Literally Nothing We Can Do

[browngirl]

The warning I want to put on this is "don't read this if you have daughters, because it will make you want to hide them from the world," but that warning is rather too emotional to be useful. So: this is about sexual assault and is potentially triggering, and considerably distressing.

To attempt a coherent summary: Melissa Bruen, a senior at the University of Connecticut, was walking in a public place on campus when a man grabbed her and sexually assaulted her. She fought him off as several bystanders gathered. They stopped her from hitting her assailant, restrained her, and as one man said, "You think that was assault?", pulled her top off, and groped her breasts, others cheered and shoved her around until she fought her way free.

Campus police say that the number of people who travel through that area makes it unlikely to impossible that they will ever arrest any of the men involved.

Melissa Bruen's article.

An article about the reaction to her article, which describes how respondents have called Ms. Bruen a liar and fame-seeker and criticized her appearance.

The Shakesville article which I first read about the case, which among other ideas discusses how this is not even the first sexual assault Ms. Bruen has suffered, and how that is sadly not unusual.

And now, a little of my personal reaction:

This young woman used her knowledge of self defence to fight off her attacker. The men passing by then decided to stop her and to punish her for doing so, including perpetrating another sexual assault upon her. Then when she made her story public she's been called a liar (and of course criticized for her appearance, and discussing how women's appearances are ALWAYS used to determine our worth is a whole other rant.) What does that say about the usefulness of stressing self-defence for women as the solution to the problem of sexual assault? And yet people resist as strenuously as they can the idea that the men who assault should ever change their behavior, that it is men's responsibility and opportunity to refrain from sexual assault.

As a woman, this fills me with despair. There are stories in my life and stories I have been told that Ms. Bruen's report reminds me of, not in magnitude but in kind. Recently a man I like and respect suggested that the solution to sexually harassing behavior at conventions is for women to stay home. Ms. Bruen beat her first attacker, so the surrounding men decided to punish her for it. It seems to me that no matter what we do being sexually assaulted is our fault, and if we stand up for ourselves people will just shove us back down.

Progress is not unidirectional, and there are times I worry that the status of women in the US is not improving. Such as now.

Comments

[ailbhe]

I think I'm glad I'm all out of compassion and rage now. That's so. Fucking. Typical.

[karadin.livejournal.com]

Good grief, you can't win, but thats not to say you should stop fighting, at least she still has weapons with words, no matter the response.

[mama-hogswatch.livejournal.com]

I wonder how many young women will decide that they have nothing to lose by becoming killers in self-defense situations from this.

[hex-16.livejournal.com]

And I'd applaud them for it. If she'd been carrying a gun instead, this man would either be dead or incarcerated right now, or she possibly even prevented the assault in the first place. This isn't her fault. I honestly don't know the gun laws there, and too often, campus policy prohibits carrying firearms anyway. I'm just saying, I'm perfectly okay with killing a rapist in self-defense.

[mama-hogswatch.livejournal.com]

I'm certainly okay with it.

The thing is, many states (NH is one) have as the test for self-defense using violent means (and I'm afraid that includes stuff that leaves a damn bruise). The test is:

Were you afraid for your life?

You have to convince a jury of that. Otherwise, YOU are the criminal.

[gingicat]

I already knew I was getting my kids into aikido classes at the earliest possible opportunity.

P.S. You should post this to shakydismount.

[mama-hogswatch.livejournal.com]

While I agree that the kids SHOULD know how to defend themselves, it's really a shame that the woman was being punished for doing so.

[gingicat]

Oh, I'm not disputing that. I have dreams of being a masked vigilante, myself.

[susanscookietin.livejournal.com]

But I would have said more if this was a locked post.

[hammercock.livejournal.com]

*incoherent rage*

You know, this is part of what pisses me off when women say things like, "Women should back each other up," and men counter, "That's sexist! How about 'people should back each other up'!" Yeah, that would be nice, wouldn't it, if those passing men had backed Ms. Bruen up? But they didn't.

[fitfool.livejournal.com]

Well I still maintain that those men should've backed her up too.

[hammercock.livejournal.com]

Absolutely they should have. Too often, though, men don't back women up when one of their own pulls shit like this.

[supergee.livejournal.com]

Comments like those make me think we need a national educational program to remind people that the Internet counts as Outside Speech.

[nellorat.livejournal.com]

I dunno--because of my connection to Duke, I read quite a bit about the accusations against some lacrosse team members there a while back, so it's definitely on my mind that such accusations can be faked. Even just going halfway through the comments show some genuine possible discrepancies in what Bruen wrote. So--

I am NOT saying it's fake--that's where superee's comment about private vs. public discourse comes in-- But I would like to know whether, for instance, the guys might be identified by bruises, if she punched them. I think this seems reasonable to at least question; I don't think that's anti-woman.

Also, as usual, only a few people managed to bring up these issues calmly and intelligently, and many people ended up saying unconnected jerky or even thuggish things about the author in particular or women in general. Yuck.

[browngirl.livejournal.com]

I admit I'm not at my calmest, but it's probably a good thing that you are the one bringing up the statement "but men can be falsely accused of sexual assault", in that I'm not just rolling my eyes and ignoring it. That comment is said in [nearly] Every Single Discussion Of Sexual Assault Ever, as if for the 1/8 (or 1/6, or 1/4) of women who are sexually assaulted, 1/2 of men are falsely accused. How many actually are? I would guess it's not 1/2. Or 1/4. Which doesn't mean it's discountable or ok when it happens, but does mean that bringing it up in a discussion of something that such a large proportion of women experience is most often just a tactic to derail the conversation. Still, as I began the paragraph with, I know that's not why you brought it up. Which is why I'm taking it seriously here.

Maybe the men could be identified by bruises, which might lead us to asking why the police aren't trying to do so, instead of wondering if that makes her a liar. And, maybe they can't be; there are many ways for a man who, say, plays touch football every so often, to be bruised. As for discrepancies in her story, I am not a professional analyst of eyewitness accounts, but I've read in reputable sources that they tend to have certain kinds of discrepancies due to the nature of human recall. It's possible that her story is a carefully crafted fabrication, but I don't think it's probable that it is. Lies tend to show themselves in certain kinds of details; based on my experiences with sexual assault and with other people's stories, I found her story to ring true.

Besides, why is the first impulse so often to disbelieve? Why, after all, is it so prevalent that whenever women report sexual assault someone insists that it must be proven to standards that no one would expect of telling of, say, being mugged? Having been disbelieved myself and knowing many, many stories that involve disbelief, I may have a tendency to believe her because I'm biased, or because my experiences indicate that victims of sexual assault are disproportionately disbelieved. I do appreciate the reminder of the former, but I do rather think the latter.

[nellorat.livejournal.com]

Mainly I wanted to say that disbelieving, even wondering about truth in this case, was very far from my first impulse. It wasn't until I read some comments that seemed calm but brought up some issues--including the one saying Bruen wasn't wearing a tube top that evening--that I began to wonder at all.

Suspecting false accusation is far from my default. I remember feeling outright crushed when I read convincing evidence that Tawana Brawley had faked her assault. Even so, when I first heard about the Duke lacrosse team, my first thought was, "Yeah, that's Duke jocks alright." One reason I read the whole damned book about it (which annoyed me in many ways) was because I felt I needed to be fully convinced one way or another, and my emotional weight was strongly on the side of thinking the guys had done it. I'd say they definitely acted like jerks, but the specific accusations were clearly false.

Also, note I am not saying that it didn't happen, just that after some of the factual comments I wonder. If I had to bet, like with a gun to my head, I'd bet that she was assaulted but that some aspects of her account are exaggerated, actually less the men taunting her than her fighting back so unremittingly. But I don't know; I'll be watching the news to see what else comes out.

[fitfool.livejournal.com]

brown_betty already commented below that the false accusations for rape run about 3%, same as the rate for other crimes. Even with that, I appreciate that you voiced the possibility calmly. I'm inclined to believe her but I do think her accusations need to be vetted the same as in any criminal investigation. As for the thing about the tube top, she had had five drinks. I don't know over what time span but I'll allow for her getting a few details about what she was wearing wrong without discounting the main point that she was attacked.

[nellorat.livejournal.com]

I realized, thinking this over as I drove to work, that I may also be a little arrogant (as my Korean-American students say) because I write reference articles in which accounts clearly conflict, and it's my job to sort them out to a best guess. For instance, I did an article on Henry Lee Lucas, who confessed to hundreds of murders yet some say did none of them, and faced a similar issue with H. H. Holmes. So my natural tendency is to look critically at discrepancies. However, doing so for an historical figure is one thing and for a living person is another. Fortunately, I do think that as screwed up as our justice system can be, it usually does sort out things moderately well, and I hope some guys are charged & there is a trial.

[brownbetty]

The rate of false accusation of sexual assault, as determined by the FBI, is 3%. Co-incidentally, the same as the rate of false accusation for pretty much every crime.

[nellorat.livejournal.com]

Thanks--I didn't know the number, but I can well believe it. Actually, I'd bet that rape is still under-reported, the 3% greatly offset by those who don't come forward. To continue the comment above, I'm interested in false reports and especially false confessions in general. (I realize this may sound cold, but I am drawn to read and write about the issue.)

On calmer reflection

[browngirl.livejournal.com]

I really did have to walk around and breathe for a bit after I read your comment: I was really angry (I'm still angry, just less so) and I really did mean it that from most people I would have just ignored the statement of "but men can be falsely accused", but I have more faith in you. I'm telling you I'm angry so you know where I am as I write this, not to guilt-trip you by implying that you did something wrong. (And I knew, when the Duke rape case ended in an acquittal, that it would become a cultural touchstone flung in the face of everyone who reported sexual assault for the next decade, but that's another discussion.) On the face of it it seems simply a relevant statement of fact, but I think it usually isn't, and this is why.

The reason why I'm so angry, the reason why I would have ignored that statement (as opposed to flaming it, which would be what I would have wanted to do), the reason I nearly put in my original entry "yes, men can be falsely accused, but This Is Not About That", is because... in discussions of sexual assault, people do often bring it up, and mostly as a derailing tactic. Even assuming good faith, when people are discussing what happened to them, what was done to them, and someone brings up the false accusations and sets them against the assaults that have been inflicted, the subtext of the statement is, "you say this happened to you, but you could be lying. You ARE lying."

And being told that one is lying about something so important and so horrible is deeply hurtful and horribly common.

So she could be lying, and have suborned whichever third party confirmed the bruises on her body. I could be lying, I have no forensic evidence anymore to back me up. We all could be lying. And if we as a society answer every report of sexual assault with "you could be lying", we never have to believe that sexual assault happens, that it happens as commonly as it does, that we have to do anything to change our society.

And that's my answer to that statement.

Re: On calmer reflection

[nellorat.livejournal.com]

I'm very glad you take my comments so seriously. I honestly thought about not replying here, and I'm sorry (though not guilty-feeling) that it upset you so much.

The first comment calling her a liar seemed to me uncouth and unbased, and I don't even pay attention to comments saying "it could be a lie" in general. What did get my attention was the post asking why, if she punched hard into someone's face, she didn't mention bruises on her hands. Now, maybe she just wanted to mention wounds due to others, but it seemed weird to me. As I said, I am NOT automatically suspicious of victims' reports at all. This wasn't just rote mud-flinging but case-specific questions. As I said above, I'll be watching the news to see what comes out.

I know this is a horribly touchy issue, and that sometimes I do put a concern for accuracy above emotional considerations--this is NOTHING compared to what a bulldog I can become in academic discussions, for instance, and I've learned to shut up when a dear friend wants support rather than careful analysis of both sides of a problem. On the other hand, I feel strongly that only long-term harm can come when some genuinely true things are considered unsayable. I hope my position is more clear now, especially that I would never bring up false accusations if it weren't that some comments seemed to bring up questions regarding this specific case.

Re: On calmer reflection

[browngirl.livejournal.com]

I think I'm going to condense both your comments into one reply, not least since most of what you said I either agree with or see where you're coming from, and, well, now that I've calmed down some more I'm less voluble. :)

So, from Comment The First:

Mainly I wanted to say that disbelieving, even wondering about truth in this case, was very far from my first impulse. It wasn't until I read some comments that seemed calm but brought up some issues--including the one saying Bruen wasn't wearing a tube top that evening--that I began to wonder at all.

*nod* That makes sense. I guess... it's kind of the first impulse of our *society*, to disbelieve. I mean... so maybe she wasn't wearing a tube top. To use myself as an example, I don't remember what I wore to work a week ago myself, and I know from bitter experience that most kinds of shirt are not impervious to being forcibly pulled off one's body.

I'm skipping Ms. Brawley's case and the Duke Rape Case because it *is* another discussion, but, yeah. I remember being sad and angry and terribly worried that her case would be used to bludgeon actual rape victims.

And from Comment the Second:

I'm very glad you take my comments so seriously. I honestly thought about not replying here, and I'm sorry (though not guilty-feeling) that it upset you so much.

Well, I have some emotional investment in the subject, alas. *rueful smile* Now that I'm actually calmer, I am glad you asked; someone was bound to, and far better it be someone such as you who really *is* asking in good faith.

As for details such as whether her knuckles were bruised; well, she was turning a chaotic event into a coherent narrative, and maybe that detail didn't fit, or maybe its absence didn't fit (maybe her knuckles didn't bruise because she boxes with punching bags as part of her exercise routine, as one off the cuff possibility). It's a different way of relating an event than, say, a detailed court testimony. But shaping an event into a coherent narrative is different than mendacity.

I know this is a horribly touchy issue, and that sometimes I do put a concern for accuracy above emotional considerations--this is NOTHING compared to what a bulldog I can become in academic discussions, for instance, and I've learned to shut up when a dear friend wants support rather than careful analysis of both sides of a problem.

That's a good thing, honestly. I don't want to sound like it isn't. I guess... that's exactly what should be done in academic discussions, but this one isn't academic, in all senses of the word. In a case like this, sometimes there are attempts to demolish by nitpicking --- "you were wrong about the kind of shirt you wore, therefore you're ENTIRELY LYING" and so on. So I'm as yet unconvinced there. However, you're definetely right that "only long-term harm can come when some genuinely true things are considered unsayable", as you put it. And, thank you for dealing with me as I struggled for rationality; this *is* a subject that I can be irrational about, so it was useful, if painful, to be challenged.

Re: On calmer reflection

[nellorat.livejournal.com]

I was very glad to see this. Your LJ constantly leads me to things that are good and important to read (such as the concentration-camp brothel post you linked to today), and I don't want to upset you unnecessarily. As I mentioned above, I think my writing reference articles on some kinds of crime also predisposed me to look for discrepancies--not in the usual, dismissive way, but I can see how I triggered your reaction to that kind of thing. Also, because it was a front-page news story (albeit in a student paper), I reacted very differently from how I would have reacted to a regular blog post. Now, I think, the national newspapers have the story, for good or ill, and we'll all see what happens. *hugs* if welcome!

Re: On calmer reflection

[danaseilhan.livejournal.com]

I'm not convinced nothing happened in the Duke rape case. I think something did, but that the DA tried to "prove" it in an illegal way. And I also think the lacrosse players were first-class A-holes for hiring a stripper in the first place. But I tend to have that opinion about people who hire strippers, especially men, simply because of the whole "woman-as-Burger-King-sammitch" mentality. ("Have her your way.")

[supergee.livejournal.com]

Actually, I was more thinking of the gratuitous comments about the victim's appearance and clothing, which struck me as the sort of thing people should know better than to say out loud.

[awfief.livejournal.com]

See, I read this kind of thing and I instantly wonder, "How could this have happened?"

So here's what I posit:

People come across a fight. Person A is beating up Person B. So the crowd comes along, pulls A off B, and starts insulting and harassing A, maybe even throwing a punch or 2.

Sounds like that's what happened, except they added a little more "fuck you" to the mix.

Now, I'm NOT CONDONING THEIR BEHAVIOR -- not in the least. But part of me has to hope that at least there was some bizarre reasoning. Like she was probably beating him to a pulp, the crowd thought it was unfair and was going to give her a taste of her own medicine, and didn't believe *why* she was beating him to a pulp.

[lurkerwithout.livejournal.com]

A "taste of her own medicine" is to start feeling her up? To try and take off her clothes? That when they come across a woman fighting a man in an area THE ENTIRE CAMPUS has nicknamed "the rape trail" to jump to the conclusion SHE is attacking HIM...

SERIOUSLY?!?

[awfief.livejournal.com]

All I'm saying is that a mob finding Person A beating Person B, they tend to split them up and start beating on Person A to give them a taste of their own medicine. This seems similar -- if you find Person A beating Person B you may not believe Person B attacked Person A, because A is so obviously kicking the snot out of B.

Again, I am NOT condoning their behavior. I'm trying to figure out what on earth would posses them to do this. If I came across one person beating up another, I would immediately cast the person being beat up as the victim. I wouldn't start beating on the aggressor (but I'd want to!) and it probably would take some convincing for me to believe that the person who I originally cast as the aggressor was, in fact, the victim.

(FWIW in real life when it's happened, I try to help separate them if I can and then move on, not actually wanting to get involved in the who said what debate.)

Point being, it's not human nature to come across a victim of sexual assault and beat up on her. So I'm trying to figure out the facts from the hype. I believe that sexual assault happened, a woman tried to defend herself, and that all a crowd saw was one person beating on another.

Which begs another question -- how much self defense is enough? If you get the attacker down, and run away, they could get up and chase after you. Should you make sure they stay down by beating them unconscious? To the death? It's not an easy question.

The other question is that if this is indeed the "rape trail" are there any of those "campus blue lights" around to call the campus police? She may have been acting on instinct and not given thought to running towards one of those, which is perfectly reasonable. If I was walking along a "rape trail" and found a woman beating up a man, I wouldn't necessarily assume she was acting in self-defense -- I'd probably assume that she was beating the snot out of him for no reason, because I'd *seen* no reason.

(in the past when I've seen fights, my thoughts go towards breaking it up, not helping the original "who said what" issue, but I do have visceral sympathy for what I perceive is the victim, even though my brain knows that the "victim" may not be all he seems).

[browngirl.livejournal.com]

Point being, it's not human nature to come across a victim of sexual assault and beat up on her.

Unfortunately, it really seems to be. Or at least it seems to be a very common response.

Events like this are boggling; we want to understand how civilized, rational, nice people can act like that. It makes sense that we do. But I think, rather than endless second guessing of the particular incident, the conclusion I have to draw from this is that it demonstrates that some aspects of our culture still need some work.

[danaseilhan.livejournal.com]

It must be human nature, since gang rapes happen so often--it's still beating her up, just from the inside.

And several guys ganging up on a much smaller person... that's just inexcusable.

[awfief.livejournal.com]

And yes, seriously. Again, NOT saying it's right. Let's say you're on "the rape trail" -- and you see a woman beating up a man. Is your first thought "well, he's getting what he deserved, so I'll leave them alone and go about my business?"

I've seen crowds do similar things -- ie, "B started it, he took my wallet" and the crowd says "oh yeah? let's show you what taking your wallet really feels like" and proceed to distribute cash, credit cards, read off A's address, etc., because A was beating B so badly that everyone cast B as the victim.

That when they come across a woman fighting a man in an area THE ENTIRE CAMPUS has nicknamed "the rape trail" to jump to the conclusion SHE is attacking HIM...

yeah, duh, because that's what they see! it's a visceral reaction. Have you never seen a fight before?

[nellorat.livejournal.com]

If you don't mind talking about it, I'd be interested in what similar things you saw crowds do. Was that wallet thing something that really happened, or was that an analogy?

For what it's worth, I've only seen violence a couple of times, and then pretty much everyone tried to get as far away as possible as soon as possible, though it was clear that someone then called the police.

[awfief.livejournal.com]

In my experience, the "get away" crowd mentality happens when the parties are mostly equally matched. Usually when one person is obviously beating the snot out of another (and I'll note that the victim's own report said it took 3 guys to get her off him), the crowd steps in.

The wallet thing really happened, and the point was to humiliate the person who was beating the snot out of someone else. I guess when someone is obviously outmatched it's hard for folks to consider who the first victim is.

[nellorat.livejournal.com]

Wow about the wallet thing!

At the risk of adding to the bad folk-image of dangerous NYC, the major incident I saw was on the subway, and it was incredibly one-sided: the guy doing the beating had no reason at all (one of those "stop shoving me" things that usually just goes away), jammed the other guy's head under an arm-rest so he was helpless, and just kept punching. I was the only person who even stayed in the same subway car, but as I said, police were called. All told, that's probably the sanest approach, in part because the police are trained to detain all involved and try to figure out responsibility later.

This just proves how various people can be, for good and ill. Years ago I concluded that no one can really know how she or he would react to violence until it happens, and this just reinforces that.

[badgerbag.livejournal.com]

Can I even dare to hope that someday one of the witnesses to that will talk about it to the media or police...

Ugh.

[fitfool.livejournal.com]

This is really depressing. With so many witnesses milling around, I do hope some of them see the press coverage and call the police. I'm not optimistic about that happening though since it sounds like it's near the end of the school year and the bulk of the students will be wrapped up with their own lives.

Sigh..........................

[invader-tak-1.livejournal.com]

Welcome to why I don't leave the house without a gun anymore.........

[the-resa.livejournal.com]

The one thing I cling to is that she fought them off, and beat off her original attacker. That makes me DAMN PROUD of her.

For the rest, as I've said before, a nice semi-automatic would take care of my feelings for the others.