Just raped a girl

My husband and I had this discussion last night about professional sports. He pointed out that Plex shot himself in the leg and has been suspended from his employment without pay. But, in contrast, Kobe was charged with (and very nearly admitted) rape and the lakers flew him back and forth for games and court appearances.

I suggested that it could be a result of a number of factors at once . . . one, the difference in the culture of the NBA and the NFL . . . and the values of the commissioners. Two, Plex hurt himself and thus his team, team owners directly and Kobe just raped a girl. It's easy to say the girl may or may not have "asked for it" or that she may or may not be of lose moral character or that she's justs looking for her 15 minutes. But in the end, she's just a girl and who really cares that she was raped?

And, that is why we have so much more work to do.

Vindication

From time to time, I will recommend to clients that they may want to consider the option of filing a civil suit against their perpetrator. I don't make this recommendation in all cases . . . and I'm cautious to warn that they should hold off on even speaking to an attorney until after the criminal courts are finished with the case. (Defense attorneys seem to love to gloss over the criminal actions of their clients and vilify the victim if it looks like she might gain one penny from the case. I've seen far too many cases result in not-guilty verdicts simply because the defense attorney suggested that the family of the victim might someday have some financial gain. Years ago, a case unravelled when the defense attorney claimed the 13 year old girl made up a story of being raped by her neighbor because her parents were in a dispute with the neighbor over a fence. )

Anyway, the NY Times is reporting a fantastic outcome for a civil case in Florida. I like that the jury awarded a substantial amount for medical and counseling expenses, as well as damages and money for anguish.

Sadly, it seems that too many people don't appreciate the consequences of their actions until their pocketbooks are hit.

Oppressions

I have refrained from really writing about the "Duke Lacrosse" case here.  I'm not directly involved in the case, I don't know anyone who is directly involved in the case, and there has been so much conflicting information in the media that it is hard to judge for myself.  

When the case was "happening" my source of information was largely the NY Times.  I've heard it discussed, and I know people in that region of the world and from time to time hear their opinions.  (By the way, you North Carolina Voters, I understand that your attorney general is using the Duke case in his re-election ads . . . which if nothing else seems in bad taste and likely to convince victims in your state that the state is unfriendly, uncaring, and not really all that nice to victims.  But, that's just my take.)

Today, we in the office watched via the internet a press conference held sometime within the past week to announce the publication of a book by the young woman in the center of the case.  I was most impressed by a professor from NC A&T University who spoke rather elegantly about the case.  

Her statements were the perfect springboard to a discussion about the intersectionality of oppressions and sexual violence.  This case isn't just about rape.  Or gender.  Or race.  Or privilege.  Or social class.  This case is about ALL OF THOSE things, and probably a few more.  

Would it be too simple to say that perhaps what really went wrong with this case, beyond the obvious, was that it challenged too many of our socially held notions and the system overheated and blew up?

Maybe the long shot of this case will be that we start working towards a meaningful conversation about the many oppressions at play in our society.

Just the Beginning

When I attempt to explain the "victim experience" to people, I often say that the assault is merely the beginning of the whole "victim experience," not the end.

The attack itself is often the scene of panic or alarm or terror. Lots and lots of women I talk to say that they worried more about being killed than they did about the rape itself. They describe that horrible, pit of your stomach feeling of realizing that you no longer have control over not being raped, you refocus your attention on surviving the attack.

But, after the attack, you have lots of rushing thoughts and conflicting impulses to contend with, immediately. Call the police? How is my family going to respond? Will I be believed? Will I be blamed? Do I blame myself? Oh god, what if I get pregnant or a disease from this? What if he comes back? Why? Why? and again, Why?

We realize that only a small percentage of victims immediately call the police and seek medical treatment. The societal myths about rape and rape victims work against that impulse. It is rare for me to see a victim who absolutely knows they did nothing "wrong." Rare. (I constantly debunk the victim's own acceptance of rape myths.)

When medical treatment is sought, we have the opportunity to both gather evidence and provide appropriate medical interventions. Medication can be given to prevent pregnancy. Medication can be given to prevent many of the sexually transmitted diseases and/or infection resulting from the assault. In recent years, the director of our emergency department and I have discussed the efficacy of offering anti-retrovirals to help prevent HIV.

This is becoming more standard as we advance our response to victims of this violent crime. So, imagine my thoughts when I read in the New York Times that in South Africa, a doctor was fired for a) offering anti-retrovirals to rape victims and b) supporting a local rape crisis center who advocated for the treatment. (Read about it here.) Now, judges have ruled that he was fired improperly. But, it took years for this ruling to happen. How many people who needed his medical care were denied it because of his humane and appropriate actions? How many rape victims shouldered the feelings of shame and guilt and blame because their victimization contributed to his firing? (Which is totally a stretch, but so often victims will blame themselves not just for the assault but the aftermath as well.)

And, how much longer will it be before "those in charge" understand that rape is not the result of the victim's actions . . . but the perpetrators? And how long before, universally, we have a society that rushes to the aid and responds to the needs of the victim rather than make their pain a political football?

Bravo

I just read an article about a 48 Hours Mystery show that is upcoming. The show features an interview with one of the boys abducted and abused by Micheal Devlin in Missouri.

I'm pretty impressed with how this case is being handled. It seems that there was a fairly quick resolution within the court system. And, from reading the young man's comments, it appears that he has had some pretty good counseling. And, it appears that it is on-going.

I was also impressed to see that his parents are stepping up and advocating for his interests. I cannot say how much I'm pleased to see that and only wish other parents were as good at protecting their children's interests.

Bravo!

Progress?

Yesterday, the topic of conversation around the water pitcher was an article I believe was on Yahoo.  The article was about a young RNC delegate who was victimized by a person they met in a bar while attending the RNC convention recently.  The delegate is an attorney, donor to the GOP, and 29 years old.  The delegate was flattered by the attentions of an attractive person.  The delegate invited their new friend up to their hotel room.  There, the new friend mixed another round of drinks, and the next thing the delegate knew, the friend was gone and so was about $50,000 worth of cash and property.

The police in the Twin Cities says he has no doubt this crime happened . . . the delegate is being very cooperative with investigators.  They believe that the delegate was slipped a "date rape" drug in the drinks mixed in the room.

Oh yeah, the delegate is male and the offender is female.  The article closes with a quote from the delegate explaining that as a single guy, he was flattered by the attentions of this attractive woman . . . and that if anything has made this humiliation worthwhile was letting people know that date rape drugs can be used on men too.

There is no mention if the victim believes he were sexually assaulted, if he is bothered by the idea he may or may not have been sexually assaulted, or if he even thinks that if sex happened (with or without his consent and/or participation) that it's even a crime.

I see cases like this all the time, but with the genders reversed.  In fact, the last ER call I personally took, the victim was a young college student who had attended her first college party and didn't realize what was in the punch.  She woke up with her underpants on inside-out and backwards and believes she was raped.  As I walked into the ER, the triage nurse asked me if it were even a rape if she doesn't know for sure she was raped?  Law enforcement has taken her statement, but isn't really concerned about finding the unknown perpetrator.

But yet, it's sexist of us to question the candidacy of Sarah Palin when she thinks rape victims ought to pay for the forensic examination and gathering of evidence in the process of reporting the crime to law enforcement?

That's what you do . . .

There is a link to the article in the title of this post.

The article is about a couple in San Antonio who tried to sell sexual access to the woman's five year old child in exchange for an apartment, a car, and day care for a 10 month old child. The article states that the mother of the 5 year old believed that the sexual abuse would be a "positive" experience for the child and she'd receive sexual gratification from watching. It also mentions that the couple, of which the male was married to another person, had plans to inflict their crazy on the 10 month old at a later date and even inflict violent crazy on a teenager.

But, keep reading. The wife of the male in this "couple" filed for a protective order to protect her 14 month old child from her husband . . . and filed for divorce. THAT'S what you do when you find out your husband is a scary, twisted, horrible person.

I'm sure there are more women or men who find themselves in similar situations . . . and we never hear about the ones who act swiftly to protect themselves and their children. I hate that this woman had to discover that the person she was building a life with could betray her in such horrible ways. . . but I applaud her for having a good moral compass.

All that Glitters?

This week, my staff and I have been following the twisted path aging rocker Gary Glitter has been taking back home.

He was convicted in Vietnam of sexually abusing 2 "pre-pubescent" girls. He spent three years in prison and was released this week. Since he is a foreign national, and a convict, Vietnam showed him the door. Mr. Glitter tried to move his road show over to Thailand but they just said no to the sex offender. He tried to avoid returning to England by first claiming that his little ears hurt, and then later faking a heart attack. (Oh, PUL-EEZE) He then boarded a flight to Hong Kong (Folks in Thailand told him that if he over stayed the 12 stay in the airport, they would jail him for immigration violations.) But, Hong Kong said they had no room for an foreign sex offender and sent him back to Thailand.

Finally, he is back in London.

Mr. Glitter says that he did not want to return to England because he would be disrespected because of his sex offender ways. Folks in England are forcing him to register as a sex offender.

Of course, I'm cynical. I don't believe that the young children he was caught sexually abusing were the first children he ever used for his own sexual gratification. Men in their 60s don't wake up one morning and decide that the one sexual experience they've never thought of before but must have before they die is sex with a young child. People who sexually offend against young children escalate their actions from fantasy, to pornography, to engaging with children for their own masturbatory uses, to abusing children. I doubt that it was by accident that Mr Glitter found himself wanting to have sex with children and JUST BY CHANCE finding himself in a country in which the sex trade makes finding a child to have sex with fairly easy. (Vietnam, Atlanta, you name it . . . the sex trade is everywhere)

I was pleased to see that even his money and/or celebrity status did not convince those other countries to take a chance on allowing him near their children. I'm glad to see that they didn't buy the logic that he'd "done his time and now deserved a second chance." When it comes to people who sexually abuse children, a second chance could mean more children's lives destroyed. Our society absolutely needs to monitor, closely, sex offenders . . . because once convicted, they are no longer innocent . . . the children in our society at least deserve that we will do what we can to control the offenders we already know about.

A step backwards

I've been mulling a blog post in my brain for a while now, but haven't managed to put fingers to keyboard yet. However, today, a news article caught my attention that has me wanting to fire off a quick post.

A news story from Ohio says that the catholic church there has issued new guidelines to their priests as to what behavior is and is not appropriate with children. Forbidden now is hugging, kissing, wrestling, lap sitting, etc. Permitted still are handshakes, high fives, and pats on the back.

Now, I'm all for creating clear understanding of what is and isn't appropriate behaviors. And, I am all for protecting children and especially can see the long reaching harm from sexual abuse from within a church.

However, I think we as humans have stepped backwards in our development if we can no longer distinguish between sexualized touch and affection, human support, or appropriate touching.

I don't think I've ever been handed a friend's baby to hold during which I have been able to resist kissing its' little noggin. Last week, while a co-worker and I were working with a local group of camp kids . . . one child spontaneously hugged my co-worker . . . which quickly turned into a group hug. The child initiated it . . . nothing inappropriate happened, and it probably was the right amount of physical contact to help the children feel safe, secure, and cared for in their world.

I would hate to see children lose that aspect of church and spiritual development. I know that members of a church, and ministers develop an often deep, intimate relationship with their spiritual leaders. I'd like to think that in a church, especially one in which there is so much screening, education, and training for the spiritual leaders, would be able to have a more meaningful dialog with their employees. I'd like to think that rather than making children feel unloved and alienated, the church could offer more meaningful supervision and guidance to their leaders.

But, that's me, clearly.

The Problem with Children

Last week was an interesting week for children and sexual abuse. We've been discussing the supreme court decision and contrasting it with the 16 city sweep of sex traffickers.

We are torn on the issue of the death penalty for people who rape young children. On one hand, we all wish we lived in a culture where the death penalty was not necessary or a consideration. We also all believe that the death penalty is not a deterrent to crime. But, we also acknowledge that there are some offenders who are so terrible and have such a long history of vicious attacks on our society . . . that we don't want our tax dollars keeping them alive.

Most of us in the office understand an economic argument for the death penalty. Our society has limited resources . . . and unfortunately, we have to pick and choose those issues and groups of people we will devote resources towards. It happens all the time. Every time we cut free lunches or supportive services to communities with big military deployments . . . we are deciding who deserves our resources and who doesn't.

At the same time this ruling was made . . . federal officials were rescuing trafficked children. If anyone deserves to "disappear" from the planet . . . I think it would be someone who sexually enslaves children for profit, no?

Fall out

I'm concerned what the ruling in the Texas polygamy case is going to do to child protective services all over the country.

The OJ Simpson case taught law enforcement to be more cautious about arresting quickly. Especially just after the case . . . and the televised lashing handed out to police in that trial . . . I saw law enforcement worry about building an "air tight" case before arresting suspects. The problem is that sometimes, that would take weeks, and victims were left feeling unheard and scared for their lives.

The Duke case has made law enforcement a bit skittish if the victim isn't a "good victim" . . . meaning someone with a record so clean they could run for public office.

Now, seeing the state of Texas claim that the children on the ranch weren't in "immediate danger" and that the rescuing of those children invalid . . . I'm afraid that it will be even harder for children across the country to be rescued.

I don't see how the state of Texas had any choice . . . given the information they had . . . but to take those children. Most states are mandated to protect the children in their state from abuse . . . emotional, physical, sexual, and abandonment. In any state in the country, if Child Protective Services received a call from a teen ager saying she'd been forced into a marriage, forced to bear children, and was being physically abused . . . they would have to intervene. In my state, we first try to get a non-offending parent to take responsibility for the child's safety. Meaning, boot the offender out . . . prevent further abuses, and tend to the child's healing. If the non-offending parent is unavailable or unable or unwilling to take on that responsibility, then the state must, at least temporarily, take custody of the child.

I'm afraid that this case being over turned is going to have ripple effects across the nation . . . and that the people who will suffer are children in the most desperate of circumstances.

Annoyance

While doing the daily scan for headlines concerning sexual violence issues, I found a story about an international hunt for a suspected child rapist. The man in question was arrested, and admits to having traveled to a third world country for the purpose of having sex with young boys. A search of his home turned up 1,000 sexually explicit photos of children and little boy underpants, including at least one pair the suspect described as being a souvenir from his "date" over seas.



But, it gets better . . . this guy made his living entertaining at children's parties and playing santa.

My annoyance comes in from the neighbors and acquaintances quoted in the story about the arrest . . . and I see this sort of thing all the time locally. They all say that he was a wonderful guy and the best santa ever and that he never molested their children so they can't believe these charges are true.

When people express sentiments like this . . . they are working several things at once. They want to reassure themselves that their children weren't victimized and they are trying to wrap their brains around the fact they didn't spot the pervert from 100 yards. But, saying things like this can work to silence victims and their families as well as legitimize the deviant behaviors practiced by people like this guy.

BOO, HISS

One of the top reasons victims say they decide not to report a sex crime is because they fear everyone finding out. And, in "everyone" finding out . . . they fear the reactions they will be forced to face. The disbelief . . . the stupid questions . . . the taking sides . . . or even more violence.

My office is vigilant to keep an eye on the crime reports in our local paper . . . should they give too much detail. And, more than once, we have reacted to help our local paper better walk the line between reporting news and being sensitive to victims.

So, imagine my annoyance when I read that the gossip mongers TMZ have published a story in which they name a sex crime victim. They name the victim because apparently, he is the son of someone famous. The victim isn't famous beyond his parentage.

There are a variety of problems with this . . . one, more and more I see "mainstream" media reporting the stories that TMZ has reported . . . and used the logic that since TMZ has already named names . . . it is okay for them to do it too. Also, this sort of exposure leaves the victim and his family open to all kinds of nut jobs and wackos thinking that they now have a say or a stake in the story. At a time when the family needs healing and good assistance . . . they will find themselves hounded by relentless photographers. And lastly, especially with my younger clients . . . sometimes people out in the various communities don't understand the differences between media reports and what happens in their own communities. I wonder how many teenagers are now going to be afraid to come forward and ask for assistance because they see a victim's face being smeared all over the internet and television?

TMZ was irresponsible and mean. And, their actions will have a ripple effect across many many communities. Thanks a hell of a lot, TMZ.

Another thing

I like to joke in my office that I'm "slow on the uptake" sometimes. It's because I often think of the issue that is at the heart of the matter sometime later. I take comfort in knowing that I do consider issues beyond the initial conversation . . . and I'm not at all bothered by the fact that it often takes some reflection to really take in the whole situation.

Initially Miley Cyrus said that she was pleased with the artistic nature of the photos and thought they were good. After the media firestorm started swirling, she gave an interview that contained a prepared statement saying that she is now embarrassed over the pictures.

First of all, it sounds a bit canned. I suspect that the embarrassment is really more an issue of being in the Disney stable. Second, why haven't her parents or manager come to the public and made a statement about their own involvement and approval and response? I find it disturbing that when this child is being chided publicly for a photo shoot that she was involved in . . . but certainly not alone . . . that the responsible adults involved had turned tail and allowed a child to take the brunt of the fall out.

If we are upset because she's a child being portrayed in an adult way . . . we should be even more upset that she is now expected to step up and be the adult in the face of a negative response.

Epidemic

For this entry, I reference this article from the NY TIMES.

Studies have shown that a quarter of teen aged girls have a std. The study tested girls for four of the most common stds and found that half African American girls and twenty percent of white girls have at least one of the stds.

I find it interesting that the remedies suggested included widespread testing and vaccinating against the diseases. Only deep into the article, and in the form of a quote, is there mention that perhaps the trend could be reversed with comprehensive sexual education in our schools.

My more cynical side wonders if half of the white girls, or if the girls in the study came only from "middle to upper middle class" families, if there would be widespread cries for change? I also notice there is no mention of boys. I doubt that only girls have stds. I would be curious to see if such a study would ever be done on boys. I think parents, and our society, are much more willing to subject girls to an invasive and humiliating exam than boys.

Update

There has been an arrest in the case of the Auburn student who was murdered last week. The man charged in the case has been charged with, among things, attempted rape. According to the story in the NY Times, there appears to be no prior connection between the accused and the victim.

In another media report, a young woman, probably a student, was quoted as saying that students need to be more careful and that she'd seen women running at night with their iPods on, and how that just isn't safe.

I understand that we like to believe that we can control our environments and the people around us. We still cling the the notion that women hold responsibility for the behavior of men. We still assign to women more responsibility for their safety than men.

The fact of the matter is, you should be able to leave your personal belongings in your car, with the doors unlocked and windows open, and NO ONE should reach in and take them. Somewhere along the line, we forget that one of the first lessons we learn as children is to not touch what doesn't belong to us.

I feel this urge to, along with changing the messages we give men in the name of rape prevention, that we need to work on changing the attitudes women have about their own responsibility for the criminal actions of others.

Very bad

I wrote an entry earlier today about the two young women who were murdered on college campuses this week, but it seems to have disappeared.

I'll try to recreate what I wrote earlier. I've been having a hard time with personalizing, projecting in these cases.

I have a friend who sent me an op-ed piece earlier this year that made the point that some of the more horrifying shootings on school campuses have links to violence against women. The piece called for stronger social reactions to the "milder" forms of violence such as stalking and threats in order to prevent mass shootings and the more "severe" forms of violence.

It is too early yet to comment on what the possible motives could have been in either killing this week. I suspect that in both cases, the perpetrator saw young, slim, "nice" women as easier targets than someone who might at first glance be seen as more threatening.

I can't help but feel tremendous sympathy for the parents and friends of these young women. The Auburn student was, according to a media report I read, in a sorority. Those friendships are intense and develop quickly. I believe the killer victimized all the young women who called her "sister." The young woman in North Carolina seems to have been a rising star, someone who would give more to our world than she would take. I can't help but think that her parents were so close to being able to see their precious graduate from college. Surely, as student body president, she would have had many events to attend, honors to receive, and would have been a speaker at the graduation. It seems that all of that campus has been victimized. I can't help but think ahead to the graduation and realize that there will be a pall on those ceremonies.

And, at the root of it all, is a culture that so glorifies violence that we create people who can commit this sort of crime in the first place.

Casulty of War

It's a pretty horrifying story, read it knowing that.

A gulf war vet (two tours) has been charged with beating and raping his three month old daughter. His defense is that he has no recollection of committing the acts because he would drink and drug himself into passing out everyday. Although he doesn't admit doing it, he does agree that it is the logical possibility . . . being that he was alone with the baby.

I'm also thinking that it is a serious serious form of neglience to knowingly drink and drug yourself into passing out when you are the sole caregiver for a newborn. . . but that's a side issue.

Because this war effort is being staffed by national guard units, vets are coming from all over the country . . . not just military base areas. I've known a few women who experienced the long term or multiple deployments of their partners. Nearly every woman I know whose partner/husband was deployed report that their relationship broke within just a few months of the vet returning.

I know lots has been said and written about the lack of adequate services for vets. It seems to me that it would be easy enough to have routine and regular follow up or check in with returned vets/their partners to see if they need extra services to help them reenter society or cope with the trauma of their war experience.

Campus safety

Click on the title for the article. Since it is an opinion piece in a regional paper, I'm not sure how long you'll be able to access it.

A friend sent me this . . . because we have discussed my ideas about "feel good security" and token acts to appear that we want to make changes in the crime rate . . . especially violent crime against women. Politically, it makes good press to say you're against violence against women . . . like rape, stalking, and domestic abuse . . . but in reality, we still worry more about homeless pets than we do victims of violent crime.

This op-ed piece reminds me of a NPR story I heard years ago about men on death row. The commenter observed that every man on death row he'd interviewed had a history of violence prior to the act that got them to death row. If we take the "milder" forms of violence (meaning anything short of murder) more seriously . . . offering substantial jail terms for violence and long-term, ongoing supervision . . . we might have a less violent society in the long run. And, then we wouldn't be so worried about the crazy guy getting a gun.

Marine Shame

We, in the office, have been following and discussing this case of the murdered/raped marine. We are pretty horrified over the fact of it. We are upset over what appears to be real problems with how this young woman's employers handled her case.

First, according the media --- since I don't have first hand knowledge and I do understand the limits of media reports --- she first reported the rape last April . . . but the Corps didn't reassign the two involved in the case to separate work areas until mid May. Then, after reporting the rape, the young woman seeks maternity treatment. Since the military keeps such a watchful eye over their people, you'd think this would have raised eyebrows.

Then, the woman felt compelled to move off base into civilian housing because of harassment she received from her colleagues. This sounds like she wasn't receiving the type of support and protection she needed and deserved and the military has the responsibility to provide. Then, finally, 8 months after reporting the rape, she is finally due to testify in a grand jury like hearing . . . and goes missing? And the military did nothing to verify her whereabouts? These people know what color you poop, and yet they didn't report her missing or check to make sure she'd not suffered a medical emergency?

When her family reported her missing to civilian authorities, it appears from the media reports, that not only was the corps not helpful, they intentionally sent law enforcement in the wrong direction. The media reports I've read say that the corps told local law enforcement that the man now being sought was "not a threat" to her and that they were "on friendly terms." If he wasn't a threat, why did the military have a protective order that they renewed 3 times (again, according to media reports) ordering him to not have contact with her? And, if they were on friendly terms, why was she going to testify that he raped her and was the father of her unborn child?

But the big question is . . . . how bright do you have to be to scratch your head and say "huh? I wonder if this is means something?" when the accuser and accused in a rape case both go missing the day before an important hearing? I know I've had my complaints about local law enforcement . . . but I'm reasonably confident that even in my little town, local authorities would find it worth looking into.

I think the corps failed this young woman . . . a woman who was able to endure the rigorous training of the marines . . . and who was willing to die for her country. I think the marines owed her more than what she got. And, the cynic in me who is so willing to believe the worst in people wonders if the man in question isn't hidden on another base, in marine custody, right now.