January 10, 2004 – Brian.Carnell.Com

Happy Voodoo Day!

Today is Voodoo Day in Benin, so Happy Voodoo Day, everyone. Lisa and I are going to celebrate by making dolls of all of our enemies who deserve to suffer in the New Year.

Voodoo Day has an interesting history. According to the BBC,

Voodoo Day was declared a national holiday in Benin more than a decade ago, under the administration of former President Nicephore Soglo.

Mr. Soglo is said to have been saved from death thanks to Voodoo powers. So in gratitude to the Voodoo community of the country, he gave them official recognition.

Take that, Constantine!

Source:

Benin readies for Voodoo Day. Karim Okanla, The BBC, January 6, 2004.

Today the whole family went to see Sing Along Wizard of Oz — basically a digitally remaster showing of The Wizard of Oz with all the words to the all the songs running at the bottom of the screen. They also hand out noise makers, bubbles, etc., which are used at appropriate times (bubbles every time Glenda shows up in her bubble, everyone barks when Toto does, etc.)

Basically it’s like a kiddie version of The Rocky Horror Picture Show. I.e. the sort of thing I could go do about every other weekend. There was a period a couple of years ago where I was watching The Wizard of Oz about every 2-3 days. Between all those times I saw it as a kid, then VHS and now DVD, I’ve probably seen The Wizard of Oz 200+ times, so I’ve got the whole movie memorized at this point. Lisa was also doing her witch cackling — few people are as wicked as she is when she wants to be.

Emma dressed up as Dorothy, complete with ruby shoes and basket with Toto. There were a lot of very creative costumes, including a young boy dressed up as one of the representatives of the Lollypop Guild.

Not a bad way to spend an afernoon.

Are Russian Mail-Order Brides Placed at Too High of a Risk?

There’s an interesting article at LegalAffairs.Org about mail-order brides from Eastern Europe. There have been a couple of high profile instances of violence against women who came to the United States as mail-order brides, leading to calls for tighter regulation of matchmaking services that arrange such marriages.

But in her article on the topic, Nadya Labi notes that a) no one knows if mail order brides from Eastern Europe are really subject to more violence than any other group, and b) the few limited studies that have been done suggest that, in fact, there isn’t a problem with these marriages. Labi writes,

So far, no definitive studies have confirmed the industry’s bad rap. In the 1996 Mail-Order Bride Act, Congress directed the Department of Justice to investigate fraud and domestic violence in mail-order marriages. But immigration officials don’t collect data on these relationships, so after three years of fact-gathering the DOJ could offer only preliminary and suspect statistics. Based on 266 immigration cases, a small sample, DOJ reported that matchmaking agencies did not play a significant role in marriage fraud. Investigators also found that mail-order brides suffer abuse less frequently than homegrown wives. On the strength of anecdotal evidence that some mail-order brides are abused, however, the 1996 law required international marriage brokers to tell foreign brides about their rights to claim certain immigration benefits if they become victims of domestic violence.

Currently Congress is considering the International Marriage Broker Regulation Act which would, according to Labi, “force agencies to ask each male client about his marital history and criminal background.” Do we want the government getting that directly involved in how people decide who they marry? As Labi writes,

But is it a broker’s job to run a background check on a man simply because he wants to meet a foreign mate? The legislation before Congress exempts matchmaking services like Match.Com and Yahoo! Personals because these companies charge the same rates to men and women and to natives and foreigners. In light of the financial incentive that mail order brokers have to side with their male clients, it makes sense to treat brokers differently by requiring them to tell foreign brides about their immigration rights. However, it seems premature to impose background checks without more proof that the men who go to brokers to meet foreign women . . . are more dangerous than men at any singles party. Mail-order brides are adults who can only hope for the best and guard against the worst. They should proceed, as others do, at their own risk.

Source:

Mrs. America: The business of mail-order marriage. Nadya Labi, Legal Affairs, January/February 2004.

Scotland Rejects Proposal to Preserve Anonymity of Men Accused of Rape

The BBC reports that a committee of Scotland’s parliament unanimously rejected a proposal to grant anonymity to men accused of rape until their guilt is proven in court.

The proposal was submitted by the UK Men’s Movement which argues that men accused of rape need anonymity to avoid the stigma that even false allegations of rape can have on innocent men. UK Men’s Movement spokesman George McAulay said in September of a similar proposal introduced by his group,

We are alarmed by the proliferation of false rape allegations, and the seeming indifference with which the authorities treat this offence, often not prosecuting even when there was a prima facie case of false allegation to answer, and even when the accuser admitted it was a complete fabrication.

False rape claims may be made for a number of reasons, the most common being revenge, attention-seeking, malice, fiscal reward via the Criminal Injuries Board or civil suit, and advantage in marital disputes now that prosecutions are made for rape in marriage.

According to the BBC, the committee that voted to reject the idea argued that “the move would discourage women from coming forward.”

McAulay responded that the Scottish Parliament’s doesn’t seriously its own goal of ensuring sexual equality,

This parliament and this executive make much noise about their commitment to equality, but I have seen little of it with regard to men. We ask that an accused who may be innocent is given the same anonymity as their accuser, who may be malicious.

Unlike in the United States, it is generally illegal in the UK to publish the name of accusers in rape cases. In the United States, the Supreme Court has upheld the right the media to publish the name of rape accusers, but by custom most do not.

In general, the ideal would be equal treatment — if an outlet is not going to name the accuser, then don’t name the accused. If they’re going to name the accused, they should also name the accuser (except where minors are involved on either side).

Sources:

Rape case protection bid rejected The BBC, January 7, 2004.

Minister to hear rape plea. The BBC, September 26, 2000.