Genital Mutilation? It used to happen. Still does.
Sterilization? It used to happen. Still does.
Deliberate infection by disease? It used to happen. Still does.
Slavery? It used to happen. Still does.
Child sexual abuse? It used to happen. Still does.
The weakness of the targets is easy enough to identify. Wrong gender, wrong colour, special needs, the unaware, the unhealthy, the diseased, the defenseless young.
Possibly those who inflict these horrors upon others are more difficult to identify because they share the characteristics of our more fortunate selves. The perpetrators can be found in the very heart of our society, not just its fringes. The atrocities are committed by those who live next door and are smug about what the do, because they believe that pummelling the weak makes their centre strong. At its most extreme, it is a form of eugenics, building a male dominated master race, not by championship cross-breeding, but by destroying those identified as unworthy of survival, insidious attitudes because the result can be accomplished by means as simple as neglect.
Such must be the thinking of the bureaucrats and politicians who have instituted a United Kingdom policy of “helping” families towards the depths of destitution1 when previously those struggling folks were merely poverty-stricken. Atrocity? How else can you label a policy that punishes a newborn child for the folly of being born, his parents for their criminal carelessness of fostering life, and that child’s two siblings — all condemned for being in the wrong-sized family at the wrong time.
The following article article focuses on the suffering of the mother, often for the best of reasons, but the burden of a third child is a government atrocity visited on not just one, but all the family members. Read more in The Guardian: As predicted, women are suffering because of the two-child benefits limit
Footnotes
- The difference between poverty and destitution? Try: Poverty May Mean Hardship. Beyond Poverty, Destitution Is Life-Threatening
