Torture

The poem “The interrogation” by Edwin Muir is about the different ways that people deal with and react in different situations. I think this poem is about a few emigrants who are illegally crossing the border to enter a country they are not lawfully permitted to. The interrogation that the poem talks about is the questioning that these people are put through by the law enforcement troops that these emigrants encounter at the border.

We know that the poem is about this illegal emigration because at the beginning of the poem states, “and then came the patrol;” This confirms that there is a governmental group of people involved. I think the central opposition of the poem is about courage and fear. The way these people choose to handle the ‘interrogation’ determines whether or not they will be able to cross the border. If they answer with courage and confidence then they will be much more likely to be allowed through as opposed to if they answer with fear. We know that they reacted unwisely in this scenario because the poem says they “hesitated” in their approach to crossing the border. This is what led them to be interrogated by the “patrol”.

This has a direct relation to real life; you are more likely to succeed in things that you handle with courage then those that you handle with fear, as fear leads to suspicion. These people are doing an illegal act and we know that they handle the situation with the wrong approach. We are further confirmed that what these people are doing is illegal when the poem says “Must come out now, who, what we are,” It conveys a sense of deception to the readers. I also think that according to the poem some people, that were confident and came as families were let through to cross the border with ease. This is supported because the poem says, “The careless lovers in pairs go by,”

Near the end of the poem, the poet talks about the response and state of mind of these emigrants. The poem tells us that these people are getting more nervous as they are being questioned more and more. This is a build-up in the poem and it demonstrates how the people are increasingly getting more nervous as this interrogation progresses. We know so from the following lines,

“And the thoughtless field is near.

We are on the very edge,

Endurance almost done,

And still the interrogation is going on.”

There is a contrast between the different groups of people shown in this poem because the people that are going in “pairs” tend not to “hesitate” when they cross the border, whereas these other people do. This is a contrast between the different ways that people handle situations. We can assume, from the evidence that I have given that it is an interrogation that questions the actions of these emigrants and why they are trying to cross the border. These would be regular routine questions. The fact that the poem is written using “we” shows that there is more than one and perhaps it’s a gang or group of people. However, the impression that is given to the readers is that these emigrants are innocent people just looking for a new home, rather than a group of criminals.

The poem is written in clear language and has a lasting effect on the readers. It demonstrates how actions can determine where different people will end up in the long run. It gives the readers a chance to think of how and why some of the people were held back and interrogated while others weren’t and crossed this road without difficulty. The effect of the courage and fear aspects is significant and seems like it was the main intention of the reader to highlight those features in the poem. They happen to be very effective techniques in catching the reader’s attention. However, the poem is not so predictable and changes its style in which the points are pointed out to the reader often.

In that day and age it was all too easy for criminals to flee from a crime UN accused and unpunished seeing as there was no major arm of law present to further investigate certain crimes or follow up on possible suspects, s a result when an individual was caught for a crime or under suspicion they were tortured as a means to obtain a confession. The Justice system and the practice of torture presented both the victims and the accused with many problems however this was all due to the harsh realities of the 18th century.

From a modern point of view torture is seen as outrageous and inhumane however in the 18th century it was practiced as an attempt to set an example for society and lower the overall crime rate, although the barbarity of these acts reflects poorly on behalf the 1 8th century society there were still many people who saw torture for its egregious nature and advocated for more tolerant alternatives.

Torture was used since the beginning of collocation however the practice became extremely popular during the 18th century, an era where using brute force was regularly encouraged. Torture existed well before the eighteenth century; the Greeks and Egyptians also used torture as means of obtaining a confession however torture for the purpose of interrogation was usually conducted in private it was hidden because they were aware of the social and political Implications that followed.

As Roman law adapted torture became part of the official Justice system of the 1 8th century, a system where the accused we tried, tortured and executed in public so that everyone was aware of the punishment that would follow crime. Torture was at its peak during the inquisition period where heretics were persecuted and tortured if they refused to change their religion or admit they were not Roman Catholic. It was this period, which were called “the witch trials” that reintroduced torture to Europe.

Slaves and others of lower class were also falsely accused and tortured for petty individual would suffer being stretched on the rack, a public whipping or exposure in the stocks. Torture was used to set an example to others in society as an attempt to lower the overall crime rate and obtain a confession. Most punishments in the 18th century took place in public; torture was an elaborate and shocking practice that was intended to discourage anyone who watched from crime.

It was a threat to all criminals and a warning to all citizens, in a day countless amounts of people were tortured to death without a trial or a clear dissertation of their offense. This caused an outrage amongst many members of society who wanted to see change and improvement on a level where issues were approached in a more humanistic manner. Many enlightenment philosophies protested for a more tolerant society, people like Voltaire spoke against the evils of the Justice system and torture until he died.

In his writing Scientific Religion he says: “What horror is this, a secret Judgment a more execrable tyranny than that of spilling blood on a whim without giving the least reason, it is important for everyone that such decisions should be biblically justified” (Brains, 1998) Voltaire biggest issue with torture was the fact that people were not Justified with an explanation for what they had done, they were not given a trial or a chance to defend themselves. It was said that an accused individual would be tortured and if they were indeed not guilty God would save them from their predicament.

Torture as a tool of interrogation is not a new phenomenon, in the Greek playwright “The Frogs” the Aristotelian asked a character which method they should use to torture a slave and he replied: “In any mode you please pile bricks upon him, stuff his SSE with acid, flay, rack him, hoist him or flog him with a scourge of prickly bristles” (Ramose, Dupes, Zoological, & Careened, 2005) The method of piling bricks on an individual was used to force the person into a plea of guilty or not guilty during a felony case.

Flaying involved the removal of a portion of the skin from the body, flaying was also used as a method of execution, when a larger portion of skin was removed. The rack was a torture device that consisted of a frame with a roller on both ends the victim was chained by the hands and legs to both ends of the frame ND the rollers were turned which would slowly pull the victim’s body in opposite directions causing their Joints to come apart.

The process of hoisting an individual consisted of binding the victim’s hands and hanging them by a rope attached to their hands causing their shoulder blades to dislocate. Flogging is a method where an individual is struck with a whip tipped with sharp ends meant to tear the victims flesh. The methods that were described in the playwright were used by the Greeks and then adapted and practiced by the 18th century society.

A large number of the 18th century torture methods proved to be Just as their cruel abilities, whether they fell victim to torture through their own actions or due to false accusations. Society was no longer running on the basis of obeying the laws to protect everyone but more so obeying to stay alive. Cesar Bacteria spoke out against the corruption of the Justice system, in his essay on crimes and punishment he tries to educate people on the possible alternatives to torture while still for maintaining order and putting crime at bay: “It is better to prevent crimes that to knish them…

Do you want to prevent crimes? See to that the laws are clear and simple and that the entire force of the nation is in their defense. See to it that men fear the law and nothing else, the fear of laws is salutary but the fear of men is a fruitful and fatal source of crimes. ” (Halls, 1977) Cesar understood that torture would never be the solution to crime and he made it clear in his essay that it was barbaric and outrageous and if there were to be any advancement in the 18th century society torture had to end.

From a modern point of view torture is seen as outrageous and inhumane however in the 18th century it was practiced as an attempt to set an example for society and lower the overall crime rate, although the barbarity of these acts reflect poorly on behalf the 18th century society there were still many people who saw torture for its egregious nature and advocated for more tolerant alternatives. Torture was used since the beginning of civilization and then adapted by 18th century Romans however they changed the practice in to something more horrific than it originally was.

Gerard asserts his eminence in his relationship with Pauline; he believes his persuasive words will always have its desired effect on Paling’s actions. ‘Of course I’m going to listen to you. Haven’t I always listened to you? And he is surprised when she doesn’t listen. ‘You believe too much in your own powers of persuasion’. He is very manipulative, such as in the beginning of the play in which he is unsatisfied with the response he received, he continues to convince Pauline until he gets the answer he wanted, also going behind her back.

He acted as though he genuinely cared about her opinion in the matter of his position on he committee when in reality, he had already accepted. Yes. Told him I’d do it. Yes. Before asking you. ‘. He also appears to be a lair and doesn’t seem to understand women as well as he likes. Pauline is a suspicious wife, knowing that Gerard did it once, he could very well do it again and with that, she insinuates his infidelity numerous times before outright managing to get him to confess to it.

Though despite that, they are still married and do love each other, her going as far as protecting Gerard while she was being tortured but not saying anything about him. They make sacrifices for each other as ell. How does the play. Inherit use details of the setting and atmosphere to illustrate the mood of the play? They are in a small beach house with a balcony and are able to hear the ocean. It also sounds secluded which isolates the scene. They use moonlight to light some specific part of the scene which omits everything else and has us focusing on one particular part which might bring a mood.

The atmosphere shifts constantly with Pauline sort of falling in and out of sanity creating a particularly dramatic mood to the play, pulling you to keep reading to figure out what she does next. When Reboot’s atmosphere shows a sort of irritants and confusion it has you wondering whether he really is innocent. The last scene too, with the mirror having it reflect back at you leaves you to really take a good look at yourself and have you think hard about the events of the play having you fill out the gaps in which the author left ambiguous.

Assess Paling’s actions. Why does she react precisely in the way that she does? Paling’s actions were premeditated and brave bordering on the edge Of crazy. She has been deeply traumatized by her past which leads to her paranoia and personal vendetta that she has laced upon Roberto. Pauline acts precisely in the way that she does because for fifteen years she has been haunted by her rape and torture which leaves her in an unstable state of mind which had finally cotton the best of her when the man she claims to be one of her captors show up on her doorstep.

What would be Justice Pauline? Feel that for Pauline to find her justice would be for the people who have traumatized her to admit what they have done and be punished for it. Her idea to first retaliate in the same fashion (to rape him with a broomstick and torture him) would not make her forgive him. It would satisfy her for the time being but not fully. For her to have justice would be to have the torturers confess in a hand written confession. Her new idea to have the letter written seems to satisfy her in a way that she would feel justice.

The written letter is also a good idea to convince herself that she is correct in the way that Roberto is actually the Doctor who assisted in her torture. I also believe by her taking the law into her own hands, she has been able to gather the kind of answers only she could be searching for. What problems does an author face in dramatist’s torture? How does Doorman achieve this? When traumatizing torture, the problem quite possibly the rate at which you reveal it.

Doorman achieved the perfect amount of torture by hinting bits and pieces to get you thinking and then finally reeling us in with the entire story and his ability to constantly shift the balance of sympathy between the oppressed and the oppressor. What role do sexuality and sexual/gender roles play in the drama? There are a multitude of examples that suggest sexist views from the male characters. Both Gerard and Miranda speak of women as confusing pieces that are completely inhuman and act as though it is a shared knowledge between them.

Gerard appears to have a dominant role over Pauline, acting manipulative toward her and believing he has a higher power over her. Many times he is heard stating that Pauline would make the meal expecting that she will do it because he knows she will. ‘Not another word. Pauline will be delighted. You’ll see the breakfast she’ll make for us. ‘ In this example he also assumes that Pauline will automatically be delighted with a random guest despite how she acts when an unfamiliar car turns up at her souse. ‘Of the two things you never share, my friend, one is your toothbrush. What is the significance of the setting for this play? Ariel Doorman carefully explains in his stage directions that Death and the Maiden is set in “a country that is probably Chile but could be any country that has given itself a democratic government just after a long period of dictatorship” which helps us to understand what exactly the significance is of Greaser’s position on the commission appointed to investigate the crimes committed under the regime. It plays one of the most important aspects to he characters conflict between justice and the love for his wife who decides to take the law into her own hands.

It emphasizes what kind Of negative control a dictatorship has and the effects of it. Why does Pauline lock the door? Is it to keep Gerard safe or to keep him away? Act 1, Scene 3 It’s the middle of the night and Pauline is written doing something suspicious. She is seen going into her living room and pulling out her gun and her stockings. She then goes to Reboot’s room, listening, and then goes in. A confused muffled cry is heard then silence. Pauline goes back to her own mom and locks the door.

She then goes back onto Reboot’s room and pulls out what suspiciously looks like a body before wing it to a chair. We learn that the body is indeed Reboot’s. She collects all of Reboot’s belongings and goes to leave the house, but not before taking off her underwear and gagging Roberto. She leaves the house in Reboot’s car and leaving Gerard locked in his room and Roberto tied to a chair. Act 1, Scene 4 It’s early in the morning and Roberto is tied to a chair and gagged only just waking up to find Pauline sitting in front of him with a gun. He is confused.

Seeing that he is awake, Pauline greets him kindly, as though he weren’t tied to a chair and gagged, she proceeds to converse with him almost normally. She begins her monologue moving from one topic to another. A friend Roberto might be related to, her early career as a student to become a doctor and asking him his preference for sandwiches. We begin to see she could possibly have some mental problems. He unlocks her bedroom door. She also turns on Death and the Maiden from the cassette she stole from Reboot’s car gushing about how much she loved it and now how it haunts her.

Gerard wakes up shocked, and goes to untie Roberto Miranda, but Pauline, convinced Miranda is one of her captors tells Gerard so. He seems UN entirely convinced and tells her she is sick which she denies. He tries to convince Pauline to let R. Miranda go but she is entirely convinced. And due to her assuredness, she tells Gerard her plan to put him on trial, like he would do if he was on the commission. Act 2, scene 1 Gerard has left to fetch his car, Roberto is still tied and Pauline has her back to him, and begins to relay of the horrors she suffered in the doctor’s “care. “

She had estranged herself from her parents, so when she was released, she had very few choices of where to go. Roberto makes a movement as if he wants to speak, but she makes him wait, thinking he’s hungry, and imitates the doctor’s voice for a moment. She then explains why he wouldn’t have known about Gerard and made the connection to her. She had not mentioned Gerard in all the time that she was being tortured, but his house is where she went as soon as she was released. Gerard then returns to the house, and Pauline enquires how it went and whether the flat was fixed. He doesn’t answer.

Michael Levin’s “The Case for Torture” argues that there are various reasons for allowing torture to exist in the United States of America. Levin would love to see society change its negative views on torture so that, under certain circumstances, torture would be permissible. The article starts off with a very brief description of how he believes society views the subject of torture as a negative thing. He leads on to oppose that way of thinking and provides three cases in which he believes torture must be administered with various reasons attempting to support his thoughts.

The hypothetical cases Levin uses range from very extreme situations, to a situation where we may sometimes see on the news. Levin makes it clear to the audience that he does not agree with torture as a punishment and focuses on exactly what it should be used for. He also stresses that there is an important difference between terrorists and victims and he believes it would stop the talk of “terrorist rights”. Levin also writes on his belief that most terrorist do their crimes for publicity and because of that, the terrorist shall be fairly easy to identify and later be tortured.

He closes the article by saying torture would cause little danger to western democracies and predicting what he believes will happen in the future. After many through readings of Michael Levin’s article, I feel the attitude he carries along thorough the article presents him as an aggressively self assured person. Most of the reasoning he gives is heavily based on pathetic appeals. The force of pathos he puts into the reader is very compelling but does not fulfill the argument as well as it should because of the lack of good logic and reasoning. Levin uses three main points to convince readers why torture should be used.

The first major point includes three hypothetical cases as big reason to why it‘s important. His second point explains the reason for the need of torture. Finally he states who gets to receive the torturing and briefly describes what the outcome may be. Levin’s biggest point is generated from the three hypothetical cases he provides the reader with. In my opinion, they are clearly work more as an emotional example and not a sound reason. The 1st case is one in which an atomic bomb is planted on Manhattan Island and will blow at noon. The suspect demands money and release of his friends from jail.

He is caught at 10 A. M. and the man won’t disclose any information on the bomb. “What do you do” (201)? The 2nd case speaks of a bomb on a jumbo jet. The suspect’s demands cannot be met. Won’t we do anything to the extortionist to the save the passengers (201)? The 3rd hypothetical case is provided with results from a four person poll. The case is one in which a newborn baby is kidnapped from a hospital. Would you allow the torturing of the kidnapper in order to get him back? I feel that all three hypothetical situations have something about them that do not make me feel convinced.

The first situation in which the bomb is planted Manhattan Island seems too unrealistic due to reasons that you don’t always hear of this kind of stuff on the news and also that the bomber is captured. Even if a person demands money and release of his friends from jail, Levin does not explain how somebody would go about finding this person wherever he is hiding? Levin also has a very weak spot in explaining the situation because when he speaks of the bomber, he says “Preferring death to failure – Won’t disclose where the bomb is. ”(201).

Saying to readers he prefers death to failure would logically mean that, even if tortured, the man is still not going to disclose the information because he would rather die than failing his mission in receiving his needs. The second situation’s weakness’ comes from a lack of critical information and once again the rareness of the situation. The situation involves a Jumbo Jet in which a bomb has been planted which can be defused ONLY by the bomber which is in police custody. Levin says “Surely we can, we must, do anything to the extortionist to save the passengers” (201).

Once again, what exactly is torture going to do in this situation if the bomb is in the air on the plane? How exactly is the bomb going to be defused? I feel that this situation could have made much better of an argument if he would have taken the time to clear up exactly how the bomb was going to get defused. Later in the paragraph Levin adds in, “If you caught the terrorist, could you sleep nights knowing that millions died because you couldn’t bring yourself to apply the electrodes? “(201). It is clearly an emotionally loaded sentence.

He purposely italicizes the word “you” because he wants you to sink into that thought and make you feel really bad about the situation. The third hypothetical case, which I consider weakest, is explained with results of an informal poll based on the situation. In the poll, four mothers are asked if they would approve the torturing of the kidnapper that kidnaps their child if that were necessary to get them back. All four mothers said they would approve of it. I feel this argument does not give a great example of what makes torture acceptable.

It is more of an example to show what someone would do for their loved ones. Its weakness is clearly seen in the number of participants in the poll that he is using and in the biased opinion they most likely already had. The best part of Levin’s reasoning is expressed when he speaks of why exactly he believes torture should be accepted and not viewed upon as something horrible. In the article, Levin says “I am advocating torture as an acceptable measure for preventing future evils. ”(201). He does a good job of making it clear exactly what he means.

In doing so, he briefly explains an argument he believes people against the death penalty use. The argument is that by killing the murderer, you are not bringing back the victim that was killed. Levin explains that instead of killing after a murder has occurred, he advocates that torturing someone stops the innocent from being dispatched. Levin makes it clear that torture should ONLY be used for the saving of lives. This leads to what he believes is the most powerful argument against torture. People would insist that such practices disregard the rights of the individual.

Levin first counter-argument is presented when he says “Well, if the individual is all that important, and he is, it is correspondingly important to protect the rights of individuals threatened by terrorist. “(201). It seemed like a very sound argument to me because of the way he used anti-torture line to support his pro-torture argument. Levin later says “Unlike his victims, he (the terrorist) volunteered the risks of his deed. By threatening to kill for profit or idealism, he renounces civilized standards, and he can have no complaint if civilization tries to thwart him by whatever means necessary. (202).

He thinks if a person decides to oppose civilized standards, he should not expect to be treated with the same rights as the people who do follow civilized standards. Although it sounds reasonable, he does make an assumption here. Levin assumes that the suspect KNOWS they are going against civilized standards. Does this mean that a sociopath that cannot distinguish between civilized standards would not be tortured? I feel a bit more of clarification could help this argument. Levin addresses the issue of torturing the wrong person.

He starts off by making an assumption terrorist proclaim themselves and perform for television and public recognition. Levin says “After all, you can’t very well intimidate a government into releasing your freedom fighters unless you announce that it is your group that has seized its embassy. ”(202). It is just another hypothetical situation to bend things his way without providing documented evidence of a real life situation where the terrorist actually identified themselves. It is as though in his eyes, he thinks finding the right perpetrator is a very simple task.

Finally, in the last paragraph he says “There will be little danger that the western democracies will lose their way if they choose to inflict pain as a way of preserving order. I noticed that his claim seems a bit modified in the last paragraph. Levin starts the article speaking of torture ONLY for the saving of innocent lives, but now, he speaks of torture for preserving order. Does this broaden up the whole claim? He also predicts that someday soon many lives will be threatened and torture will be the only way to save them.

This prediction is supported by no evidence what so ever and is clearly only to provide fear to the person reading it. The discussion of key terms was decent in this article. When he speaks of torture the closest description I found that define torture to Levin is: “Subjecting someone to the most excruciating pain. ” This may seem like a great description of what we see as torture but the example of torture he mentions is “having the electrodes applied”. I really wasn’t sure what he was referring to until I looked it up online and read that electrodes are what kill you in the electric chair.

I believe he did not provide any better example of this because it can very well make a reader oppose of the torturing right away if he speaks of a more gruesome example. Levin also uses the word moral cowardice to describe allowing the death of millions of innocent lives. He does a good job by explaining that it means the unwillingness of dirtying ones hands. Regarding tone and ethos, the author starts off taking a big risk by introducing the topic of torture as something societies reject outright, then saying he opposes the beliefs of society on that topic. Not only does he just oppose it, he says it is unwise.

I think by doing that, he may give the reader a sense that he thinks only his beliefs are wise and that he does not respect any other ideas. Throughout the article, Levin continues to carry the attitude of a know it all. Levin says “Opponents of the death penalty, for example are forever insisting that executing a murderer will not bring back his victim. “(201). In case you didn’t notice, he says “forever insisting”. This presents an assumption in a way to make it seem like fact that death penalty opponents ALWAYS insist executing will not bring back his victim.

Not only does his statement risk offending the death penalty opponents, it can also continue to promote his know it all attitude which can surely annoy other people too. Another occasion of his overly aggressive attitude is when he says “Once you concede that torture is justified in extreme cases, you have admitted that the decision to use torture is a matter of balancing innocent lives against the means needed to save them. “(201). Whether or not it makes sense, he is clearly making an assumption that we admit to something by agreeing on another thing. The way he worded that may seem a bit too aggressive for a general audience.

On the other hand, some people can also see that attitude as a good thing because they feel the person they are listening to actually knows what they are talking about. Even though he carries the cocky attitude through most of the article, when it comes to speaking of his hypothetical cases he tries to change his tone to more of an emotional one that is more likely to affect the reader. This however is a good thing, because it can make the reader a bit more vulnerable to falling into his emotional example. Ultimately then “The Case for Torture” is very mixed in effectiveness.

The hypothetical cases sound a bit too rare and unlikely to appen but it can cause the audience to think it out. Only minor elements of his reasoning are sound and effective. But his reasoning needs a bit more of support from some other place and his hypothetical situations can certainly use some actually documentation of the occurrences he speaks of. I do not believe this essay does the total job in changing people’s minds from anti-torture to pro-torture. But I do think that the people who were already anti-torture surely hate this guy a bit more especially because of the attitude. I think this essay leaves a large amount of places for it to be attacked by a person who does not believe in torture.

Running Head: RAPE VICTIMS IN KOSOVO DURING WAR Rape Victims in Kosovo during War Manjola Cuka ENGL 135 Advanced Composition Catherine Davis April 20, 2009 DeVry University, We all are aware of the suffering that war brings in people’s lives. War means losing everything you hold dear. War means losing your childhood home, war means losing your husband, wife, child, brother, and sister. During the war in Kosovo there were a number of brutal actions performed towards the Kosovo population physically and emotionally.

The Serbs knew exactly what these people valued the most in their lives. That is honor. Among other inhuman and degrading acts executed towards the Kosovo people during the war, the Serbs used rape as a tool to destroy not only the women as individuals but also their families to the core. According to McKinsey (1993), there were an estimated twenty thousand females raped during the war in Kosovo. That is a large number considering that population of Kosovo is a little over two million people. The Kosovo population had been trying to gain their independence for almost a decade.

They were only asking for their rights: the freedom of speech, the right to send the children to schools where they can learn their own language, the freedom of media, and the freedom of living in their own country without fear. This is their country and they were only asking for what was theirs. According to the U. S State Department report (1999), the Serbs started an “ethnic cleansing” campaign that was meant to remove all the non Serb population out of the country. The most gruesome acts towards these people started to get worse after NATO troops bombed the Serb military points on March 24, 1999.

Serbs decided to punish the people by forcing them out of their homes, burning their houses, torturing them, raping them, and killing them. Rape was the main weapon used against the Kosovo women to terrorize and weaken the entire population. Shenon (1999), reports on these gruesome activities that were taking place in Kosovo: “The department’s report said that refugee accounts suggested that Serbian forces had executed more than 4,000 Kosovars, and that surveillance photographs taken either by satellites or airplanes had identified seven possible sites of mass graves.

The report said that rapes of Albanian women were being reported in increasing numbers, with systematic mass rapes apparently carried out in the cities of Djakovica and Pec. ” To understand the consequences that rape has in the lives of the Kosovo people, we have to understand how they are raised and the beliefs that are engraved in them throughout the years. The people of Kosovo value family and country more than their own lives. The young girls are raised to believe that their role in the world is to get married, have children, and take care of the chores around the house.

There is a distinguished difference the way these people lived their lives. Men were the bread winners and women were there to raise the children and take care of the house. If there was male company in the house, the females would only serve them and go to their rooms until the company left. One of Dr. Alakija (2000) reports explains how a team of males was greeted only by Kosovo males, and when a team of females went to investigate they were greeted by females. It is not appropriate for strange males to discuss with the Kosovo females even to get their testimony.

Another important part of these people’s lives is marriage. Dating outside marriage is prohibited in their culture and the girl should not lose their virginity until she gets married. The girls that had pre marital relationships are called unfit for any man to marry. So after knowing these facts we can only imagine, what rape means to these people. The women lose their purity after being touched by another man even though it is not their fault. No man would come close to them for the rest of their lives. They would live the rest of their days hating themselves and wishing they were dead.

The Kosovo women were raped and tortured systematically in front of their loved ones ruining them physically and emotionally for the rest of their lives. There are statements of pregnant women who were raped and beaten by either gunpoint or by being tortured. The physical pain these women endured can never be compared with the emotional and mental damage they went through. There is not a bigger humiliation than being raped in front of your father, your mother, your brother, your uncle, and your children. How can someone be the same after going through something like that?

These women were raped in front of their children, no matter what age. It is heartbreaking and infuriating at the same time how these individuals would put children and mothers in these inhuman situations. One of the many rape victims explained how helpless she was when being held down by multiple individuals while another was raping her. This is how she describes her torment: “I could not resist, I could not fight against them,” the witness, a woman identified as N. S. , testified. ”I could not resist because the others were holding me while my children were watching” (Sullivan, 2000).

Another horrific fact during the war was that the Serbs raped these women with the intention to make them pregnant. There are two reasons the Serbs impregnated the Kosovo women: one was to dishonor them and their families for life and second one to increase the Serb population with their children. According to BBC News (2000), only the month of January of 2000, there were one hundred rape babies born. That is a large number for this small community. How were these women able to live every day knowing that inside them was the child of the enemy.

The enemy that killed their man, the enemy that kicked them out of their own homes, the enemy that raped them in front of their loved ones. As Both (2001), noted “The term ‘genocidal rape’ is both emotionally and politically loaded, but is does seem to accurately reflect the realities felt by some if not all raped women in the conflict. As we saw above, some raped Muslim women reported that their attackers claimed that they were intending to impregnate them to create Serbian babies, and that some women were held captive for a period of weeks to ensure that they did not abort the child they had conceived in rape” (p. 4). Honor is the most valuable virtue in the Kosovo society. Serbs knew they would humiliate and degrade not only the Kosovo women but their families and their loved ones. After being raped these women would never speak of the ordeal they went through and would hide it from everyone if they could. These women would rather be dead then share their torment with someone else especially if it was someone they did not know. They would rather keep the pain to themselves if that was an option. It was not enough they suffered rom the torture that was used against them, but they had to live in fear of losing everything they held dear even though this was not their fault. The raped Kosovo women would not share these ordeals with their own families for the fear of bringing shame to their entire family. The husband would leave the wife if they found out she was raped. Here is one example of a husband that suspects his young wife was raped: “Mr. Thaqi says his wife, who did not want her name published, denies the rape because ”she doesn’t dare tell that kind of story. ‘ If she admitted it to him, he said, ”I would ask for a divorce — even if I had 20 children. ” As his wife listened, silent and shamefaced, in a corner of their empty home, looted of all furniture and possessions by the Serbs, Mr. Thaqi added: ”I don’t hate her, but the story is before my eyes. I feel very cold toward her. ” Kissing her, he said, ”is like kissing a dead body” (Bumiller, 1999). It is not hard enough that they were raped and humiliated but they have to live with the shame for the rest of their lives. Most of these women lock themselves in their parents’ homes until they die either by choice or they are forced.

It is heartbreaking how the community and their families expect them to commit suicide for something that was not their fault. Serbs knew that by raping the women they would destroy their families. What other method could be better then destroy a country to its core? These women live the rest of their lives excluded from the outside world wishing they were dead. The husbands live the rest of their lives wishing their wives were dead. Their parents live their lives wishing their daughter was dead. In the Kosovo culture rape carries a very strong social taboo and shame keeps victims silent.

The women and men of Kosovo are not as afraid of death as they are of rape. “Rape is a deeply sensitive subject in ethnic Albanian Kosovo, a Muslim and largely traditional society, where a sexual assault can permanently stigmatize a woman, shaming her family and ruining her marriage or prospects of marriage. Gathering first-hand accounts of rape has proved very difficult for war crimes investigators, and the scale of sexual assaults here may never be fully known” (Finn, 1999). They cannot tolerate the thought of their women being touched by another man.

This degrading act not only humiliates the women but it demoralizes the men that are fighting in the mountains. That was one of the biggest war strategies the Serbs used to defeat the Kosovo people. And this was one more reason the women keep the rape secret. They want their husbands, their fathers, and their brothers to fight for their country instead of carrying the family shame in their shoulders. The world came together to help the rape victims with everything they needed. The biggest issue the humanitarian organizations were facing was the non cooperation from the victims and their families.

Under no circumstances they would admit they were raped unless there were witnesses to testify to that. Even then it would be very difficult to treat these patients. Knowing the consequences of admitting they were raped, what mother would risk losing her children to get medical treatment? How can they put their own well being before their children? They considered themselves dead anyway. They would rather live in pain for the rest of their lives with their children around them, then medically treated and have lost their families.

They would shut down and most of the time they would deny they were raped. There are a large number of cases that are not officially reported as we have seen in different reports: “Rape: There are numerous accounts indicating that the organized and individual rape of Kosovar Albanian women by Serbian forces was widespread. For example, Serbian forces systematically raped women in Djakovica and Pec, and in some cases rounded up women and took them to hotels where they were raped by troops under encouragement of their commanders.

Rape is most likely an underreported atrocity because of the stigma attached to the victims in traditional Kosovar Albanian society” (U. S State Department Report, 1999) It is unthinkable in some cultures to comprehend how these families treat the rape victims, particularly these women that were forced into these acts and had no other choice. Instead of embracing them and try to help them get through these tough times, they throw them in the streets and also blame them for the shame they bring to the family. There is no mercy for the raped victims.

What can be worse than having your own parents, the ones that gave you life, the ones that raised and nurtured you, wish you were dead? These rape victims find their way out by shutting down or by going in the mountains and join the man in the fight for their freedom. They have no life next to their own family. They choose to leave and fight to get away from the staring eyes of their neighbors and everyone else that gets in contact with them. The biggest reason is to take their humiliation with them and spare their family the shame and embarrassment.

Here are the words of a father of a rape victim: “I have given her to the KLA so she can do to the Serbs what they have done to us,” Haxhi Lokaj said of his daughter, who has been sent to fight with the rebels of the Kosovo Liberation Army. “She will probably be killed, but that would be for the best,” the 40-year-old father said with more resignation than sorrow. “She would have no future anyway after what they did to her” he continued (Williams, 1999). There are different approaches the enemy uses to destroy a population to the core in the time of war.

Serbs used the most degrading act to ruin the Kosovo families for life. That was rape. Death does not come close to the pain and the outcome that rape brings in these peoples’ lives. If the women and men died protecting their country, fighting for their rights, or protecting themselves from being abused, they would be praised. In contrary if the women were raped but survived, for no fault of their own, they were the humiliation of their family and the whole community. Compassion for the rape victims does not exist.

It will take a long time and a few generations for these people to start living a full life. It will not be easy for these memories to be erased from their minds. References Alakija, P (2000). The ravages of war. Retrieved April 21, 2009 from http://www. cmaj. ca/cgi/content/full/163/9/1148 BBC News. (2000). Women scarred by Kosovo atrocities. Retrieved April 17, 2009 from http://news. bbc. co. uk/2/hi/europe/716701. stmBooth, K (2001). The Kosovo tragedy: the human rights dimensions. (1st Ed. ) Oxford: Routledge, member of the Taylor & Francis Group.

Retrieved April 15, 2009 from http://books. google. com/books? id=777jPodhCYYC&dq=The+Kosovo+tragedy:+the+human+rights+dimensions. &printsec=frontcover&source=bn&hl=en&ei=8HLuSaSYMYuqtgeEgMHMDw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4Bumiller, E. (1999). Crisis in the Balkans: Crimes; Deny Rape or Be Hated: Kosovo Victims’ Choice. Retrieved April 15, 2009 from http://www. nytimes. com/1999/06/22/world/crisis-in-the-balkans-crimes-deny-rape-or-be-hated-kosovo-victims-choice. html? n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/Subjec

• When Marji was inventing torture games, she was merely a product of the war environment.

Marji lived in an environment surrounded by violence, anger, and most importantly war. She is a young girl and during school she invented a game where the loser would be punished with war punishments. Some of these punishments included the “mouth filled with garbage” method or the twisted arm method. While most kids may know the difference in right and wrong, Marji grew up in an area where she had no choice but to be brainwashed by society and the war.

She heard about war tactics from her Uncle Anouche, she saw the violence on the streets, and she even saw dead bodies. Most young children only see those things on movies and video games, and even then they can be negatively affected. However, for a child to see these things daily she can only assume it is the norm. Marji was psychologically affected by the war and her environment, which led her to believe the terrible things she saw were normal, and thus it resulted in her being a product of her environment.

• Marji chases and wants to attack Ramine.

Ramine symbolizes the war, and Marji attacking him symbolizes Marji wanting to put an end to war. To Marji, Ramine symbolized the war, the evil, and all the conflicts in her country. Marji discovered that Ramine’s father killed people, which lead Marji into a rage. Marji chased after Ramine with nails between her fingers wanting to hurt him for what his father had done. She had no reason to be mad at Ramine because he had not killed anyone. However, she began to realize that the war was constantly showing up in her life and affecting her life.

She was filled with anger, and she longed for the war and violence to be over. When she was trying to put an end to Ramine, symbolically she was trying to put an end to the war.

• The torture game Marji invents shows her strong desire for power.

In a country where no one has any power, Marji longs to have power. She devises a game at school where the loser gets punished with torture methods like the “mouth filled with garbage” method and the twisted arm method. She comes up with this idea because she sees the people in the war who have power use violence to gain that power.

Although it is wrong to gain power that way, Marji has such a strong desire for power that she doesn’t care what she has to do to earn it. Marji ends up feeling so powerful that after school she stares at herself in the mirror and her reflection shows herself with devil horns. This demonstrates that not only does Marji want power, but she doesn’t care if the power comes with being evil.

•  By attempting to attack Ramine with nails, Marji believes violence is the way to obtain justice for what Ramine’s father did. When Marji found out that Ramine’s father killed people, she immediately wanted to obtain justice.

She wanted the evil people to face the consequences and be punished. She rallied up her friends and they all put nails between their fingers and chased after Ramine. Marji could have gained justice a different way. She could have talked to Ramine’s father, but instead she chose violence. Marji chose this method because throughout the war they try to gain justice through violence. She heard of war tactics like the twisted arm method, and she knew those methods caused pain. She knew those tactics caused so much pain that they eventually caused regret in a person whose done wrong.

Since Marji believed Ramine and his family had done wrong, she believed to gain justice she needed violence to do so.

• Marji chasing after Ramine is simply a way for Marji to distract herself from her self-conflicting battles.

Marji chases after Ramine with nails between her fingers. Although she claims she does it because Ramine’s father was evil, the true reason she did it is because she needed a distraction from her own conflicting battles. Marji struggles daily with who she is, how she identifies herself, and where she wants to be in life.

Ramine, although young and highly affected by his father’s opinions, he knows who he wants to be, and he defends his father even though Marji and her friends are threatening him. Marji, on the other hand, doesn’t know where she wants to be, and she doesn’t know where she belongs. She fights battles with herself and that causes a lot of built up anger and frustration. Marji’s only solution was to take out her frustration on someone who she unknowingly is jealous of, which happened to be Ramine because he knows exactly what he believes in.