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

[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.