Saman

Since everyone is writing about the girl who seems to have been killed because she did not agree to marry a cousin, I feel like talking not about what is said, but what is NOT said. Because that's often where all the self-righteous shit hides.

I am not commenting on the fact that in the Pakistani tribal world it is so common to marry a cousin. And I don't wonder what happens to the gene pool after thousands of years of marrying cousins. I suppose over there when someone manages to turn on a light bulb using the switch, they give him a doctorate. At least.

And the problem is not even a problem of "integration". That stuff isn't legal, full stop. A criminal does not have "integration problems", just as Hitler did not have "problems with Jewish cuisine". Anyone who commits a crime has problems with the law, and since the law does not process intentions and psychic events, the fact that it "is normal" for him has no meaning.

Nor do I comment on the fact that an entire investigation was born without a single complaint, without the corpse, without the murder weapon, simply with an image showing peasants holding a shovel in their hand. The judiciary has its own mysterious ways.

I do not comment on the Islamic community which says "you must not kill women like this because it is not Islamic". And since when have we asked the Islamic community what should we do? If by chance it were the other way around, would it be lawful? If Islam were allowed to kill under these conditions, should we accept it? Someone explains to those goats that the law of the state exists, and what Islam says about it we rinse our hairy balls vastly? But that's not up to me, so I'm not going to write a whole article on this. With what Islam says, I rinse my balls in private, as is done in a secularized country.

On the contrary, what I want to comment is what I do NOT see. Because I see, at least from the newspapers, that there is an investigation for "murder" open. But the Italian law provides for gender-based murder, known as "femicide". The very interesting thing is that not only is the investigation not for "femicide", but no "woke" newspaper in Italy uses this term.

Femicide was supposed to be the case created to indicate the murders of women, if they occur for reasons of gender, of contempt for the female gender, of hatred towards the female gender. "Gender Murder".

The murder of Saman, if it happened, falls in all respects within this definition. There is no doubt that killing a woman because a "tradition" says that women must marry whoever wants a family because they are women, and if they rebel they must be killed, is an evident, clear, clear case of "femicide ".

Oddly, this is the murder of a woman in which the word "femicide" is mentioned less. It is not a question of big data, you can see it by eye. There was talk of "femicide" even when Luana died at work. But woe to the world to talk about it now.

And there is a reason for this:

the true definition of femicide is not "gender murder", but "race murder". By "femicide" we do not mean "a man who kills a woman because she is a woman", but a WHITE man who kills a woman because she is a woman. The others do not commit "femicide": it seems to be a normal murder.

There is a precise reason for this silence. The concept of femicide does not differ from that of murder for material factors such as "an inhuman tool is used", but because it is supposed that femicide is a murder that has a precise culture at its foundations . That is, the material fact is mixed with a "culture" that makes it possible. Along with killing, the culture underlying killing is also judged .

Femicide as an accusation processes, together with the act of killing a woman, the culture that leads to the murder of a woman.

The problem is that the sponsors of this idea are also vastly anti-Western. And they have created a death trap, because once it is decided that the accusation of femicide tries the crime TOGETHER with the culture that underlies it, then it becomes a trial (also) against the Pakistani tribal culture.

This is the trap one falls into when mixing a trial against a material act with a trial against a concept: the "concept" is a cauldron into which anything can fall, including Pakistani traditions, including the whole Islam.

We have built up a type of crime that indicates the culture underlying a murder as aggravating . It can be called "patriarchy", as the feminists want, or "Pakistani tribalism", and sooner or later it will happen that this culture will be called "Islam". It's just a matter of time and probability.

And let's be clear, not all tribal cultures are the same. If I killed a woman because she doesn't know how to make piadina, or because she puts red wine in the tortellini broth (obtaining the dark matter that science has been looking for for years), my tribal culture would say that I did well. Strangely, the tribal culture of Emilia Romagna is not taken into consideration as much as the Pakistani one. Perhaps the Romagna tribal culture is less authentic? Yes, because in Pakistan they are kinda niggers , and therefore their tribal culture is authentic: but we are not racist if we say it.

Let me be clear, big data is not needed to compare the number of appearances of the term "femicide" in gender-based murders committed by Italians, and those committed by people who come from non-Western cultures. The difference is embarrassing, and you can see it by eye.

They were in such a hurry to slam the Western patriarchy into the dock that they did not wonder what would happen at the first contact with other patriarchates. Those that really exist, for example.

Moreover, even the term "partiarchal" or "patriarchy", "male chauvinism" or "male chauvinism" follows the same law. You can look for them, the news, and you will notice it: these words appear very often when it is a European / Italian who beats or kills his partner, but they are rarely mentioned when it is a foreigner who does it.

And the reason is obvious:

if we were to measure "patriarchy" on a scale of one to ten, and as feminists do we give a 10 grade to Western society (which according to those ladies is the top of the shit), to Pakistani society we should give, approximately, 70,000 points, and to the Islamic religion something like 100,000 points.

And if we make laws that together with a crime also process this culture, the clash with the most patriarchal cultures on the planet (the REALLY patriarchal ones, I mean), is imminent. It is not a question of "if", but of "when".

The fact is that an evaluation of merit on male chauvinism, patriarchy or misogyny has been included in a law, which will now have to enter into the merits of ALL these crimes, even when it is necessary to evaluate the machismo and misogyny of culture. Indian, Islamic countries, Chinese culture, Japanese culture.

What could possibly go wrong?

In any case, Saman's death makes us understand one thing:

if you don't want the accusation of gender crime, and you still want to kill your wife, convert to Islam and change your name like Mohammed al Salam. In this way, the aggravating circumstance of the gender crime will be removed, because otherwise it would be to say that Islam is a male-dominated and feminicidal culture.

And femicide is no longer definable as a gender crime, but as a race crime. It is such only if the murderer is a white man.

What could possibly go wrong?