The call came in to the police. A 10-87 in progress, and mere moments before the evidence is gone forever. But when a man takes revenge on a woman for her refusal to accede to rape, something must be done.
A man in Laholm, Hallan County in Sweden was reported to police because he farted after the woman he was with denied to have sex with him.
She reported the incident to the local police saying that his “revenge fart” disturbed her peace of mind.
The official report would, of course, read flatulens. because police reports are official documents and, obviously, this happened in Sweden. But in order to demonstrate a harm of sufficient magnitude to meet the elements of an offense, one question needed to be answered: doesn’t a woman deserve peace of mind?
The man and the woman, whose names were not released to the public, had talked of having sex in [sic] a different occasion, but they are not in a relationship. According to the woman, the man visited her in her house with the desire to have sex with her. When she refused to indulge him, he simply farted and left.
That he felt entitled to her body is bad enough. But that her agency was diminished when he “simply” emitted an unpleasant odor is inexcusable. What of the consequences she was left to suffer?
“It smelled very bad in my flat,” the woman said in her police report.
Of course it smelled very bad. How else would it smell? And when a man takes revenge upon a woman for her refusal to have sex, does it really matter anyway? Is there any harm, any amount of suffering, she must endure for asserting her right to be free of rape? If physical rape is unacceptable, should fart rape be any less?
The police spokesperson said that they had an obligation to check if criminal actions were involved. But the incident was not investigated further.
Yet again, what this demonstrates is an unacceptable gap in the law, where a man can fart rape a woman with impunity. As with other “revenge” acts perpetrated upon women for their refusal to allow themselves to be reduced to chattel, to be sex toys of the patriarchy, there is no law in place to protect them from whatever harm men perpetrate upon them.
Were the police uncaring? Perhaps, though they claim to have checked whether emission of deliberately odorous fumes constitutes a criminal act. Then again, they seem to have a wealth of imagination when they’re the targets of clearly intentional wrongs, but gave up with barely a battle here when they decided to not “investigate further.”
Why? Why is a fragrant harm done a woman unworthy of further investigation? When this was clearly done in retaliation for a woman’s refusal to lie back and take it, it is obviously sexual. And when the scent, indisputedly “very bad,” entered the orifice of her nose, näsborre as reflected in the official report, against her will, how can that be ignored?
By intentionally forcing a smell, a very bad smell, into the nasal cavity of a woman in retaliation for her refusal to engage in sex, this is clearly fart rape. That the police in Laholm refused to pursue the perpetrator of this offensive offense proves that law enforcement fails to take seriously the fart rape of a woman.
And it can no longer be denied that laws against revenge porn are critically necessary to make sure this never happens again.
H/T Losing Trader