DISAGREEING WITH FEMINIST JOURNALISTS or HOW TO LOSE FRIENDS AND ALIENATE PEOPLE
In the April 1st edition of Victoria’s Times Colonist, Jody Paterson wrote an article about a horrific sexual assault that took place in Saanich and the police response to this violence. Her article, entitled “Sex Assault Still Somehow Women’s Fault”, accuses police, the media, and society in general of victim-blaming. I certainly agree with Paterson that our response to assault and rape, both historically and still today, is sad. I also agree that the victim was in no way somehow to blame for the violence directed at her. And I think we can all agree that these violent attackers are criminals and should be dealt with accordingly. I’m also fairly certain members of the Saanich police force feel this way too and are very concerned about catching these guys.
But have the police acted responsibly and are they doing enough? Referring to warnings issued by the police, for women in the area to take precautions, Paterson tells us that “it’s ridiculous to respond to any terrible crime solely by exhorting future victims to be more careful.”
As Paterson is a respected journalist and seems passionate about this issue we can be sure she chose her words carefully and meant what she said. She wrote “solely” but couldn’t have meant it, she was just trying to be provocative. She knows as well as I that the police took the eyewitness account of the victim and collected DNA left by the perpetrators. I’m also sure they searched for surveillance video evidence in the areas where the crime took place. Police also took the added step of informing the public of the crime, doing so through multiple media while making an appeal for witnesses as well. And, out of a concern for public safety, they also issued a warning. They cautioned people to avoid similar circumstances to that of the victim, and warned those who choose to enter into similar situations, as is their right, to take extra care – a message that could save lives given that these people are still at large and appear to be active predators. With the police having taken a rather substantial breadth of measures and covered just about every base I can think of it’s plain to see that Paterson’s statement is false and needlessly inflammatory.
I have never before defended the actions of the police, but in this instance these were not paltry and uncaring acts of a sexist institution. Without a suspect or additional witnesses or evidence what more would Paterson have the police do? I suppose they should be going after the city, which clearly has some part in this for not taking due diligence. Surely they could illuminate the entire region from space with floodlights and provide reinforced concrete barriers and razor wire to separate all sidewalks and roadways. And certainly the police themselves are culpable for not being out in greater numbers, and neglecting to monitor all public and private spaces within the region, 24/7, so that such a crime cannot happen under their watch. (After all, that works so well in Britain.) Maybe drug and alcohol laws aren’t strict enough either, and there needs to be better monitoring and enforcement. Yeah, and maybe a curfew for people under the age of thirty-seven? I mean, what are youth doing having parties anyways? Certainly we as a community could be doing more to prevent social events, particularly ones in the evening and involving music and/or alcohol. As a society we need to crack down on such insidious and deviant behaviour! What? That’s not where Ms. Paterson was going? Oh, she was just stating that we as a society need to do a better job of education? Oh I see; because of course these people who kidnapped and assaulted a defenseless fellow citizen did so out of ignorance or because they hadn’t passed a standardized, government-approved, multiple-choice test. Right. During the sex talk they had with their parents or during “family planning” at school they weren’t explicitly told that it’s a bad idea to commit horrific acts of sexual violence and terror. Yes, that’s it. If they’d just had enough time roleplaying with Debbie and Don the sex assault marionettes. Yes indeed, this issue is about education. (And as I’ve never sat in on a Rape isn’t the Answer education session, or participated in any Kidnapping isn’t Cool lectures, and I grew up in the same senseless “rape culture”, by Paterson’s calculus I must be a violent rapist-in-waiting. Blind and ignorant as I clearly am, as all dick-wielding psychopaths are, I’d better enroll in some form of sexual re-education and violence prevention training ASAP. Or maybe there’s some anti-psychotic medication we can just put in the water as a kind of silver bullet?)
Oh, that’s not what she meant either? She meant that we have a culture and a media that objectifies and otherwise degrades and devalues women. Oh, I see. I guess that’s a valid critique. Even I look at the sorry state of the sexual revolution (from severe under-representation of women across three levels of government to the absence of female voices in business and industry; from the rampant sexualization of young women, and even very little children, to tits and ass absolutely everywhere you go, across all media, and in just about every possible setting, etc...) and publicly shake my head in shame, glad that I don’t have to raise a daughter in this setting.
In case you don’t feel this way Paterson offers a personal example to win you as a convert. She writes that:
A friend of mine used to work as an aide in a local elementary school classroom. He told me the story of a little girl who was getting her pants pulled down by a group of boys every lunch hour. The principal addressed the issue by ordering the girl to quit wearing elastic-waist pants.
So, let me get this straight: at an unspecified time, someone Paterson knows, who can’t be named (who is no longer doing the job and wasn’t directly involved – because otherwise he clearly would have acted and stopped this chronic assault that was happening “every lunch hour”, lest he be one of the accused) once heard a story about some young children (who also can’t be named) who did something bad while attending an unnamed elementary school. (WELL, that’s not only a compelling story but also a profound piece of journalism! A really great anecdote, highly credible and persuasive too! This is the kind of investigative journalism that could land you with a Pulitzer.)
Without knowing any other details we can’t know what actually happened. If this was really the only response, as Paterson insists, it was definitely a poor decision. But that’s not what Paterson is suggesting. This is not merely the narrow-mindedness of one principal. She suggests that the school administrator (as well as the other staff and parents involved, and likely society as a whole) would have acted differently if the child in this case had been born with a different set of genitals. For such a serious claim, and the condemnation of our entire culture and its institutions, what evidence does Paterson offer? Well, nothing at all. She’s all bald rhetoric.
As someone who has spent eight long years in elementary school (like everyone else) and spent another fourteen years off and on working in schools, at after-school programs and in day-camps for kids of this age, I am reasonably confident the principal had something to say to the boys involved in this case. I’m also pretty sure their teachers would’ve been informed of the incident and been compelled to not just talk to them but also look out for further anti-social behaviour. As well, given that the school administration and all the other teachers and staff knew about the incident (after all Paterson’s friend, the one-time minor aide, knew all about it) it’s almost impossible to imagine that the parents of all the children involved weren’t also informed. We have meetings with parents and send notes home for the most mundane of non-transgressions. It is inconceivable that a known assault, nevermind chronic bullying, would go unmentioned and unpunished. And we can be further convinced that it was addressed by Paterson’s own account, because without such communication how would the mandatory dress code that Paterson notes have been enforced? To suggest that no other action was taken or any other concern was given to this child, as insisted (“Honey, it’s all up to you”), and that this was the case because of her gender, is as ignorant as it is mean-spirited and self-serving.
Like Paterson, in the absence of a cogent argument or anything new to say, I think we should just blame television or maybe video games. After all, as she brilliantly insists in her Times Colonist piece, the evil glowing screen in people’s living rooms has normalized rape as “a form of home entertainment.” (Moral panic much?) Yes, just as television has clearly stupefied an entire generation who walk around unable to distinguish reality from the make-believe, sub-marine world of Robert, the talking yellow sponge in regular quadrilateral trousers.) This must stop! We must crack down on violence and sex on TV; and, while we’re at it, someone should seriously look into removing such themes from music, radio, film, theatre, opera, books (the dictionary, encyclopedia, and Bible, to name a few), puppet shows, painting, graffiti, sculpture, oral histories, and, perhaps, people’s thoughts too. I don’t know about you, but I agree with Paterson: I say that no depiction of rape or assault should ever be seen or heard, by anyone, least of all on a late-night adult television series called Law and Order: Special Victims Unit. As she suggests, this kind of “drama” and “entertainment” does nothing more than train our baby boys to grow up and become little rapists. It logically follows that when they watch shows like this (late-night adult television), with depictions of victims and their tremendous suffering – and with culprits getting caught and killed or locked away in a cage for the rest of their life – our little boys can’t help but idolize these people and want to take up a life of violent crime and victimize their own community themselves. We need to end this right here! No more! (Oh, and while we’re at it, could we ban that Family Guy show? They’re always doing unsavoury things and acting all dysfunctional-like. Some people call it clever satire but I think you’ll agree it’s nothing more than social rot – a cancer set to destroy us all!)
In all seriousness, if my house were broken into (or, to make it more relevant, let’s say my house was broken into while I was there and I was violently assaulted), among other things – like going to the hospital to deal with the immediate physical trauma, and working with a personal counselor to recover from any psychological effects – I might also change the locks to my house, put in an alarm system, install motion lights, trim the hedges that conceal my windows and doors, and/or adopt a large Rottweiler. And the police might also suggest any one or several of these (as theft and violence don’t appear to be features of society we can simply will away, cure through education, or ever fully defend against.)
In this case, would someone then take the police to task for offering me, the homeowner and victim, these suggestions? No, we’d say that it was helpful and empowering – healing even. And no doubt we would find it ridiculous if instead the police made a wide public appeal for citizens to stop stealing from other citizens. And it would be equally ridiculous, and offensive, if they insisted that all males sit through a lecture or course about why stealing is bad, burglary is worse, and violent assault during the act of burglary is still more so. We certainly wouldn’t be blaming John Hughes and Macaulay Culkin for the Home Alone series of films and for their part in “normalizing [home invasions] as a form of entertainment.”
What do the police do when a cougar or grizzly is spotted near a residential area and mauls a jogger or eats someone’s French Bulldog? Well, they inform the public of what occurred and where and encourage people to avoid entering into a situation that will put them into contact with the animal until police are able to neutralize the threat. But even after this particular animal is removed, the potential for violence remains so long as wild animals exist. And the police may remind the public, particularly those on the outskirts of suburbia, to avoid leaving out pet food, to not tether their pet in the yard, to gather up fruit and berries from their trees and bushes, and to keep their ground level doors and windows shut. And if you’re going out for a run they’ll suggest you avoid certain areas at certain times, wear a bell or make lots of noise, run with a friend, and/or carry pepper spray. These are common-sense recommendations for avoiding unwanted contact with wild animals that can kill you. These are not orders you’re required to follow. And, you’ll notice, nobody takes offense to these recommendations; they don’t elicit charges of victim-blaming; nobody suggests the police are engaged in their own attack or that survivors are being re-victimised by such recommendations. Why not?
Sexual assaults, and other forms of anti-social behaviour (like bear attacks) are not going to disappear through any amount of education, legislation, or precaution (any more than bad journalism is.) Yes, hopefully, by using and improving upon these social instruments such violence will occur less and less. (And the statistical evidence is irrefutable: violence of all kinds is rapidly evaporating, becoming more and more rare everywhere across the globe. If you are in doubt, see Steven Pinker’s The Better Angels of our Nature.) Yet some amount of violence, disgusting behaviour, and bad luck has always been with us and will remain.
I (as a thirty-something, White male, five feet eleven inches tall, and the most privileged person in town) daily steer clear of all kinds of locations, situations, and individuals. And in most circumstances I have to adjust my appearance, language, and behaviour if I don’t wish to experience the most likely forms of egregious stupidity. I do this not out of irrational fear but based on my life experience. At home and around the world I have been threatened, bullied, chased, experienced road rage (many times), been assaulted, mugged, had guns shoved in my face, and even had para-military units and civilians alike pretend to shoot me with their assault rifles... (Enak! Terima kasih banyak!) I did nothing to prompt these attacks. (In some instances it was the language I spoke, at other times it was the colour of my skin, sometimes it was my hair or what I was wearing, at other times it was for not crossing an intersection fast enough or for the crime of riding my bike on the street. And still other times it was for no discernible reason at all.) And, to be sure, having a penis has only increased the frequency and severity of these attacks (and has not had the opposite effect, as Paterson may wish to assert.) And, no, none of these situations would have been avoided or improved had I been twice my size or been carrying a weapon of my own. And while I’m not a pacifist, I am convinced that responding to these situations with violence would not have ever resulted in a better outcome... As a result of these experiences, I’ve learned over time what, when, where, and who to avoid if I want to maintain some control of the situation and not find myself accosted, assaulted, or killed.
(Additionally, there are two important points worth noting here. One: junkies, homeless people, the mentally ill, the poor, immigrants, refugees, and other minorities have never given me any trouble – ever. Two: Should I forget any of these abilities, inabilities, requirements, or boundaries – or simply not know that one exists – my community is quick to put me back in my place. For instance, if I were to cover my bike helmet in moss, say – as an adult male in the 21st century in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada – my friends, family, and neighbours will work to rectify the situation immediately by calling me a “fag” or by trying to run me off the road in their truck.)
While I’m always thrilled, and in awe, when I learn that others have avoided such experiences, I also cannot even imagine a small village, nevermind an entire world, in which I (with every possible weapon of privilege at my disposal) am free to travel, act, speak, dress, or even write as I would like. That is just inconceivable. (I mean, even this book and this essay you’re reading now: these ideas are largely frowned upon and elicit all kinds of unpleasant responses from both very likely and very unlikely places, that results in me censoring myself virtually all the time, even among friends...) Yet others seem to expect total freedom and respect, everywhere and at all times. That’s great. I applaud people for seeking to cultivate that for themselves and maybe, in the process, for the rest of us too. But I also recognize that there is stupidity and evil in the world, that testosterone and adrenaline are real, and that you’re not going to pacify or de-claw all of the bears, cougars, wolves, coyotes, bobcats, wolverines, lynxes, foxes, badgers, raccoons, fishers, and rats of the world. And you’re not going to reason with them or re-educate them either.
So, in the absence of a utopia, some simple advice and reminders can be effective in keeping people safe. Which is what we want. No? And it’s never a bad idea to remind people, particularly the young and less-experienced, to make some effort to avoid putting themselves in the most vulnerable situations. It doesn’t hurt to remind them to have a thoughtful plan for the end of the night if there’s a chance they’ll be inebriated, or even if it’s just going to be really late when they’re coming home. Surely we can agree that any person, regardless of age or gender, takes a certain amount of risk when travelling alone at night in a poorly lit and secluded area (and doubly so while tired, drunk, or high.) And with all of these factors at play the threat of just falling down and cracking your skull on the sidewalk, nevermind being victimized by your local predator (a hungry black bear or drunken sailor looking for a fight) becomes pretty likely. And noticing this, or reminding the public (especially if part of your job description is “ensuring public safety”) is not some sort of loosely veiled injustice that all of society must then apologize for.
Comments