My dilemma in writing this article was how to start it off. I did not want people to write it off as a feminist rant, or a man-hating tirade, because it is neither.

It is meant to be an eye-opener to the lack of awareness on sexual politics. Oh yes, many of us get very excited and garrulous about partisan politics. But when it comes to views on gender related activities within our society, many women shy away for fear of being tagged with the dreaded “F” word and misogyny rears its nasty head.

I was interested in the case of a man who was a bus driver, don’t know if he still is, who was acquitted of raping a 14-year-old girl. It transpired during the court case (I must point out at this stage that I am only going by The Times article) that the girl was a schizophrenic. That is, the girl was mentally ill, i.e. unstable and vulnerable.

“The girl and the man met on the bus the man was driving on Christmas Eve in 2003.” Now propriety tells one that a bus driver should not be chatting, especially about personal matters, with commuters, let alone a minor.

From my reading, the story was full of holes. Because at some point the girl told the police that sex was consensual. Yet, we are left in the dark on whether any sex took place at all. If it did, the man still had something to answer for.

All that he claimed in court was that he met her for a drink, to help her. Why meet up with a 14-year-old for a drink? To help her? Surely the way to help would have been to get in touch with social services.

Reading the comments in response to the article, I was so struck by the ignorant and knee-jerk reactions, mainly from men, that I felt I had to venture a different opinion.

To the comment, “kemm ha jtuh flus ta ddanni lill dan il-povru bniedem...tal-misthija!” “How much money will this ‘poor’ man get for damages?... It’s shameful.” I replied, “She was only 14 and a very vulnerable girl. He was 29. No povru.”

That got the following reaction, “Pamela, do you know what schizofrenia (sic) is? Your statement is utterly shocking. I don’t condone rape, but I’m all for justice and not preposterous feminist statements like yours.”

Why was my comment feminist, not to mention preposterous? At least, I can spell schizophrenia.

And yes, I do know what the illness is, which is why it was surprising that “In spite of her illness, her psychiatrist certified her fit to attend court, plead and testify”.

Another commentator had this to say, @ Pamela Hansen “After a court decision backed up by the evidence of experts within the field I would only expect such comments from a person who thinks he (sic) knows it all and believes his (sic) opinion is always right. Either that or you’re just trying to be funny.”

Let me just remind readers of my comment, “She was only 14 and a very vulnerable girl. He was 29. No povru.” I was challenging the men’s comments not the court’s decision. I was not being funny.

Of course I should not have had the cheek to comment, we women should know our place and not give an opinion.

Firstly, may I point out to this commentator that one usually writes “she” and “her” when referring to a woman. Secondly, in no way was my comment stating I am right, but only that the man was “no povru”.

Later another commentator said in Maltese, “They should publish her name not his. Miskin who knows what he went through from 2003 until now.” I think it was the povru and miskin that got my goat. At 29 I presume he was compos mentis and must have realised he was playing with fire, even if no rape took place.

So I commented again “He was 29 and she was a vulnerable 14-year-old” adding “That is no miskin.” Please note, that at no time did I say that he should have been found guilty of rape, but my two comments were precisely as stated above.

Yet, here is what someone else had to say in reply, “Of course how could he possibly be anything but guilty regardless of what the court says according to you. Miskina!”

And another “So you must be serious seeing as this is your second such comment on this case! Do you honestly believe that all the court experts and the judge are incompetent? Ms. Hansen please stop making a fool of yourself.”

So take note women, you dare put forward an opinion and your comments are misinterpreted, you are called “Miskina” and told to “Stop making a fool of yourself”.

This is what another commentator had to say in Maltese, which I have translated, “Common stories these days from women and young girls. When it is proven that it is all lies... do you think this is one of women’s rights”? By the way all this was in capital letters.

Despite having a Commission for the Promotion of Equality, most still have no idea what women’s rights are about. Although, I must say that anyone with an iota of sense would know that lying is not a woman’s right.

But the worst comment that says it all when it comes to the medieval mentality that is still prevalent was in response to the comment I have reproduced above “They should publish her name...” In reply a man believed the comment “intelligent” adding in capital letters “Who was she so that we can burn her”.

[email protected]