Bangladesh: Mysterious Person On Killing Spree of Rapists telesurenglish.net

Submitted by boom in Anarchism (edited )

A mysterious person using the name Hercules is killing men accused of rape in Bangladesh, leaving the bodies with notes around their necks warning rapists.

Accused rapists of Bangladesh are in legitimate fear of their lives as a mysterious person using the nomenclature Hercules is on a killing spree.

The local media reported that the Bangladeshi police discovered bodies of three men accused of rape shot dead with notes tied around their necks.

The latest body had the following note, “I am Pirojpur Bhandaria’s (victim’s name) rapist Rakib. This is the punishment for rape. Rapists beware. Hercules.”

Rakib was one of the men accused of gang raping a student. His accomplice in the same case Sajal Jomaddar was also found dead on Jan. 26 with a note tied around his neck saying, “I am Sajal. I am the rapist of (victim’s name). This is my punishment.”

Before them, another dead body of Ripon was found in Savar who was a mastermind in a gang rape of a 14-year-old garment worker who died of her injuries on Jan. 8.

The police have no clues as to the identity of Hercules and investigations are ongoing.

Even though the citizens are rejoicing, Sheepa Hafiza, executive director of a rights group said that killing people is extra-judicial.

"The country's law enforcement agencies are well capable of conducting a fair investigation into each incident and leading it to the trial process," she added.

27

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

boom OP wrote

Rate that praxis!!!

12

CircleA wrote

THE ANARCHY SCALE

Mutual Aid: 10/10

Direct Action: 10/10

Anti-State: 8/10

Anti-Capital: 2/10

Feminism: 10/10


Final Score: 9/10

Theme: Extra-judicial!

15

existential1 wrote

"The country's law enforcement agencies are well capable of conducting a fair investigation into each incident and leading it to the trial process," she added.

Are they though?

5

Splinglebot wrote

retribution isn't praxis

1

Mango wrote

But self-defense is.

7

Splinglebot wrote

if they're definitely still active then sure but I'd rather not be so quick to resort to murder if it's possible to avoid it

2

celebratedrecluse wrote

unless the rapist is committed to and able to participate in accountability, consequences, and reparative work, it is statistically unlikely that even a rapist who feels remorse, guilt, and/or a desire to change their behavior will not commit intimate violence again.

Many rapists in fact do not have these opportunities, either due to a lack of social supports for victims to have their perpatrators held accountable, lack of desire by the victim(s) to facilitate or participate in those kind of processes (which is totally valid of course), or even in some cases being enmeshed in a cultural context where they cannot disclose their past without being subject to immediate and far-reaching ostracization. Thus, for any number of reasons even a rapist who wants to change their ways is going to remain a huge fucking liability to any organizing effort, due to the lack of conversation or community projects that are designed to deal with their toxicity.

In fact, to the contrary most rapists are enmeshed in a society which not only excuses, but even valorizes their behavior. This happens not only in dominant society, but also in radical subcultures. So the rape becomes a positive thing, or one that can be invisibilized if inconvenient. In that social context, it is very rare for the rapist to even acknowledge their behavior as negative, or as what it is, let alone have a desire to change themselves and their relationships with others.

Thus, any rapist who has not gone through some kind of effective, victim-centered community process (which is basically all rapists, statistically) has a very good chance of hurting someone again, particularly people they are intimate with. Even people who do go through this process frequently commit violence again. Rapists are a clear and present danger, which necessitates cutting rapists out, which in turn fuels their dangerous toxicity, and in some cases even their desire to commit further violence on populations who they feel "wronged them" by exiling them. And so the cycle of violence continues.

Nonetheless, this is also why it is justifiable to kill rapists. If there is a broad social context that prohibits serious restorative justice work (generally true across the globe, and from what I hear about South Asia it sounds pretty true there too), the rapists are in power. Non violent methods have failed dramatically. If people are going to start striking back, it's assymetrical warfare against a much more powerful target, and deserves the support and solidarity of those who oppose rape culture.

4

ziq wrote (edited )

The people who make the "rapists get rehab" argument are living in some fantasy world where they filter every query through some anarcho-utopia filter like thus: "what would we do with rapists if we lived in a perfect world?" It's so ridiculous the way they think. We don't live in utopia. We live right here, right now.

2

ziq wrote

It's not murder. Murder is the state's language to describe killing that breaks their monopoly on violence.

3

surreal wrote (edited )

i've tried friend i've tried. non-violence non-cooperation and the Ghandi school just doesn't work in this planet. not with this human kind.

5

Splinglebot wrote

I'm not a pacifist but I do think lethal force should be avoided unless absolutely necessary. I'm not really a fan of emotionally driven retribution unless we can be certain that doing so will prevent further harm.

Although to be fair, I don't know the specifics of this situation

3

this_one wrote

unless we can be certain that doing so will prevent further harm.

At that point, isn't it no longer retribution? If the goal is to prevent harm, wouldn't that make it consequentialist/restorative justice?

2

ziq wrote

The specifics: guy raped and killed people. Hercules killed him for it.

1

ziq wrote

Shouldn't that be for the victim to decide?

5

boom OP wrote

Declaring yourself the arbiter of praxis isn't praxis.

4