all for long sentences for rapists of any sort.
It seems to me, however, that rape is primarily a crime of aggression and hatred. As such, it should be considered rape whether it's oral, anal, or vaginal. So, "forcible sodomy" while making sense as opposed to "consensual sodomy" is really still rape. We don't, for instance, define "forcible vaginal intercourse" as opposed to "consensual vaginal intercourse" because we use the short term, "rape". The differences between "forcible sodomy" and "forcible vaginal intercourse" focuses too much attention on the physical act and the taboos associated with it and takes attention away from the sheer naked aggression of what both acts are which is rape.
Statutory is a more reasonable and better understood qualifier.
"The differences between "forcible sodomy" and "forcible vaginal intercourse" focuses too much attention on the physical act and the taboos associated with it"
But forcible sodomy physically hurts a whole lot more.
But forcible sodomy physically hurts a whole lot more.
I bow to your knowledge on this, but it is besides the point. Being shot in the head or the heart killing a person hurts less than being stabbed 20 times and left to bleed to death. The charge is still murder and we do not differentiate between the crimes of aggression and hate.
"The charge is still murder and we do not differentiate between the crimes of aggression and hate." Why not? One is brutal murder the other is even more brutal. One is brutal rape one is even more brutal. I mean there are different degrees of brutality and the law should treat them accordingly.
The charge is still murder and we do not differentiate between the crimes of aggression and hate.
At sentencing, we in fact do exactly that.
Furious|T| is exactly correct and I am grateful for the correction, but I was referring to the charges and not the sentencing. Sojourner, I think that is precisely where the law should treat such matters. Let the judge or jury do their job and reign down on the brutality of the crime. Let prosecutors and police deal with the facts of what took place.
"The differences between "forcible sodomy" and "forcible vaginal intercourse" focuses too much attention on the physical act and the taboos associated with it"games
Agreed...