Good morning istoryans:
I have read yesterday that SC has granted women to harm or even kill abusive husbands:
However, they have set
three circumstances:
a
must be present: evidence of at least two incidents of physical abuse inflicted by the husband;
b
the attack must have caused the woman to fear for her life and make her believe that she needed to use force to save her life;
c
the husband must have posed probable—not necessarily immediate and actual—grave harm to the woman.
Especially in letter c, take note that the women have the right bisag PROBABLE palang -- meaning, naghuna huna ra cya na basin naay buhaton iyang bana niya. She has the right bisag walay ACTUAL HARM na gibuhat iyang bana.
Nobody especially in the mainstream media made a fuss about it. If the law turned out to be in favor of the husband, I would expect Gabriela, ug mga advocates sa "gender equality" na magrally. Of course, there is "Gender equality" as long as it favors women and LGBT but not mens rights.
This law was made from the premise that MEN ARE VIOLENT and WOMEN ARE always VICTIMS AND INNOCENT (are they??).
Just wondering: what can we do about abusive wives? Could victim husbands use the same law to abusive wives?? How do you think the SC would decide?
Abuse can serve as defense for women facing slay rap | Sun.Star