100 years of rape inversion
I know I’ve already written about the Kristof article and the report on the sexual crimes of Gazans on 10/7. But I want to highlight this article by Guy Goldstein, because it offers a great deal of relevant historical background and perspective on how long this sort of behavior has been going on – and by “this sort of behavior” I don’t just mean sexual attacks by Palestinians on Jews, I also mean what the author calls the inversion of charges by which Palestinians falsely accuse the Jews of similar crimes.
Some excerpts:
The libel [Kristof] dutifully repeated in “The Paper of Record” was a hundred years old when he printed it. The Palestinian propaganda has not changed in a century. The Western press, which once exposed it, now promotes it.
Haj Amin al-Husseini, the man Palestinian historians call the father of their national movement, distributed the original handbills in the summer of 1929. The text called on Arab men to rise against the Jews, an enemy who had “violated the honor of Islam and raped the women and murdered widows and babies.” The leaflets had been printed in advance.
No Jewish man had raped any Arab woman. That didn’t matter.
He paired the rape libel with a second weapon. His crowds at the Nebi Musa riots of 1920 had chanted “Palestine is our land, the Jews are our dogs.” Dogs in Islamic law are najis, ritually impure, the same religious category as pigs and bodily fluids. Calling a Jew a dog made a religious statement about defilement. Twin demonizations, both concocted and distributed with the specific intent of inciting violence against the Jews.
The author goes on to describe the Hebron massacre that resulted, in which Palestinians (not called that back then, of course) committed barbaric crimes against Jews that have a great deal of resonance with what occurred on 10/7, nearly 100 years later. There are resonances with other historic events in the area, too.
I strongly suggest you read the whole thing; it can’t be summarized. It’s an extraordinary history.
An interesting article. I was aware of the Arab massacres of Jews in the 1920s; I was not aware of the false charges of Jews raping Arabs in those years.
I lived in a Muslim country for two years, as a corporate wife. I was very well-treated. However, I knew that women were not generally treated with respect in that society. Women wearing abaya and hijab were sometime assaulted on the streets or on public transit, to the extent that authorities designated some train cars as “women only” to try to protect them.
White men do not rape black women. They are simply not attractive. In the same way, it is hard to imagine a Jewish man raping an Arab woman. The emotional state is revulsion, not lust.
Quoting myself, from yesterday’s Kristof post.
AesopFan on May 14, 2026 at 5:15 pm said:
@ Sgt Mom > “He and the NY Slimes should never be able to live this down.”
Kristof and the Times have apparently been around this block before.
It’s still in operation and he is still employed there.
https://freebeacon.com/media/its-hamas-propaganda-new-york-times-writer-nicholas-kristofs-sexual-violence-column-caps-a-career-of-corrections-retractions-and-apologies-going/
The Washington Free Beacon has been busy doing actual journalism.
While children are not responsible for their parents’ activities — especially from before they were born! — this biographical background might have some bearing on his beliefs.
https://freebeacon.com/media/times-columnist-kristofs-father-fought-on-nazi-side-in-world-war-ii/
“Palestinians (not called that back then, of course}”
Well, of course. As I have pointed out previously, there has never been a country called palestine. It is an imaginary country like wakanda, and palestinians, who don’t exist, are the imaginary citizens. The spellchecker wants me to capitalize the names of non-existent countries. Is a non-existent country a noun or a nothing?
Wonderful article. Good find and thanks for posting. I found the very first comment – from the original article – very good.
You have to give Arabs credit, they know Westerners better than we know ourselves.
It certainly does seem that way sometimes.
Israel sues the NY Times for defamation:
https://pjmedia.com/catherinesalgado/2026/05/14/israel-sues-new-york-times-and-exposes-iranian-terror-network-in-australia-n4952856
TJ: White men do not rape black women. They are simply not attractive. In the same way, it is hard to imagine a Jewish man raping an Arab woman. The emotional state is revulsion, not lust.
This blog needs a better class of troll.
TJ:
Your comment is wrong on so many levels that it’s hard to know where to begin.
First of all, plenty of white men are attracted to black women, now and in the past. Same for Arab women – and by the way Jews and Arabs are somewhat related in the genetic sense.
But even more than that, you show a PROFOUND misunderstanding of rape, which is not about attraction. It is about power, and in the case of war it’s about power plus humiliation, degradation, and sadism. It knows no boundaries of age or attractiveness.
And finally there are quite a few Arab Jews, but I do not expect TJ to understand that or the likes of the Baghdadi Jews. Suffice it to say plenty of white men or women enjoy black women and men, if it weren’t so we wouldn’t see African-Americans see such a high admixture on the whole of “white” ancestry.
The Al-Husseinis were monsters and especially Amin, who is essentially the grandfather of the “Falestinian” cause. They helped mastermind the genocidal massacres of Jews in the region from 1919 to now, particularly the Hebron pogrom of 1922, the “great revolt” of 1936-9, the pro-Nazi Iraqi Coup in 1941 and the ensuing Baghdad Pogrom known as the Farhud, and the wars in the Mandate from 1947-9.
That should be enough to warn against demonization of Jews from this lot. Apparently it is not.
Yes its about violence not attraction see serbia or myanmar or a host of other countries
Of course we know the measure of richard falk who was the source for this tidbit the Times buried the story deep inside the a section unlike the way they played the gaza hospital story
Its rare that the whole husseini story is referred i think leon uris noted it in exodus but it wasnt put forward in carl foremans script not when one can libel pope pius gratuitously for the same time
Heads they win tails you lose
Of course it was the same Times different reporter that put abu ghraib in stereo for 44 days straight
Then they proudly announced it provoked more terrorist attacks quad erratum demonstratum
Of course they make the location of alleged events vague well thats how the hated protocols worked
It’s the inversion of truth & the deliberate projection that gives away the game.
Saw this over at the Professor’s place earlier…it fits: “For you are the children of your father the devil, and you love to do the evil things he does. He was a murderer from the beginning. He has always hated the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, it is consistent with his character; for he is a liar and the father of lies.” John 8:44
Powerful stuff John Guilfoyle. I sometimes despair at the evil of which humans are capable – from the atrocities we are discussing here to the ease with which many lie. The devil seems a plausible explanation to me, and reading the Bible reminds me that it’s nothing new.
Thank you, Neo, for your responsive explanation of rape and what it means in wartime specifically. I’ve been lurking on your blog for almost ten years. I appreciate the time you give here and the knowledge and wisdom that comes with it. Thank you.
Turtler, just a date correction.
The Hebron pogrom/massacre was in 1929.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1929_Hebron_massacre
(There were several serious pogroms in other cities, including Jerusalem, at various times throughout the 1920s. The main Arab “uprising” was between 1936 and 1939, with further attacks following the UN vote for partition on 29 November 1947.)
@Barry Meislin
Thanks, I was a dumb dumb who had his wires crossed thinking of something else.
I think the Farhud in Baghdad in 1941 is important because it shows a chapter of the Holocaust not directly managed from Berlin, and that this was never purely or even primarily about Jews in Israel/Palestine, since most of those murdered there were not connected but were targeted anyway.
No doubt a case of too many massacres to keep track of.,,
Regarding the Farhud, while it may not have been “managed” directly from Berlin it was certainly inspired from there; and the number of Nazi-sympathizers in Iraq, especially Baghdad, was significant.
To be sure, Arabs in British-governed (or essentially-controlled) areas of the Middle-East (e.g., Iraq, Egypt, Mandatory Palestine, though not Transjordan) had more than one reason, in their view, to support the Nazi war effort. (Cf. Anwar el-Sadat.)
Related:
“Hamas captured documents show they believed they could destroy Israel with their October 7th attack, sought more Iran, Hezzbollah, others [help]…”—
https://x.com/SpencerGuard/status/2054545741918687373?s=20
“Why would the NY Times make such horrific claims about Israel? The reasons are several-fold”—
https://nypost.com/2026/05/14/opinion/the-new-york-times-feeds-anti-jew-hatred-with-a-horrific-lie/
H/T Powerline blog (for both).
But even more than that, you show a PROFOUND misunderstanding of rape, which is not about attraction.
But rape IS about sexual attraction. It’s a feminist fake theory that rape is primarily about power.
It was rashid ghailani who was a former prime minister son of a british appointed naib (sound familiar) and founder of the golden square the iraqi version of the black one hundred who was responsible
The brits had driven away the bulk of ghailanis partisans but in revenge they directed the farhud
This echoes the post war riots in aden, and morocco and other places that drove the jews out
Long before the retreat of the palestinians so called
But nebi musa was the first of these efforts that haj amin staged
Enabled by terrible policy decisions by the brits
Among other things he had fought for the ottomans unlike the hashemites
David pryce jones crooked circle points this out among other unconfortable facts
His presence seems to an odd blindspot to many western observers like david ignatius who dubbed him ‘the old man’ without the baggage in agents of innocence
Don:
And you show an even more profound misunderstanding, if such a thing is possible.
No doubt some rapes are predicated on attraction – especially date rape, for example. But rape of the enemy’s women in war? Don’t be stupid. They rape children and grandmothers, attractive and unattractive – plus often torture and dismember and kill them as well. They also rape men. It’s about power, sadism, humiliation, degradation.
But rape IS about sexual attraction. It’s a feminist fake theory that rape is primarily about power.
==
I suspect you’re right about most circumstances.
if it weren’t so we wouldn’t see African-Americans see such a high admixture on the whole of “white” ancestry.
==
I think Steve Sailer estimated that averaged out over the generations about 3% of the children born to phenotypically black women had white sires. Not absent, not common.
==
If I’m not mistaken, white on black rape in this country actually is rare.
Here is a video from Quillette on rape:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CTmN__aJEM8
Don:
And you show an even more profound misunderstanding, if such a thing is possible.
No doubt some rapes are predicated on attraction – especially date rape, for example. But rape of the enemy’s women in war? Don’t be stupid. They rape children and grandmothers, attractive and unattractive – plus often torture and dismember and kill them as well. They also rape men. It’s about power, sadism, humiliation, degradation.
Nope, rape is primarily about sexual release. In primitive tribes like the Yanamano, as Napoleon Chagnon discovered, 30% of men die of homicide and the main reason for violence was fights over women. Men within the tribe fight over women, and other tribes are attacked mostly to obtain female captives (or for revenge).
“Rape is about power” is leftist garbage linked to noble savage nonsense. The idea that humans are naturally peaceful, and that what violence did occur were over natural resources. In fact violence is the norm, and access to women is a major driver.
While the Palestinians no doubt hate Jews, the men who raped with their penis were aroused. If you watched the video of the Palestinians with the captured female IDF soldiers that were lined up, it’s clear they had a very sexual interest in them. Quote: “these are the young women who can get pregnant!”
Art Deco:
We are talking here about rape of the enemy in wartime, or as part of pogroms. Mass rape. Rape often combined with torture and even murder. Not about attraction. As I said in an earlier comment, rape of other kinds is sometimes connected with attraction, and date rape certainly is. But mass rape in war or warlike conditions is a different thing.
As far as Sailer goes, if you don’t include a link it’s hard to know what he’s even talking about, or when he said it and why. But I think it’s always been the case the black/black parenthood has been the norm in the US, and mixed parentage (whether voluntary or through rape) significantly less common. That doesn’t mean it didn’t happen with some regularity, however. For example, the advent of widespread DNA testing has revealed that the US black population has on average 73% African genes and most of the rest is European. That’s quite a bit of admixture. Genetic testing also indicates that the African contribution is more from black women than from black men.
Don:
Your ignorance is on display again.
Rape can be done with objects, and power and the desire to hurt is arousing to a sadist. And that fact has nothing to do with leftism or feminism.
What rape is about to the Yanomami (the tribe’s actual name) could not be more irrelevant to this discussion. However, since you brought the tribe up, whatever is going on with Yanomamo warfare and women could just as easily be used to bolster the argument that it’s more about power and aggression than attraction. See this:
And by the way, the Gazans saying “these are the young women who can get pregnant” were not the marauding sadists raping them.
I have already made it crystal clear that this post, and my remarks about rape in the post and its comments, are about the particular subset of rape known as rape as a tool of war.
We are talking here about rape of the enemy in wartime, or as part of pogroms. Mass rape. Rape often combined with torture and even murder. Not about attraction. As I said in an earlier comment, rape of other kinds is sometimes connected with attraction, and date rape certainly is. But mass rape in war or warlike conditions is a different thing.
It IS about sexual attraction if an erect penis is involved. Or obtaining sexual release more specifically. Sexual attraction doesn’t require affection and it doesn’t preclude hate.
Don:
If it’s about hate and power, and that leads to attraction in warped people, then it’s not about what we usually call attraction and you are merely arguing semantics.
Yanomami (the tribe’s actual name)
Yanamamö was the name used by Napoleon Chagnon, the man who studied them from 1964 until sometime in the 90s.
The push to use “Yanomami” was done because leftist academics hated his conclusions. It was a snide effort to snub him.
I don’t need your wiki snip, I used to have a copy of “Yanamamö: The Fierce People” by Chagnon, from my first Anthro class in college in the early 80s.
You might want to educate yourself with one of his other books: “Noble Savages: My Life Among Two Dangerous Tribes — the Yanomamo and the Anthropologists”. I’m not the ignorant one here.
And by the way, the Gazans saying “these are the young women who can get pregnant” were not the marauding sadists raping them.
How do you know they didn’t rape them?
The Palestinians were all pretty much the same thing. They were all conditioned to hate Jews, and were given permission to do as they wished and even encouraged to rape. But they raped to obtain sexual release. And I doubt that most were sadists, just Palestinians conditioned to hate Jews.
Don:
I followed the women’s stories.
You seem to know very little about rape in war.
One of the many things you don’t know about sexual violence on 10/7 is that it was planned ahead of time. Captured Hamas documents and computers made it clear that sexual violence was a part of the plan and was intended to create terror and show domination.
Neo, not only did I follow the women’s stories, I also watched graphic videos that haven’t been publicly released. And I’m aware of the fact they planned rape, I’ve seen the captured documents and their tactical plans.
That doesn’t change the fact that rape is a sexual act.
And I knew there would be a lot of rapes early on (before they were reported), because of the nature of attacking people in their homes.
In men, sexual attraction is independent of your other feelings towards someone. Men typically have sexual attraction towards many women they encounter daily without having any other feeling towards them. If men are placed in a position where they can physically impose themselves on women, and if they also have no empathy for these women, rape will commonly result.
You seem to know very little about rape in war.
I’ll also note I’ve read more than most on the rape the Soviets did in WW2 and what the Japanese did in China and elsewhere, including reading much of Iris Chang’s book (although I passed on buying a copy at a discount store since I didn’t want it in my house). As well as other periods in history.
Don:
I have no idea what you’re trying to say. Of course “rape is a sexual act.” That doesn’t mean it’s always primarily about attraction or even usually primarily about attraction.
In particular, rape in war is about violence, power, domination, and often sadism, expressed in a sexualized way. Rape in war is not primarily about attraction, although of course sometimes attraction can be an element of it. It is primarily about domination, power, humiliation, sadism – and is sometimes not even involving a man’s sexual organs but objects.
In war, and for Hamas, the victims are often tortured and killed.
Of course men can be attracted to women irrespective of other feelings. The vast majority of men do NOT rape women, however, no matter how attracted they might be. And rape in civilian life is usually very different than rape in wartime, although psychopaths rape in civilian life for reasons that are often more akin to rape in wartime (torture, domination, sadism).
You seem to continually miss the point.
\We are talking here
==
The qualifier in my remark is ‘in most circumstances’.
==
As far as Sailer goes, if you don’t include a link it’s hard to know what he’s even talking about, or when he said it and why.
==
What he was discussing is perfectly plain from my remark. Sailer has discussed the participation by blacks in DNA databases and the like. IIRC, he’s of the opinion that self-selection tends to exaggerate somewhat the measure of white ancestry among blacks (which from his research he thinks is about 17%).
==
Sailer has published on several different platforms over 25 years, so I’d have to scrounge around for the discussion. (He’s currently on Substack). IIRC, it was in reference to Strom Thurmond’s history.
They have been conditioned by propaganda like farfour the mouse for 20 years that jews are unpersons add the sermons of certain imams like arifi previously the saudi naval academy chaplain
Art Deco:
It not only was not “perfectly” plain, it was not at all plain.
Don: But rape IS about sexual attraction. It’s a feminist fake theory that rape is primarily about power.
—
If that’s the case, then rapists are primarily stupid.
Rape is very risky. Sexual needs can be satisfied,
cheaply and safely in any city, probably anywhere.
Prostitution is “the oldest profession.”
It does appear that indeed Don has a thing about rape and is stupid.
If that’s the case, then rapists are primarily stupid.
Rape is very risky. Sexual needs can be satisfied,
cheaply and safely in any city, probably anywhere.
Prostitution is “the oldest profession.”
Rape is an evolved adaption. It was common in primitive societies going back to our chimp like ancestors (chimps also wage war and rape).
In particular, rape in war is about violence, power, domination, and often sadism, expressed in a sexualized way. Rape in war is not primarily about attraction, although of course sometimes attraction can be an element of it. It is primarily about domination, power, humiliation, sadism – and is sometimes not even involving a man’s sexual organs but objects.
Rape was the norm in war until modern times because in the context of war most of the things that normally prevent rape are not present (except in modern Western forces). This is particularly true with certain cultures, and why the Red Army and the IJA during WW2 could both be called “armies of rapists”, since almost every soldier in those armies who had a chance to rape did so. Those soldiers were ordinary men of their cultures, not sadists for the most part.
“Don” seems like a caricature invented by Susan Brownmiller.