[Gabi925]

Abuse is ABUSE (that is, a legal offence) no matter the group identity of the abuser or that of the abused. Does the law specify that only "women" can be "abused"? No, but law discriminates in that it compels consideration of the group identity of the "abused" in meeting out punishments.

Legal systems generally accept the legitimacy of considering aggravating and mitigating circumstances in punishing offenders. For example, judges rightly consider more severe punishments when the victims are of increased "vulnerability", such as children too young to resist or even understand they are being subjected to abuse. Increased vulnerability is also applicable to the infirm and people of decreased mental capacity.

Unfortunately, rather than frame the issue of victim vulnerability in terms of the vulnerability concept, much current legislation frames it by specifying group identities. Instead of the "more vulnerable", laws specify "women", "children", "the elderly", "the disabled", etc. An exceptionally bad example of this is found in the Canadian Child and Family Services Act of 2009 [http://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/sta...90-c-c11.html], which uses language as, "the child is an Indian or native person". Invoking group, ethnic identities in such legislation contributes to public perceptions that abuse offences are specially linked to the named groups.

A good law should be "all-encompassing" (à la Stephen Hawking, and also Ockham), striving to avoid missing or unnecessary added words. Yet legislation is full of useless group-based (rather than concept-based) "specifications" that ironically create discriminatory situations for those obligated to enforce and respect the law.

The legalities regarding offences such as abuse and aggravating/mitigating circumstances should be applied without reference to age, sex, or any other group-based identification. Otherwise the law obviates or eliminate equality and human rights. Specifying concepts, not groups, is the true province of law.

What we actually see, though, is that in systems of common law, based on precedent, laws are now written to patch old situations addressing only population subgroups.

This type of legislating does not treat all individuals as equals or as having the same rights and responsibilities. That's practically abuse itself!

I appeal to all who believe in the rule of impartial law, regardless of sex or whatever you take as your group identity, to be aware of the legislation of your elected representatives! Advocate for concept-based, non-discriminatory laws.

Note: With gratitude, to rohag, a friend that was able to correct my English promptly, without commenting, changing or modifying my message and ideas; he just put it in that rich English that is easy to be understood. I never thought that it was possible someone to take time and avoid any interference of his ego in helping me how I asked. Sometimes I forget that great people are usually modest.