This and this are connected.
Different women, separated by class, professional status, age, resources and geography.
The connection between these women: they shared an intimate and sexual space with men who did not respect them. These men, feeling unjustly deprived of 'their' entitlements, deliberately and malevolently harmed and tried to injure them by exploiting the double standard about women's sexual expression that still persists in this 21st century.
In the case of *Nicole* and *Kim* in Halifax, the vindictive actions of a man who felt justified to impugn the respectability of his ex-lover, and to physically endanger her (and her house-mate) were documented by the victims. Yet the crown attorney declined to pursue criminal charges for what *Adam* did.
As for Lori Douglas in Winnipeg, the first inquiry that thrust her into public view was dropped but a newly formed Canadian Judicial Council panel will be looking at her case - again.
There was one basic question that was never adequately addressed. Given that Douglas testified she had no knowledge of the proposition Jack King presented to his client — an 'invitation' for Chapman to have sex with her — nor had she consented to his initiative, was her spouse effectively trafficking her, and setting her up to be sexually assaulted as well?
It's a moot point now: King died last April, and that aspect of the complicated inquiry was dropped.
It appears to me that it is these women's respectability that is being judged, rather than the criminal actions of vengeful men.
Remember the Rehtaeh Parsons case? Media attention put a spotlight on the reluctance of the RCMP to adequately investigate the multifaceted and unrelenting sexualized violence that led to her suicide. It forced the police to bring to justice those responsible for her harassment.
Once again, media attention has stirred the police into some semblance of action. Kim and Nicole's criminal harasser may yet be brought to trial.
Douglas and her lawyers took legal recourse in order to expose the bullying tactics of the original CJC panel for what they were: unvarnished misogyny.
Last word: this exchange of tweets captures how women's respectability is viewed through a sexist lens and why women are challenging the double standard.
From @fortyfs' timeline, here.
Reminder: Respectability vs RESPECT: Part One.