A federal lawsuit has been filed against Baylor University, accusing football players at the school of engaging in gang rape as a rite of passage, and the school of doing nothing to prevent it.

The alleged rapes happened when Art Briles was head coach of the team and Kenneth Starr was president of the university. Briles was suspended a year ago, and Starr lost his position as president but remained a law professor at the school until last August, when he resigned.

Jane Doe, the anonymous woman who filed the lawsuit, claims that she was drugged and gang raped by four to eight Baylor football players in February of 2012. She alleges that the players then burglarized her apartment and harassed her through text messages until she left school the next year.

Jane Doe confirmed that at least one, 21-second videotape of two female Baylor students being gang raped by several Baylor football players was circulated amongst football players. The suit also alleges that Baylor football parties often involved dogfighting–at least once, a dog was so severely injured it almost died.

The lawsuit contends that Briles was fully aware of the alleged gang rape, and includes text messages between him and an assistant coach, in which Briles calls the woman a “fool” for reporting the burglaries to the police.

Baylor athletes gang-raped women as a ‘bonding’ experience: lawsuit. They allegedly called it ‘playtime.’ https://t.co/qXnSpRkxWl pic.twitter.com/ICcJ0c8gFU

— Kate Briquelet (@kbriquelet) May 18, 2017

Allegations of sexual assault at the Christian university began to surface in 2012. Baylor student Jasmine Hernandez accused football player Tevin Elliott of raping her twice at a party. He was convicted in 2014 of two counts of sexual assault and sentenced to 20 years in prison.

In 2013, a female soccer player reported that she was sexually assaulted by football player Sam Ukwuachu. He was convicted in 2015,  and sentenced to six months in jail and 10 years probation.

Hernandez, who publicly disclosed her name, sued the school last year for failing to investigate her claims–Briles and Starr were fired not long after.

Another woman, who was identified under the pseudonym Elizabeth Doe, also filed a lawsuit against Baylor earlier this year, alleging that football players had gang-raped her in 2013. She stated in the lawsuit that 31 players had committed at least 52 rapes, including gang-rapes, between 2011-2014.

Elizabeth Doe’s lawsuit accused the school of using sex as a way to sell the football program to prospective students. It described how Kendal Briles, a former assistant football coach and son of former head coach Art Briles, asked a recruit, “Do you like white women? Because we have a lot of them at Baylor and they love football players.”

Also in @Baylor lawsuit: Woman got school counseling. Says unnamed counselor talked stats of women who don’t report rape to dissuade her

— Jim Vertuno (@JimVertuno) May 17, 2017

Jane Doe’s lawsuit described many of the same elements–likening rape culture at the school to a hazing ritual. She alleges that organized gang rapes were considered to be a “bonding” experience for the players. Her suit also alleges that the older players brought underage recruits to strip clubs. They also had a “hostess program” that allegedly made sure women had sex with the recruits during their visits to campus.

After the allegations against Baylor became known, the school’s board said it was “horrified” and “outraged” to learn what was happening on campus.

Briles filed a lawsuit himself in December, accusing the school of libel. But he quickly dropped the suit after the university released text messages between the assistant coach, the athletic director, and him, that showed how they all did their best to avoid contact with law enforcement and encouraged victims to not press charges.

Jane Doe’s suit claims that school officials encouraged the plaintiff and her family not to report the assault to law enforcement. But the school says it will do all it can to ensure that things are made right.

“The University’s response in no way changes Baylor’s position that any assault involving members of our campus community is reprehensible and inexcusable,” the school said in a statement.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Lawsuit Accuses Baylor Football Players of Gang Raping Women as Bonding Ritual appeared first on Law Street.

Throughout most of our history, rape was a property crime.

Today we do not, in the modern United States at least, think of a woman’s sexuality as a financial asset. But that is a recent phenomenon. For most of our history, rape was not treated the same way as other violent assaults because it wasn’t just a violent assault, it was also a crime against property.

You can see this view–of a woman’s sexuality belonging to her father and later her husband–in laws concerning rape and sexual assault. It was even possible for a father to sue a man who had consensual sex with his daughter because he had lost the value of his daughter. Based on this view, value is lost in terms of her work if she became pregnant and was no longer able to earn wages, or in terms of a future wife for someone else because of this stain on her character. Men could not be held accountable for raping their wives because a wife was a man’s property and consent to sex–at any time of his choosing–was part of the arrangement.

Lest you think that these laws are ancient examples of a culture that no longer bears relation to our current policies on rape, spousal rape was not made illegal in all fifty states until 1993, where it still may carry a less severe sentence than other rape offenses. The tort of seduction was technically on the books in North Carolina in 2003.

This context is important given our current cultural attitudes toward sexual assault. To understand this culture and how it can be amended, we need to look more deeply at the historical understandings of rape and consent.

Force Means No

The framework for defining rape underpins our understanding of who is required to prove consent or non-consent. The Hebrew Scriptures, which established longstanding cultural norms that helped form a basis for what was morally and legally acceptable in early America, make a distinction between a woman who was raped within a city and one who was raped outside of the city limits. The first woman was stoned to death and the second considered blameless (assuming she was a virgin). This distinction is based on the idea that it was the woman’s responsibility to cry out for help and show that she was non-consenting. A woman who was raped in the city obviously had not screamed because if she had someone would have come to her rescue and stopped the rape. The woman outside the city had no one to rescue her so she could not be blamed for being victimized.

This brutal logic, which is completely inconsistent with how we know some victims of rape react to an attack, was continued in the American legal system when our laws on rape were formulated. Rape was defined as a having a male perpetrator and a female victim and involving sexual penetration and a lack of consent. But it was again the woman’s responsibility to prove that she had not consented and the way that this was demonstrated was through her resistance. She was only actually raped if she had attempted to fight off her attacker. Different jurisdictions required different levels of force to show a true lack of consent. For example, fighting off an assailant to your utmost ability or even up to the point where the choice was either to submit to being raped or to being killed. Indeed, the cultural significance of chastity as a virtue that the female was expected to guard was so profound that many female Christian saints are saints at least in part because they chose to die rather than be raped or be a bride to anyone but Christ.

Potential canonization aside, it was consistently the responsibility of the woman alleging that she was the victim of a rape to prove that she had fought off her attacker in order to show that she had not consented. If she could not show that she had sufficiently resisted, she was deemed to not have been raped. Her chastity was someone else’s property, either her father’s or her husband’s/future husband’s, so it was always understood that someone, other than her, had the right to her sexuality. The assailant had assumed that he had the right to use her sexually and was only a rapist if she acted in such a way that a reasonable man would have known that she did not belong to him. Her failure to communicate that fact, that she was the property of some other man, was a sign that she had in fact consented. Therefore the rape was not his moral failing in stealing another man’s property but her moral failing in not protecting that property from being stolen.

Culture Wars

We can see the effects of this ideology in how we treat rape victims today. Although we don’t necessarily require evidence of forceful resistance, it is considered helpful in prosecuting a rape case. Rape shield laws may have eliminated the most egregious examples of slut-shaming victims, but an innocent or even virginal victim is certainly what the prosecution could hope for if they were trying to design their most favorable case. One of the first questions that will be asked of the victim is “did you say no?” In other words “what did YOU do to prevent this from happening to you?” The burden is still often legally and almost always culturally on the victim to show that they did not consent.

There is an alternative approach that has been gaining traction on college campuses and elsewhere known as the concept of “affirmative consent.” Take a look at the video below, which elucidates the differences between the “no versus no” approach compared to affirmative consent, which is often described as “yes means yes.”

In this video, Susan Patton and Rush Limbaugh both represent examples of rape culture. The contrast between the views of Savannah Badlich, the advocate of affirmative consent, and Patton, who is against the idea, could not be starker. To Badlich, consent is an integral part of what makes sex, sex. If there isn’t consent then whatever happened to you, whether most people would have enjoyed it or indeed whether or not you orgasmed, was rape. It is your consent that is the foundation of a healthy sexual experience, not the types of physical actions involved. In contrast, Patton expressed the view that good sex is good sex and consent seems to not play a role in whether it was good sex, or even whether it should be defined as sex at all. The only thing that could indicate if something is an assault versus a sexual encounter is whatever physical evidence exists, because otherwise, the distinction is based only on the assertions of each individual. Again we are back to evidence of force.

What is “Rape Culture”?

Rape culture refers to a culture in which sexuality and violence are linked together and normalized. It perpetuates the idea that male sexuality is based on the use of violence against women to subdue them to take a sexual experience, as well as the idea that female sexuality is the effort to resist or invite male sexuality under certain circumstances. It overgeneralizes gender roles in sexuality, demeans men by promoting their only healthy sexuality as predatory, and also demeans women by considering them objects without any positive sexuality at all.

According to this school of thought, the “no means no” paradigm fits in perfectly with rape culture because it paints men as being predators who are constantly looking for a weak member of the herd to take advantage of sexually, while also teaching women that they need to be better than the rest of the herd at fending off attacks, by clearly saying no, to survive. If they can’t do that, because they were drinking or not wearing proper clothing, then the attack was their fault.

“Yes Means Yes”

Affirmative consent works differently. Instead of assuming that you can touch someone until they prove otherwise, an affirmative consent culture assumes that you may not touch someone until you are invited to do so. This would be a shocking idea to some who assume that gamesmanship and predation are the cornerstones of male sexuality and the perks of power, but it works out better for the majority of men and women, who would prefer and who should demand equality in sex.

This video gives a brief highlight of some of the issues that are brought up when affirmative consent is discussed and the difficulties that can still arise even with affirmative consent as a model.

Evaluating Criticism of Affirmative Consent

The arguments are important so let’s unpack some of the key ones in more detail. The first objection, expressed in both videos, is how exactly do you show consent? Whenever the affirmative consent approach comes up, one of the first arguments is that it is unenforceable because no one is going to stop sexual activity to get written consent, which is the only way to really prove that a person consented. We still end up in a “he said, she said” situation, which is exactly where we are now, or a world where the government is printing out sex contracts.

The idea that affirmative consent will by necessity lead to written contracts for sex is a logical fallacy that opponents to affirmative consent use to make the proposition seem ridiculous. Currently, we require the victim to prove non-consent. Often the victim is asked if they gave a verbal no or if they said they did not want the contact. The victim is never asked: did you put the fact that you didn’t want to be touched in writing and have your assailant read it? The idea that a written explanation of non-consent would be the only way we would take it seriously is absurd, so it would be equally absurd to assume that requiring proof of consent would necessitate written documentation. Advocates for affirmative consent don’t want sex contracts.

In addition, even under our current framework we accept a variety of pieces of evidence from the prosecution to show that the victim did not consent. A clear “no” is obviously the strongest kind of evidence, just as under an affirmative consent framework an enthusiastic verbal “yes” would be the best evidence, but that is just what the best evidence is. That is certainly not the only kind of evidence available. Courts already look at the entire context surrounding the incident to try to determine consent. The process would be virtually the same under an affirmative consent model. The only difference would be that the burden would be on the defendant to show that they believed they had obtained consent based on the context of the encounter instead of placing the burden on the victim to show that, although they didn’t say “no,” they had expressed non-verbally that they were unwilling to participate.

The shift in the burden of proof is sometimes cited as a reason not to adopt an affirmative consent model. Critics argue that this affects the presumption that the accused is innocent until proven guilty. Which is, rightly, a cornerstone of our judicial system. If this model did, in fact, change that presumption then it wouldn’t be an appropriate answer to this problem. But it does not.

Take another crime as an example. A woman’s car is stolen. The police issue a BOLO on the car, find it, and bring the suspect in and sit him down. They ask him “did you have permission to take that car?” and he replies “Yes, officer, she gave me the keys!”

He is still presumed innocent and, as far as this brief hypothetical tells us, hasn’t had his rights violated. It looks as though he is going to get a fair trial at this point. That trial may still devolve into another he said, she said situation. She may allege that she didn’t give him the keys but merely left them on the kitchen table. At that point, it will be up to the jury to decide who they believe, but that would have been the case in any event. He is presenting her giving the keys to him as one of the facts to show his innocence.

If a woman’s car is stolen we don’t question her about how many miles are on the odometer. We don’t ask if she wore a seatbelt the last time she drove it. We don’t care if she had been drinking because her alcohol consumption doesn’t negate the fact that she was a victim of a crime. We certainly wouldn’t force her to prove that she didn’t give the thief the keys.

That is how affirmative consent works. It wouldn’t require a written contract or even necessarily a verbal assertion. Context would always matter and the cases would still often become two competing stories about what the context meant. And it doesn’t mean that we are assuming that person is guilty before they have the chance to show that they did, in fact, get that consent. It just means that we are placing the burden of proving that consent was obtained on the party claiming that consent had been obtained.

Conclusion

There is no other category of crime where we ask the victim to show that they didn’t want to be the victim of that crime. A man who is stabbed in a bar fight, regardless of whether he was drunk or belligerent, isn’t asked to prove that he didn’t want a knife wound.

We need to change our cultural framework of rape and consent. When we are working under an affirmative consent framework what we are doing is changing the first question. Currently, our first question is for the victim: did you say no? Under an affirmative consent model our first question is for the suspect: did you get a yes?

Resources

Women Against Violence Against Women: What Is Rape Culture? 

Vice: A Brief And Depressing History of Rape Laws

Women’s Law Project: Rape and Sexual Assault In the Legal System

Find Law: Is The Tort of Wrongful Seduction Still Viable? 

International Models Project On Women’s Rights: Law Reform Efforts: Rape and Sexual Assault In The United States of America

Catholic Company: The Virgin Martyrs As Models of Purity

Chicago Tribune: To Combat Sexual Assault, Colleges Say ‘Yes’ To Affirmative Consent

Think Progress: What Affirmative Consent Actually Means

SUNY: Definition of Affirmative Consent 

Washington Post: Why We Made ‘Yes Means Yes’ California Law

Mary Kate Leahy

Mary Kate Leahy (@marykate_leahy) has a J.D. from William and Mary and a Bachelor’s in Political Science from Manhattanville College. She is also a proud graduate of Woodlands Academy of the Sacred Heart. She enjoys spending her time with her kuvasz, Finn, and tackling a never-ending list of projects. Contact Mary Kate at staff@LawStreetMedia.com

The post Rape Culture and the Concept of Affirmative Consent appeared first on Law Street.

Ex-Stanford student and swimmer Brock Turner, who most of us are acquainted with by now, has been banned for life by USA Swimming. Turner, who was sentenced to an upsettingly mild sentence of six months in jail for sexually assaulting an unconscious student in 2015, was a promising athlete with his mind set on the Olympics. Now he will never be able to compete professionally in swimming since USA Swimming is the national governing body for the sport, and also hosts the trials for the Olympics.

See Law Street’s five reasons why people are protesting the Brock Turner’s sentence.

A spokesperson for the organization told USA Today that Turner was no longer a member of the organization at the time of the assault since his membership had just expired, but if he wished to apply today, he would not be eligible. The spokesperson said:

USA Swimming strictly prohibits and has zero tolerance for sexual misconduct, with firm Code of Conduct policies in place, and severe penalties, including a permanent ban of membership, for those who violate our Code of Conduct.

Now that Brock Turner has been banned from US Swimming for life and no longer has any of those cool future prospects can he just go to jail

— Kendra W (@kendrawcandraw) June 10, 2016

Although sentenced to six months, it now looks like Turner will be a free man after only three–online inmate records from Santa Clara County Jail show that he is to be released on September 2. This is because inmates at county jails only serve half the time they were sentenced if they behave well. On top of that, he is reportedly held in protective custody to keep him safe from other inmates during his short jail stay.

#BrockTurner will probably serve HALF of the 6 month sentence+is placed in protective custody as to not be targeted. pic.twitter.com/UNowixpccG

— very famous (@adatweetsthings) June 10, 2016

Turner was found guilty of three felonies, which carry a maximum sentence of 14 years in prison–but the judge thought it too harsh for the 20 year-old, saying “a prison sentence would have a severe impact on him,” so the judge sentenced him to six months in a county jail. The assailant’s father also read a letter in court, pleading for a mild punishment, saying, “he has never been violent to anyone including his actions on the night of Jan 17^th 2015.” This seems like a strange statement about someone who was found guilty of attacking an unconscious woman.

The girl who was assaulted read her moving statement in court and it was later published on Buzzfeed, to which Vice President Joe Biden replied with an open letter expressing his anger with what happened and thanking her for her courage to speak up. Both of them praised the two Swedish students that rescued her and held on to Brock Turner until the police showed up.

Brock Turner is blowing up but these men (Carl Fredrik and Peter Jonsson) rescued the girl and called the police. RT pic.twitter.com/vMqZePrYMn

— Tweet Like A Girl (@TweetLikeAGirI) June 10, 2016

The judge, Aaron Persky, has been widely criticized for the lenient sentence and urged to withdraw. In the new and totally unrelated case he’s working on, 10 prospective jurors have refused to work with him because of the Turner case.

For more on this, read Law Street’s piece about Lena Dunham and the cast of “Girls” dedicating a video to the survivor of the Stanford case.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Stanford Sex Offender Brock Turner Banned by USA Swimming – Forever appeared first on Law Street.

Yesterday we went through the five reasons why people are protesting the Brock Turner’s sentence, the 20-year-old former Stanford swimmer who was sentenced to six months in jail after he sexually assaulted an unconscious woman last year. Now it seems that civilians aren’t the only ones speaking out against the case and rape culture–celebrities are too.

Lena Dunham, who is the creator, writer, and star of the HBO series “Girls,” tweeted out Wednesday a video featuring her and few of her fellow female cast mates discussing sexual assault in dedication to the survivor of the Stanford case.

I dedicate this to the brave survivor in the Stanford case who has given so much to change the conversation. https://t.co/KMOJUxvPu0

— Lena Dunham (@lenadunham) June 8, 2016

In the compelling Now This video, Dunham along with Allison Williams, Jemima Kirke, and Zosia Mamet explained that despite their differences, they are all in agreement when it comes to the issue of sexual assault.

Their message was simple–support, listen, and take action.

In the video, the women also offered the following three statistics on sexual assault:

• One in five women will be sexually assaulted in their lifetime.
• 80 percent of those attacks will be committed by someone they know.
• One in four girls will be sexually abused before the age of 18.

They also didn’t hesitate to recognize their own privilege in the video, stating,

While its just the four of us here right now, we hope to represent the solidarity and support all survivors should be able to find. Which may be the first time that four white women can accurately represent anything.

Following the video’s release, people began using the hashtag #SheIsSomeone on social media to express their support for the Stanford victim, and other victims like her who have suffered from sexual assault as well as victim blaming.

A friendly reminder that sexual assault & rape is wrong because #sheissomeone and we all deserve safety and respect. https://t.co/j4XKxcKzUa

— Kelly Roskam (@KellyEWRoskam) June 9, 2016

People all over the world are coming together to support this girl and it’s amazing. #SheIsSomeone

— Emily (@emilyhawkkins) June 9, 2016

Not because she’s someone’s daughter
Not because she’s someone’s girlfriend
But because #SheIsSomeone

— Tessa (@GonceTessa) June 9, 2016

Dunham, who is an outspoken feminist, has publicly supported many women’s issues in the past, and even created an online feminist newsletter titled Lenny Letter in an effort to continue raising awareness on other issues plaguing women today.

So for all the women out there, I’d like to extend a big “thank you” to the cast of “Girls” for speaking out on this issue and helping to educate more women and men on how they can help support victims of sexual assault.

For more on the Stanford sexual assault case and Brock Turner’s sentencing read our original article here.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Cast of “Girls” Unites to Send Powerful Message About Sexual Assault appeared first on Law Street.

A series of viral tweets alleging that four Morehouse College students gang raped a Spelman College student set off campus outrage and protests at both HBCUs, resulting in Spelman launching an official investigation into the allegations.

A Twitter account using the handle @RapedAtSpelman began publicly sharing the story of how she was gang raped at a party, and then was asked to keep quiet by the college’s dean and Public Safety Department in a series of tweets Monday evening.

Its sad that I have to create a page to express myself rather than tweeting from my real account because AUC students blame & bash victims.

— Raped At Spelman (@RapedAtSpelman) May 2, 2016

The person behind the anonymous ‘Raped At Spelman’ account identified herself as a freshman at Spelman, a historically black private female college. She said that the night she was raped she had gone to a college party and gotten drunk with a group of friends and upperclassmen. Later that night she says four Morehouse students attacked her.

I was drunk but that doesn’t mean I forgot about what happened. I went to the bathroom upstairs to throw up and when I opened the door I was

— Raped At Spelman (@RapedAtSpelman) May 2, 2016

surrounded by 4 Morehouse students who took me to another room and took turns raping me. I was in shock about what had happened.

— Raped At Spelman (@RapedAtSpelman) May 2, 2016

After the alleged rape, Raped At Spelman states that she discovered her friends had left, so she walked back to campus alone and went to Public Safety to file a report before being sent to the hospital for a rape kit. 

She says it took a month before she was scheduled to have a meeting with the college’s dean and Public Safety; to her surprise they asked her to give her “brothers” a pass.

When I got to the meeting with the Dean and Public Safety they asked me what was I wearing, why did I seperate from my friends, & why was I

— Raped At Spelman (@RapedAtSpelman) May 2, 2016

drinking under age. The Dean also said that Spelman & Morehouse are brother & sister so I should give them a pass. I never felt so worthless

— Raped At Spelman (@RapedAtSpelman) May 2, 2016

in my life. I got so depressed that I wanted to take my own life and I started to self-harm. I don’t want to be at a school that does not

— Raped At Spelman (@RapedAtSpelman) May 2, 2016

make me feel safe and wants to silence me. So I would like to say goodbye to Spelman and to the amazing people I’ve met along the way.

— Raped At Spelman (@RapedAtSpelman) May 2, 2016

Adding…

You can NEVER say Morehouse has their sisters back if they are just going to force her on it.

— Raped At Spelman (@RapedAtSpelman) May 2, 2016

By Tuesday, the hashtags #RapedAtSpelman and #RapedByMorehouse were trending on Twitter. Students quickly organized public demonstrations in which they spoke on the state of rape culture at both colleges.

Just like that, the sun’s out and the protest is underway.#RapedByMorehouse #RapedAtSpelman pic.twitter.com/GMzCQESJAF

— Da’Shaun Harrison (@_iAmRoyal) May 3, 2016

Today Black women are doing it again. They’re defending all of our humanity. #RapedByMorehouse pic.twitter.com/V22fc3pZr9

— Avery. (@Philosavery) May 3, 2016

Raped At Spelman continues to tweet from the handle, but her identity remains a mystery. The claims add Spelman and Morehouse to a long list of other schools that have been accused of covering up or mishandling sexual assaults on campuses. As of now, it is unclear whether or not Spelman’s investigation will in fact be able to validate her claims, or provide any type of resolution.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post ‘Raped at Spelman’ Twitter Account Details Alleged Morehouse Gang Rape appeared first on Law Street.

Former Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin is threatening to sue rapper Azealia Banks after a mixup over a satirical article spawned a profanity-laced Twitter feud that is definitely NSFW.

The feud probably came as no surprise to hip hop fans, since the “212” rapper’s fledgling music career has easily been overshadowed by her propensity for internet trolling.

When Banks isn’t calling flight attendants “f*ggots” or renaming Iggy Azalea “Igloo Australia,” she lets her “trigger fingers turn to twitter fingers” by inciting nasty feuds with celebrities seemingly at random.

However, the normally unapologetic rapper may have just swallowed a bit of her pride after Palin threatened to take legal action if Banks didn’t issue a public apology.

But before we get to that, let’s recap the bizarre timeline of events that got us here.

March 31:

A satirical website posted an article with a clickbait title claiming to quote Palin as saying “Even The French Understand That Slavery Wasn’t Our Fault, Because The Negroes Liked It.” Fake Palin went on to say,

I’m going to say it once again loudly and clearly: Negroes loved being slaves and they were doing just fine under our rules. So, you see, you can’t really blame us for any of it, not legitimately.

April 3:

Banks presumably stumbled upon said article (clearly not knowing that that it is fake), and launched into one of her notorious Twitter rants.

The tweets have since been deleted, but not before someone at the Media Research Center quickly managed to snag screenshots that can be seen here.

***Warning: This is where the NSFW part comes in

Banks writes:

12:42 am

Sarah Palin needs to have her hair shaved off to a buzz cut, get headfucked by a big veiny, ashy, black dick then be locked in a cupboard.

12:44 am

Hideous. At least suk a nigga dick or summ’ before you start talking shit about “black people willingly accepting slavery”. Least she can do

12:46 am

Honestly… Let’s find the biggest burliest blackest negroes and let them runa train on her. Film it and put it on worldstar.

April 4

Breitbart publishes an article titled “Rapper Azealia Banks Calls for Sarah Palin to Be Gang-Raped by Black Men.”

April 5

(This is point where deciphering the timeline got a little bit messy, so I’m going to break it down by event.)

Palin Responds on Facebook

Palin responds to the article by writing an open letter to Banks on her Facebook, in which she writes,

Hey Female Rapper – listen up, little darling. No one has any idea what you’re wigging out about in these bizarre, violent rants against me, but you’re obviously not exercising enough intelligence to acknowledge you’ve been sucked into believing some fake interview in which I supposedly offered comments representing the antithesis of my truth.

Palin then promises to check her daughter’s playlist to make sure none of Banks’ “anti-woman, pro-rape garbage” is on it.

Legal Threats Are Made

Taking Trump’s lead, Palin then tells People Magazine in an interview that she plans to take legal action against Banks “on behalf of all reasonable women of every age, race and political leaning” if Banks doesn’t issue a public apology.

Banks Responds on Twitter

LOL, if Sarah Palin actually decides to sue me i’ll only use the controversy to make myself an even larger American Cultural Figure.

— AZEALIABANKS (@AZEALIABANKS) April 5, 2016

The Sarah Palin page in history will be condensed to a footnote in the Azealia Banks chapter. Well behaved women seldom make history.

— AZEALIABANKS (@AZEALIABANKS) April 5, 2016

Everyone can tell you’re spreading them cheeks for Mr. Trump Sarah….. you ain’t got to lie.

— AZEALIABANKS (@AZEALIABANKS) April 5, 2016

Then She Kinda Apologizes

In a now-deleted letter posted to her Tumblr, Banks combines a mix of flattery and insults to pen what very well may be the strangest apology ever. At one point Banks attempts to explain to the 52-year-old politician the distinctions between “running a train” on someone and rape, as well as ends the letter by saying that “if Bristol Palin listened to my music she probably wouldn’t have all those cotdamn kids!!!! ;-P #sis #iud #stayinschool #causeitsthebest””

So…now you should be all caught up.

It’s extremely doubtful that Palin will actually accept Banks’ apology, especially since the rapper’s recent Twitter feed has become largely devoted to mocking Palin. That being said, a legitimate lawsuit doesn’t necessarily seem all that likely either. For now, all we can do is sit back and wait for Palin’s response.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Azealia Banks’ Feud With Sarah Palin is Bizarre and Definitely NSFW appeared first on Law Street.

There were several applause-worthy moments at last week’s Academy Awards, including, of course, Leonardo DiCaprio’s long overdue win for Best Actor and his subsequent speech about saving the environment.

I have immense respect for celebrities who use their public platforms to champion various causes, a phenomenon which has become significantly more common as things like feminism and race equality come to the forefront of political discussions in America.

One such celebrity is Lady Gaga, who has taken on the role of advocate for sexual assault victims, including fellow pop star Kesha, who is undergoing a legal battle with her alleged assailant and producer Dr. Luke.

Lady Gaga, along with Diane Warren, were nominated in the Best Original Song category for “Till It Happens To You,” a dramatic ballad about sexual assault for the documentary film “The Hunting Ground.”

“The Hunting Ground” focuses on sexual assault on college campuses. What the filmmakers found was horrifying, if not surprising: victims of sexual assault are hushed up and discouraged from reporting their assaults, especially when their abusers are high-profile. The documentary received backlash from schools and perpetrators who were featured,  including Jameis Winston, the quarterback of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, whose alleged assault of another Florida State student is covered in the film.

But the producers refused to back down. One of them, Amy Ziering, said in an interview with Salon that campus rape is:

A pernicious, pervasive problem that’s been misunderstood for decades, and we really need to step up our game, rethink it, and figure out how to do something better about it. And just help people. That’s where our interests should be: Let’s help all the victims of this. Let’s acknowledge they exist. Let’s do right by them. Right now, we’re just really damaging everybody.

Watch a trailer for the documentary below:

While the documentary itself may have its faults from a storytelling stand point, the message is clear: nothing is being done about the staggering number of sexual assaults that take place on college campuses.

Which brings us back to Lady Gaga and her Oscar-nominated song.

“Till It Happens To You” has a title that is pretty much self-explanatory. It speaks from the point of view of a rape victim, questioning “What the hell do you know?” to those who dismiss the issue of rape without fully understanding its magnitude.

At the Academy Awards, Lady Gaga accompanied herself on piano, and towards the end of the ballad, welcomed dozens of sexual assault survivors–male and female–onto the stage with her.

The song did not end up winning the Oscar, but the global stage it received last weekend is very important. We need to keep this song and “The Hunting Ground” in the spotlight, and we need to keep the conversation about sexual assault in the news. We need to stop the culture of victim-blaming, and we need to stop glorifying the perpetrators. Only then can a true solution be reached.

Watch the entire performance here:

Morgan McMurray

Morgan McMurray is an editor and gender equality blogger based in Seattle, Washington. A 2013 graduate of Iowa State University, she has a Bachelor of Arts in English, Journalism, and International Studies. She spends her free time writing, reading, teaching dance classes, and binge-watching Netflix. Contact Morgan at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post We Should All Be Talking About Lady Gaga’s “Till It Happens To You” appeared first on Law Street.

This weekend the New York Times published the article “Get Home Safe,” My Rapist Said, in its opinion pages. In it, Alisson Wood tells the story of her boss raping her one night after work. She sought justice and solace from her company and the law, but only received dismissals. It was her word against her boss’s, and he claimed the situation was consensual, slut-shaming her. This situation is not uncommon for many other survivors of rape in America, victimized by a culture that often finds more fault in its victims than its perpetrators. Rape culture undermines the power imbalances at the core of rape by diverting attention away from why and how a rapist takes advantage of a person, and instead focuses on the character of the rape victim. For example, a boss takes advantage of an employee, a man takes advantage of a woman, or a cop takes advantage of a citizen. But last week, justice beat the power of rape culture. The prosecutor in the Daniel Holtzclaw case convinced a jury of the power imbalances of a white police officer raping African American women, and for Holtzclaw’s 29th birthday he received a recommended 263-year prison sentence.

Holtzclaw has been standing trial since November 2 after sexually assaulting 13 women in Oklahoma City. Jannie Ligons, a 57-year-old grandmother, went to the police after Holtzclaw attacked her on June 2,2014. Holtzclaw’s record revealed more allegations of rape, catching national attention and leading to his arrest. He faced 36 charges ranging from multiple counts of first degree rape to stalking and sexual battery. Officer Holtzclaw clearly underestimated the courage Ligons possessed as a survivor of sexual assault, and as a woman who could put trust in a police department whose own officer violated Ligons’s most basic right to her body.

Holtzclaw targeted 12 other African American women in a low income neighborhood ostensibly because of their vulnerability and unlikelihood to press charges. A couple of the victims were guilty of criminal activity of their own. The defense tried to use to this to its advantage by discrediting the victims and questioning why they did not contact the police after their assaults. But, who could those victims trust? The fact that they would likely not be perceived as “innocent victims” halted many from contacting authorities. “What kind of police do you call on the police?“–that was a question of one of the victims, who was only 17-years-old.

Race has factored into this case from the onset. Holtzclaw intended to protect himself by preying on these women with full knowledge of the future juxtaposed images of an All American Football player-turned-cop against black women. While the verdict supplies some justice to these victims, the all-white jury hardly seemed fair with about a 15 percent African American population in Oklahoma City.

Some activists see Holtzclaw’s verdict as a good milestone in a long history of black women as victims of sexual assault and domestic abuse. I agree with and welcome the justice served to this rapist. However, the lack of mainstream media attention garnered by this case validates all the fear these women had in reporting their rapes. It’s an indication of the intersectional obstacles women of color face in our lives, our problems often invisible, and rape culture even more prominent. So, it is an insult to see Holtzclaw’s tear stained face. Are those tears because he did not beat the odds? Or because white privilege did not win out and he did not get away with his exploitative assaults? As for me, I’d rather read through the brave testimonies of these 13 women in their own words than see his tears.

Dorsey Hill

Dorsey is a member of Barnard College’s class of 2016 with a major in Urban Studies and concentration in Political Science. As a native of Chicago and resident of New York City, Dorsey loves to explore the multiple cultural facets of cities. She has a deep interest in social justice issue especially those relevant to urban environments. Contact Dorsey at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Power of Justice: A Guilty Verdict for Daniel Holtzclaw appeared first on Law Street.

The “Safe Campus” Act has been met with significant criticism since it was introduced into Congress this summer. There are a few troubling aspects to the proposed legislation, but one in particularly really stands out: unless rape victims report their assaults to the police, the school isn’t allowed to investigate them, or levy any sort of action against the accused. This bill was supported by much of national Greek Life–both the North-American Interfraternity Conference and the National Panhellenic Conference were on board. But one sorority–Alpha Phi–just broke from the NPC to say it doesn’t endorse the deeply problematic bill.

Alpha Phi released a statement obtained by the Huffington Post today that outlined the organization’s views on the bill. It explained:

We are writing at the request of many of our members and chapters to clarify Alpha Phi’s position on the 2015 Safe Campus and Fair Campus Acts which have been endorsed by the National Panhellenic Conference. Alpha Phi has not endorsed this legislation and has not committed to any financial support.

Additionally, Alpha Phi explained its position further, saying:

We believe our sisters who are survivors should have choices in how, when and to whom they go to for support or to report the crime. They should have their own voice and the support and encouragement they need to move forward including reporting as they choose to.

The issue critics have with the Safe Campus Act isn’t necessarily that police shouldn’t be the ones looking into a crime. Rather, the act would hamstring universities’ abilities to take any actions. Given that police investigations and convictions can take years, groups that oppose the act are arguing that a school should be able to work in the meantime to provide a safe environment for its students.

Additionally, requiring victims of rape to report their assaults to the police opens up a whole new set of issues–including the fact that rape victims often aren’t treated with respect or dignity. Dana Bolger, co-founder of Know Your IX, an advocacy group, explains:

Many survivors of color, who experience police surveillance and brutality every day, don’t want to go to the very people who have been agents of violence against them. And for male survivors and survivors assaulted by someone of the same sex, reporting to the police won’t do anything: Many states still don’t recognize rape against people of the same gender, or against men, as rape at all.

There are other arguments against the Safe Campus Act as well–for example, many other crimes (drug possession, alcohol violations, etc) are able to be handled with schools without involving the police.

It’s unclear exactly which reasons motivated Alpha Phi to clarify its position on the bill, but the organization’s executive director, Linda Kahangi explained:

Many of our members — both collegians and alumnae — had expressed concern that NPC’s endorsement of these two bills implied that Alpha Phi had endorsed them. We wanted to clarify to them that we had not.

It’s an important clarification, and will hopefully cause some of the other Greek Life fraternities and sororities under these umbrella organizations to question their involvement as well. While making campuses safe for all is a great goal, the Safe Campus Act falls too far short to fit the bill.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Alpha Phi Breaks From National Greek Life Organizations on “Safe Campus” Bill appeared first on Law Street.

In 2006, the criminal justice system helped Josh Duggar’s family expunge his record of abuse and protected him from being exposed in media reports as someone who had “forcibly fondled” younger girls (a.k.a. molested children).

Every day–then, now–the criminal justice system targets people of color–especially women and trans people of color–for abuse and shootings (a.k.a. public executions for walking while Black or Latina).

And yet.

And yet we continue to use pictures of him in suits instead of finding pictures that try to reflect him negatively (see featured photo), like the mainstream media insists on doing with young people of color slaughtered by cops.

When Black young men are murdered by cops, they are cast as “thugs.” When a young white man is accused of child abuse, he retains his status as ‘poor cult victim.’

This serves both racist and misogynist ends: white perpetrators remain victims, and his misogyny is cast as an exception (caused by his cultish family).

The mainstream media likes to speculate on the “scandalous” aspects of how the family helped cover up the abuse; how the family, in fact, abused him through their extremism and his isolation from “mainstream culture”; but we don’t like to speculate on how Josh Duggar is not, in fact, an exception. Josh Duggar is the rule.

Duggar is an embodiment of rich white cis male non-dis/abled privilege, and while the control his family exerts over him is indeed frightening, their misogyny is not an exception.

The Duggars may be particularly explicit in the ways they preach and practice misogyny, but what pieces focusing on the cultish aspects of the Duggars that facilitated the abuse miss is that every person in this country–every. single. person.–is raised to hate women. The Duggars may be more explicit than most, but they are not alone: Josh Duggar’s apparent belief that women and girls exist for male pleasure is the same belief that we are all raised with.

It’s called rape culture, and it’s everywhere.

The fact that the Duggars isolated their children so much that they didn’t have a TV misses the point: all of us with TV, too, receive the same message–in a heteropatriarchal society like this one, women are disposable.

Because rape culture is not isolated to “cults.” It is everywhere.

Because women–especially women of color–are disproportionately targeted by the same criminal justice system that protected Duggar when the first police report was issued against him.

Because living in a heteropatriarchal society makes us much more vulnerable to debilitating mental health issues.

Because “strong women” in the mainstream media is still the only trope we’re allowed to hope for.

Because the kind of misogyny that the media ascribes to the cult of the Duggars is the same kind of misogyny that we are exposed to every single time we turn on the television, interact with men in the street, or are educated in a public school system that still focuses on “great” [read: genocidal] white men and does not teach consent as the golden rule in health classes (a.k.a. teach rape culture to all students).

Because we can condemn–or pity–Josh Duggar as much as we’d like.

But ultimately, we must recognize that his privileged positions and entitled, abusive actions are the rule, not the exception.

Jennifer Polish

Jennifer Polish is an English PhD student at the CUNY Graduate Center in NYC, where she studies non/human animals and the racialization of dis/ability in young adult literature. When she’s not yelling at the computer because Netflix is loading too slowly, she is editing her novel, doing activist-y things, running, or giving the computer a break and yelling at books instead. Contact Jennifer at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Josh Duggar is Not an Exception: On Rape Culture in the U.S. appeared first on Law Street.

Bud Light, produced by beer giant Anheuser-Busch, is apologizing after controversy broke out over one of the beer’s labels. The brand has been using a number of slogans as part of its “Up for Anything” marketing campaign; however, one sparked a lot of controversy–the phrase that posited Bud Light as “the perfect beer for removing ‘no’ from your vocabulary for the night.”

Bud Light….the perfect beer for marketers about to lose their job. #NoMeansNopic.twitter.com/dLWtDSMhXQ

— Jeff Barrett (@BarrettAll) April 28, 2015

There was a lot of backlash in response to this slogan, as many who saw it thought that it was an inappropriate, if inadvertent, nod to rape culture. The phrase “no means no” has become a popular rallying cry for those combatting the incredibly prevalent problems of rape and sexual assault. So for Bud Light to hint that its product takes away, in any way, the ability to say “no,” struck plenty of negative chords.

Moreover, there are plenty of other things that people should say “no” to if they’ve been drinking–driving, to name just one. This slogan indicates that people drinking Bud Light would engage in activities they normally wouldn’t–and that doesn’t exactly scream responsible alcohol consumption. While Bud Light’s slogan was supposed to be light-hearted, and presumably indicate that its beer would lead to a fun night where its consumers were open to new experiences, this slogan completely missed that mark.

Twitter users took to the social media platform to express a wide variety of reactions, ranging from disgust to mocking.

Sorry AB. NO does mean NO. No matter how much beer. #SoWrong #BigFail http://t.co/OXBbwQd4uq

— Rep. Stacey Newman (@staceynewman) April 28, 2015

Stolen from reddit: “No” always means “No”…especially if the question is: “Do you want a Bud Light?” #terribletagline#UpForWhatever

— TheRealLouisWeiher (@LouisWeiher) April 28, 2015

Bud Light has stopped production of the bottles featuring the slogan in question, although it won’t be recalling the ones that are already on the shelves. The bottles are sold in packs with mixed labels, meaning a 12-pack may contain a few offensive labels, just one, or none at all. Logistically speaking, a recall would have been difficult, which is understandable. Also in response to the backlash, Alexander Lambrecht, Vice President for Bud Light, released a statement:

The Bud Light Up for Whatever campaign, now in its second year, has inspired millions of consumers to engage with our brand in a positive and light-hearted way. In this spirit, we created more than 140 different scroll messages intended to encourage brand engagement. It’s clear that this particular message missed the mark, and we regret it. We would never condone disrespectful or irresponsible behavior. As a result, we have immediately ceased production of this message on all bottles.

It’s good that Bud Light made the call to remove the slogan from its labels, but the fact that it took such a concerted backlash to do so is a bit concerning. While we shouldn’t expect everyone to have an encyclopedic knowledge of every current social movement, “no means no” has been a pretty visible one. The fact that a single Bud Light marketing executive didn’t think of the overall implications of their label is pretty surprising. Bud Light did the right thing by apologizing–hopefully in the future it gives a little more thought to what message it is sending to consumers.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Bud Light Removes “No From Your Vocabulary” in Misguided Campaign appeared first on Law Street.

It was clear when the Charlottesville police department announced that it had found “no substantive proof” to support the UVA gang rape detailed in Rolling Stone’s “A Rape on Campus: A Brutal Assault and Struggle for Justice at UVA,” that the magazine had made some serious mistakes in its reporting. As a result, the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism was tasked with investigating the magazine’s story in order to figure out just where Rolling Stone went wrong. The report, which is being called “a piece of journalism about a failure of journalism,” outlines a list of fundamental journalistic failures on individual, procedural, and institutional levels. The controversy has forced Rolling Stone to issue a formal retraction.

Rolling Stone writer Sabrina Rubin Erdely began her article intending to showcase the pervasiveness of rape culture on college campuses using the story of an alleged gang rape survivor known as Jackie. Jackie’s horrific story of sexual assault and her campus administration’s lack of action resonated with readers and launched a national dialogue about rape. But just a few weeks after the story was published, details from Jackie’s story were called into question, leading to a formal police investigation into the alleged rape. While police found that they could not authenticate Jackie’s claims detailed in the article, they did not refute that something had potentially happened to her.

Columbia University followed suit with its own investigation in order to uncover what faulty journalistic practices led to such a scandal. The group summarized their findings writing:

Rolling Stone‘s repudiation of the main narrative in ‘A Rape on Campus’ is a story of journalistic failure that was avoidable. The failure encompassed reporting, editing, editorial supervision and fact-checking. The magazine set aside or rationalized as unnecessary essential practices of reporting that, if pursued, would likely have led the magazine’s editors to reconsider publishing Jackie’s narrative so prominently, if at all. The published story glossed over the gaps in the magazine’s reporting by using pseudonyms and by failing to state where important information had come from.

While a combination of failures including fact checking and corroboration attributed to the article’s inauthenticity, the takeaway is that Rolling Stone’s fundamental mistake was that they trusted Jackie way too much. The article’s editor Sean Woods claimed they were “too deferential” to their rape victim stating:

We honored too many of her requests in our reporting. We should have been much tougher, and in not doing that, we maybe did her a disservice.

Working with rape victims can be understandably challenging, especially when there’s the potential to re-traumatize them by having them retell specific events. Despite this, there still needs to be a way to hold sources accountable while preserving journalistic integrity. Rolling Stone failed to provide a balanced account of the events by only featuring the victim’s side of the story. This misstep now opens the door for other articles’ authenticities to be questioned, especially those written by Erdely, or others involving anecdotal evidence.

Surprisingly Erdely and her editors will not lose their jobs even in light of the report’s findings–apparently Rolling Stone views the report’s public embarrassment as punishment enough. However, that decision may not stand with an impending lawsuit against the publication on behalf of the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity in the works. Publicly Rolling Stone needs to prove that its credibility remains after this massive disservice to journalistic integrity.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Rolling Stone Retracts Story About Alleged UVA Rape appeared first on Law Street.

Last November, Rolling Stone shocked the nation with its 9,000-word article entitled “A Rape on Campus.” The piece told the horrific story of a University of Virginia freshman known only as “Jackie.” She claimed to have been gang raped by seven Phi Kappa Psi frat members during a frat date party. The article accused UVA of a “cycle of sexual violence” and “institutional indifference” that preferred to silence girls like Jackie who reported rape instead of helping them. The piece started an impressive national dialogue about rape culture, particularly rape culture on college campuses. Now after four months of investigating and roughly 70 interviews, police have concluded that the gang rape that reignited a movement most likely never even happened.

Charlottesville police announced Monday that they have found “no substantive basis” to support the gang rape detailed in Rolling Stone’s article. Investigators also found “no evidence” that a Phi Kappa Psi frat party even took place on the night of Sept. 28, 2012, which was when the rape was reported to have occurred.

In the above video Chief Longo says,

We’re not able to conclude to any substantive degree that an incident occurred at the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity house, or any other fraternity house, for that matter. That doesn’t mean something terrible didn’t happen to Jackie on the evening of Sept. 28, 2012. We’re just not able to gather sufficient facts to determine what that is.

There were a number of unsubstantiated claims made by Jackie in the Rolling Stone article that investigators detailed debunking. For starters, police found no proof that a party even occurred at the frat house the night of the alleged rape, but instead proved the Phi Kappa Psi brothers were attending a formal at their sister sorority, Delta Gamma, that evening. Jackie also claimed to have been hit over the head with a glass bottle during the rape, and that her roommate at the time, a nursing student, later removed glass shards from her face. But when police interviewed the roommate, she denied removing any such glass and claimed the wound was more consistent with an abrasion from having fallen. The list of inconsistencies didn’t stop there. For the full text from the Charlottesville police statement detailing their findings in the UVA rape case click here.

According to Chief Longo, the case is not closed but rather suspended until police are able to gather more information or someone comes forward providing more information.

So, what does this mean for Rolling Stone and its journalistic integrity? The magazine, which operated under the assumption that everything Jackie told it was true, already released a statement taking responsibility for its mistakes in handling the article. It admitted to its failure to contact the accused in the story, known as “Drew,” and get his side of the story. Now it’s opening itself up for further review by allowing the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism to complete its own investigation into the magazine’s reporting, which will later be published in Rolling Stone in early April.

As for Phi Kappa Psi, the accused fraternity might be seeking legal action against Rolling Stone for “defamation”. UVA’s Phi Psi chapter said in a statement provided to Business Insider:

Phi Kappa Psi is now exploring its legal options to address the extensive damage caused by Rolling Stone — damage both to the chapter and its members and to the very cause upon which the magazine was focused.

From a legal perspective the frat has a pretty good case, due to the magazine’s gross lack of fact checking and failure to even contact the frat for its side of the story. However if the fraternity members plan to follow through with a suit, they must be willing to expose themselves yet again to scrutiny that could result in even more unwanted publicity.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Police Find No Evidence to Support UVA Gang Rape Story appeared first on Law Street.

Sexual assault on college campuses has been one of the hottest topics for a couple years now. Many universities are being investigated by the Department of Education for Title IX violations. The recent Rolling Stone article about rape on the campus of the University of Virginia that was partially retracted and has landed the publication in hot water over concerns about its journalistic ethics has seriously reignited the discussion. There are a lot of moving parts to the debate about sexual assault on college campuses, and I think that one of the many, many reasons that the conversation gets so easily muddied is that we don’t all agree on definitions, or statistics.

While this is obviously an extreme example, watch this video of “Princeton Mom” Susan Patton who I’m still a little bit sure must be running the world’s longest satirical performance. She begins the video by talking about how rape is no longer just defined as a woman being held at gunpoint and assaulted, and then spends the next ten minutes pretty much going on about what a shame that is. She also thinks that rape is often women falsely accusing men after “regrettable sex.” Then she talks about how it’s women’s responsibility to protect themselves from rape by not drinking, making good decisions, and choosing better friends. It’s a charming exercise in a game I like to subject myself to called “Holy Shit, People Actually Think This Way.”

Now the Department of Justice (DOJ) has weighed in with statistics from a study it conducted, and it’s probably going to all get even more confusing.

The new DOJ report dealt with not just college students, but college-aged females more generally. The DOJ report included the statistic that six of every 1,000 college females are sexually assaulted, and now everyone who thinks like Patton is using it to prove that sexual assault on college campuses isn’t a thing we should be worried about, and that this talk of “rape-culture” is overblown.

First, what we need to do is remember that anytime this sort of study is undertaken–one that relies on people’s word, memories, and stories, rather than say, hard facts in a laboratory–is that it needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

There have been other studies that indicate that the rate of college sexual assault is much higher than what the DOJ reports. A survey at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) concluded that 17 percent of female students and 5 percent of young men were sexually assaulted as students. Then there’s the Campus Sexual Assault Study from 2007 that gave us the now-infamous and oft-cited “one in five” statistic.

There are a few reasons why two studies can have such radically different numbers, and they’re excellently detailed here, by the Marshall Project. The main takeaway is this though: neither is necessarily right and neither is necessarily wrong. They asked different questions, they talked to different people, and at the end of the day, it’s really very much an inexact science. We’re not sure how many students are sexually assaulted; more studies to come might help us pinpoint that number, but probably not.

But we do know that at least some are. Furthermore, the same DOJ report stated that eighty percent of students sexually assaulted don’t report it. And 80 percent were assaulted by someone they know. Both of those statistics are deeply troubling.

No matter how many people are being assaulted on our college campuses–whether it’s one percent, twenty percent, or somewhere in between–it’s too many.

But that “less than one” percent is probably going to get thrown around for a while. Because, unfortunately, there are a lot of people out there who, for whatever reason, don’t want to see change. They just got some ammunition, for now.

That’s why we need to keep having conversations about rape culture. Why we need to keep educating our young people, and for that matter, all our people, on consent. Why we need to stand up for rape victims when they’re accused of making up their stories. It doesn’t matter how many–any at all are too damn many.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post DOJ Stats Show College Sexual Assault Remains Too Prevalent appeared first on Law Street.

Hey y’all!

A couple of weeks I wrote about Rolling Stone’s report of a young woman being brutally raped on the University of Virginia campus. Last week Rolling Stone retracted the story, even apologizing to its readers. After the original report hit the news cycle people hung on to every word–even the administrators at UVA took action by banning all fraternities–but now it seems that the story may not have been true.

In my first article I was conflicted about the story of Jackie–the victim–and wondered why she would value her reputation at the school by keeping quiet for so long over her own well-being and justice. I get that being raped by five to seven guys is a traumatic event, one that no one would ever want to relive, but why would you allow your “friends” to talk you into keeping something like that quiet, as the report indicated? Why allow seven rapists to troll the campus for another possible victim?

I believe in the theory that there are three sides to every story, and in this case those sides belong to the victim, the unnamed rapists, and the truth somewhere between the two. One person’s perspective on an event can be totally different from someone else’s, so combining both stories usually brings out a more accurate truth, in my opinion. What Rolling Stone  did was allow Jackie to tell her side of a story without sufficient due diligence on the part of the publication by contacting the men she accused and fact checking the story. Granted, I don’t know how much fact checking you can do when a young woman states she was raped two years ago. Yes, you can check to see if such a party took place at the frat house, but there isn’t much more access someone can get without starting to raise flags. Rolling Stone‘s journalism in this case was abysmal.

My biggest question is would UVA administrators have taken the time to do a thorough investigation if this were privately handled? I would like to think so, but the cynic in me knows that sometimes administrators put the reputation of a school above the well-being of its students.

I’m ashamed of Rolling Stone, not just because of this article but because of several missteps over the last couple of years. The cover where it got the facts wrong on who signed the Constitution–a staple of being an American. The RIDICULOUS decision to put a terrorist on the cover of its magazine where he looked more like a rockstar than an enemy of the state! Fact checking and respecting Americans is clearly not on the agenda over at Rolling Stone. Maybe you guys should stick with what you know–entertainment. But really, you shouldn’t even do that because those reviews are usually wrong, too.

Fellow Law Streeter Anneliese Mahoney wrote about how Rolling Stone’s retraction affects rape victims in America. I agree with her, the original Rolling Stone article and later retraction are going to make real victims of rape shy away even more from reporting their experiences. UVA administrators and investigators disproved certain facts that Jackie reported to Rolling Stone. Why couldn’t this publication have taken a little more time and done the right thing? Why did it not take a step back and try to get a full story? Look at the big picture? Yes, it was probably trying to do a good thing in telling this story. So many women feel like they were not alone and were encouraged to tell their story because somehow Jackie found the strength to do it. But now that “strength and courage” have been squashed by reality.

It’s Go Ask Alice all over again. The diary of a young girl that was in fact fictional but presented as truth. There is a certain level of betrayal from the publishers of Go Ask Alice and the people over at Rolling Stone. You want to help rape victims? Try doing your job and not ruining what victims have worked so hard for. That 5.9 percent of false accusations that Anneliese mentions are the ones that are heard the loudest and hung on to the longest. Those who cry wolf are the ones doing the most damage to real victims and Rolling Stone may have just let someone cry wolf on the main stage with a loud speaker.

I’ve shamed Rolling Stone. I’ve shamed UVA. I’ve even shamed Jackie. But now it’s time to reiterate that even though her story as published in Rolling Stone may not be true, anyone who is a victim of rape–or any crime–should find the strength in themselves to speak up. Be what Jackie was supposed to be–a role model who is taking charge of what happened to her and standing up for herself and victims alike.

Don’t let Rolling Stone take away your power.

Allison Dawson

Allison Dawson was born in Germany and raised in Mississippi and Texas. A graduate of Texas Tech University and Arizona State University, she’s currently dedicating her life to studying for the LSAT. Twitter junkie. Conservative. Get in touch with Allison at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Rolling Stone, Bad Journalism, and the Future of Rape Victims appeared first on Law Street.

Early this afternoon, Rolling Stone released a post entitled “A Note to Our Readers.” It was a follow-up to a story published last month that took an extensive look at rape culture on the campus of the University of Virginia. Although the story was far-reaching, it focused particularly on a young woman named Jackie who allegedly was gang-raped at a fraternity party. I use the word allegedly because even though I believed Jackie’s story wholeheartedly, Rolling Stone has now retracted the article.

“A Note to Our Readers” was spectacularly vague, and in my opinion, put more blame on Jackie than a nationally known and respected news publication, but that’s almost beside the point. You can read the full retraction here, but here’s the part that stuck out to me. For context, it’s important to understand that Rolling Stone never interviewed or spoke with the men Jackie accused, out of an attempt to respect the fact that she was fearful of them. This is the what Rolling Stone included in its note today:

In the face of new information, there now appear to be discrepancies in Jackie’s account, and we have come to the conclusion that our trust in her was misplaced. We were trying to be sensitive to the unfair shame and humiliation many women feel after a sexual assault and now regret the decision to not contact the alleged assaulters to get their account. We are taking this seriously and apologize to anyone who was affected by the story.

There were discrepancies to Jackie’s account–for example, the fact that she may have gotten the date of the party wrong, and so on. I don’t have the information that Rolling Stone does, and they were clearly being purposefully vague–but “discrepancies” does not render the entire story null and void.

Discrepancies are part of reporting, part of crime, and part of life. Jackie was telling this story after the fact and was relaying a traumatized experience. If she didn’t have discrepancies, I’d be more surprised.

And what people want is tidy little narratives from victims. They want perfect and total recall from shocking situations.

— roxane gay (@rgay) December 5, 2014

Our legal system doesn’t demand that every little question be answered and correct–I’m going to make an entirely unfair comparison here, but a grand jury in Ferguson, Missouri proved just a few weeks ago that discrepancies in stories apparently mean jack squat. So why would the existence of discrepancies make Rolling Stone pull their story?

There are a couple of explanations. One is that they’re protecting their asses. They don’t want to get sued. They are businesspeople and they are choosing to protect their business, regardless if it means invalidating a quite possibly real and shocking story.

Another explanation is that Jackie lied, and Rolling Stone didn’t catch it. I don’t want to believe this is true. False accusations are rare–exceedingly rare–but they do exist. A study out of Northeastern University estimates them at about 5.9 percent. That’s of course only out of rapes that are reported–there are far more that aren’t, which means that the people who report false rape vs. people who are actually sexually assaulted are really rare. I highly doubt that this was fabricated, but it’s not impossible. There could be half truths too–Jackie could be telling someone else’s story who was too afraid to come out with it. Either way, I can’t say with certainty but I don’t think this was a lie. And honestly if it was, that’s on Rolling Stone too for screwing up their fact checking.

Because at the end of the day, it should be Rolling Stone we’re mad at. This whole thing is going to encourage rape victims to hide, not come forward and tell their story, unless they can remember every damn detail and prove it. It’s going to shift the conversation from the legitimate problem we have with sexual assault in this country to conversations about journalism. This incident is going to be cited by rape apologists and those who claim false rape accusations until those idiots are blue in the face. It’s going to set us back, there’s no way it’s not going to.

Rolling Stone: you didn’t do your job, and now rape victims are going to pay the price.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Rolling Stone Just Set Back Rape Victims’ Progress in America appeared first on Law Street.

Law Street’s top three stories of the week ranged from the truly outrageous, to the infuriating, to the utterly baffling. Anneliese Mahoney  brought us the number one most read article of the week about a Canadian couple who dotted all their insurance i’s and crossed all their doctor’s permission t’s and still were hit with a million-dollar hospital bill when they unexpectedly had their baby while on vacation in the U.S.; Mahoney also wrote about the startling  sexual assault allegations surrounding Bill Cosby and the rape culture in which we’re immersed; and writer Ashley Shaw told the tale of the very worst neighbor you can imagine–one whose dogs dogs killed the neighbor’s beagle so she decided to sue them. I told you it was utterly baffling. ICYMI, here is the best of the week from Law Street.

#1 Meet the World’s Most Expensive Baby

A Canadian couple decided to go on a nice, warm visit to Hawaii. Jennifer Huculak and her husband Darren Kimmel were three months away from the birth of their daughter when they came to the U.S. on vacation. Unfortunately, a few days after their arrival, Huculak went into labor and gave birth to a baby girl. Because their daughter was born premature, they racked up some expensive hospital bills. Well, actually, expensive is kind of an understatement. To be more precise, they are being charged $950,000 for the medical care they received. Read full article here.

#2 Bill Cosby Allegations: A Striking Example of Rape Culture

Bill Cosby has, to many, gained the sort of “elder statesman” distinction in the acting world. For all intents and purposes, things were going well for him this year. He signed up to do a new show on NBC and announced a Netflix standup special. Then a comedian named Hannibal Buress did a bit in which he accused Cosby of being a rapist. Read full article here.

#3 Woman Sues Neighbors After Her Own Pit Bulls Kill Their Beagle

I have a quiz for you (don’t worry, it’s only one question, it isn’t math, and it’s multiple choice): If your four pit bulls break through a fence and enter the neighbor’s yard, then kill Bailey the ten-year-old beagle that resides there, what do you do? a. Apologize. b. Offer to buy the neighbors a new dog. c. Both a and b. d. Sue the neighbors for $1 million. Read full article here.

Chelsey D. Goff

Chelsey D. Goff was formerly Chief People Officer at Law Street. She is a Granite State Native who holds a Master of Public Policy in Urban Policy from the George Washington University. She’s passionate about social justice issues, politics — especially those in First in the Nation New Hampshire — and all things Bravo. Contact Chelsey at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post ICYMI: Best of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

Anyone who has been inside of a high school in the last five years has seen some interesting fashion choices by today’s teenagers. Teachers are expected to teach to the tests, teach students how to survive in the real world, personalize the curriculum for IEP students of all levels, and still have their work graded within twenty-four hours. And now? Some districts are adding another dimension: dress code enforcement. Dress codes are an important part of school culture, as they sometimes dictate whether or not a student can even attend class. Some things make more sense when it comes to the dress code: no short-shorts, no shirts with offensive sayings, and no pants that sag too low. There are also some questionable additions to the dress code, namely yoga pants, leggings, spandex running pants and other clothing that fights tightly to the body. With the seemingly endless stream of issues that American school teachers are responsible for this begs the question, are yoga pants really the problem?

What’s the fuss about yoga pants?

Yoga pants have really become a hot button topic among everyone from teenagers to fashion’s biggest designers. The pants are made out of a thin material that stretches and gives, which is why they’re comfortable for people to wear. The pants are usually credited as flattering on most body types because they cling to the legs and give definition where there may not be any. The pants also can become sheer when someone bends over, which is a chief complaint among the trend’s naysayers; however, if they are the proper size, that may not be an issue–especially with yoga pants, which tend to be thick. Many schools are dealing with the dilemma of whether or not they are proper attire for the classroom, and emotions run deep on both sides.

What sort of punishments can yoga pants get you in school?

Regulations vary from school district to school district, but an increasing number of them are outlawing yoga pants, leggings, and similar wear. The punishments and ramifications also vary, but they usually involve a request to change into either clothes brought by parents, or provided by the school.

Ashley Crtalic published a well written letter in the Billings Gazette a few weeks ago that raised some interesting points about her local high school dress code, including a punishment that is increasingly popular in public schools: public shaming and humiliation for not following the dress code. Some schools have extra, extra large shirts that say “I disobeyed the Dress Code,” or “Dress Code Reinforcement” on them, showing everyone in the school that that person broke the rules. Students have to either wear the shirt or have a parent bring in a spare pair of clothes.

Alternatively, some schools will have their students sit in the office until parents come in with a change of clothes. The concern with this is that today in America, if a home does have two parents, they usually both work, so requiring a parent to leave work in order to bring alternative clothing to school can be a burden. These students are missing out on important class time that they need, especially if they want to go onto college–all because they wore yoga pants to school. Other punishments range from detention, demerits, loss of privileges, and loss of activities.

How are students fighting back?

Feminism is reaching a whole new, younger audience thanks to social media websites like Tumblr. It is through those platforms that people are hearing more and more about these argued injustices. A 14-year-old student recently put up these posters over signs announcing her school’s dress code, protesting against them publicly and hoping to gain support.

Many school officials claim “distraction” is why these types of pants are banned. Students have responded to that criticism with concerns of their own, however, that such strict dress codes and punishments unduly distract female students. If a female student has to sit in the classroom with an embarrassing shirt on, or sit in the office waiting for a new outfit, she is probably not able to pay full attention to her studies.

Students who disagree with these dress codes argue that the distraction comes in many forms–gossip, catcalling, attention, unwanted touching, or even unwanted pictures. If it is as bad as has been reported at some schools, it would be bordering on sexual harassment, which shouldn’t be tolerated by any school. Those who stand against such dress restrictions argue that part of the purpose of school is to prepare young people to be functioning members of society, one of those things should be how to properly function in public.

So, is banning yoga pants a good idea?

Some argue that not allowing girls to wear yoga pants or leggings to school is a way to keep them responsible for their own appearances, and provide training for when they go into the real world. Girls won’t be allowed to wear leggings or yoga pants to the office, and school is preparing young adults to go out into the work force. Schools have banned pajamas, basketball shorts, and sweatpants for students for similar reasons–they aren’t the correct attire to wear in a professional environment. Supporters argue that it’s not an attack on young women, but rather a valuable teaching moment for students.

Other parents say that not allowing yoga pants or leggings in schools will cut down on the bullying and taunting of other students, namely females. Many girls who are bigger get made fun of for wearing leggings, especially if they cannot find them in the correct size. There is also a question of classism within leggings. Those who can afford the more expensive leggings are more likely to not have a problem with the sheerer, cheaper variety.

Some of the parents who are for banning yoga pants are in favor of instituting a much stricter dress code overall for all students, limiting them to shirts with collars and khaki pants. This works to eliminate some of the label mongering that many schools face, as the outfits will all be similar. It also prepares students for being comfortable in what would be a business casual outfit in college or a work place.

Case Study: Haven Middle School

The administrators of Haven Middle School in Illinois told parents in September that their daughters were no longer allowed to wear shorts, leggings, or yoga pants to school because they were “too distracting.” Parents fought against the rule because they didn’t think it was the girls’ responsibility to stop boys from becoming distracted.

They wrote a petition that 500 students went on to sign, claiming that the rule was sexist. Some students wore yoga pants anyway, in protest. One girl told the Evanston Review that, “Not being able to wear leggings because it’s ‘too distracting for boys’ is giving us the impression we should be guilty for what guys do.”

The parents are fighting back as well, say that, “This kind of message lands itself squarely on a continuum that blames girls and women for assault by men. It also sends the message to boys that their behaviors are excusable, or understandable given what the girls are wearing. We really hope that you will consider the impact of these policies and how they contribute to rape culture.”

As of publication time the dress code at Haven Middle School is still up for review.

Case Study: Skyview High School

When the administrators of the small Billings, Montana high school decided to add the following provision to the handbook over the summer, they didn’t think it would cause a big problem: “Leggings, jeggings, and tights ARE NOT pants and must be worn with dress code appropriate shorts, skirts, dresses, or pants.”

But it was a problem for many students, including one who went to the school board and declared that they were shaming the women in the school. “It’s completely sexist and misogynistic,” she said. “This tells women that our bodies are something that need to be hidden.” It is important to note that boys in the school were allowed to wear sleeveless t-shirts as they are a part of their uniforms.

No one has been sent home for violating the new code, but the principal has said that she has asked students to put on a longer top or sweatshirt. If they don’t have one, they can borrow one from the office. By a week after the ban, 200 students wore yoga pants on the same day.

Conclusion

Dress codes do have a place in our public schools. It is the job of the school district to prepare students for their best possible futures–futures that probably don’t include wearing leggings or yoga pants to the office. They are fine for gym class, for lounging around on the weekends, but in school, the goal should be to learn, not be comfortable. In fact, not allowing any sort of loungewear on the school grounds is a great way to improve the wardrobe of students before they go into college or the workforce. Let’s teach our kids how to dress for success.  As is currently the case of some dress codes or dressing standards, schools are typically assuming that boys can’t pay attention because of the way girls dress; however, we might not be giving either party the benefit of the doubt. By high school, if schools have done their jobs, our students should know how to act. If they don’t, then it is up to principals, guidance counselors, teachers, or other male students to have a meeting of the minds with these young men. This is a topic that will continue to cause contention in our public schools as districts deal with new trends and fads.

Resources

NY Daily News: ‘Distracting’ Yoga Pants Banned By Officials at North Dakota High School

Billings Gazette: Why Yoga Pants Are Incredibly Dangerous to Today’s Youth

My Fox Philly: High School Bans Yoga Pants

Alternet: High School Bans Dangerous Threat to Male Students: Yoga Pants

Fox 17: Leggings and Yoga Pants Are Banned at Niles High School

Boston.com: Your Guide to America’s War on Yoga Pants

Noel Diem

Law Street contributor Noel Diem is an editor and aspiring author based in Reading, Pennsylvania. She is an alum of Albright College where she studied English and Secondary Education. In her spare time she enjoys traveling, theater, fashion, and literature. Contact Noel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post School Dress Codes: Are Yoga Pants Really the Problem? appeared first on Law Street.

Bill Cosby has, to many, gained the sort of “elder statesman” distinction in the acting world. For all intents and purposes, things were going well for him this year. He signed up to do a new show on NBC and announced a Netflix standup special. Then a comedian named Hannibal Buress did a bit in which he accused Cosby of being a rapist.

Buress was of course not the first person to accuse Cosby of rape. In fact, many of his alleged victims had come forward over the years, starting roughly a decade ago. But because of Cosby’s celebrity status, the allegations had never really stuck. Buress’ point in the video is dead right–many people continue to defend Cosby because of his role in American consciousness as “America’s dad,” or just think that the many, many young women who have come forward with rape allegations are looking for their 15 minutes of fame. In fact, it took another man–Buress–repeating those allegations to even make it into national news.

That’s really just the tip of the iceberg. More and more women are coming forward with their stories–and they all sound pretty similar. Similar enough to make it clear that Cosby used the same M.O. with these women.

These women are finally widely getting support…mostly. Of course, this is America, so we still have a nicely cultivated culture of treating rape victims like shit. I found all of the tweets below by searching “Cosby” on Twitter. It only took me about five minutes. This is why women don’t go forward, and why it’s so essential to stand by the women who have. Because when you come forward you become a walking target for all of this.

Victim Blaming

Maybe women who don't want Bill Cosby's pudding pop in their vajayjays shouldn't be doing drugs naked in his hotel room. Just a thought.

— Todd Kincannon (@Todd__Kincannon) November 20, 2014

Mr. Kincannon, doing drugs does not mean you consent to sexual activity. Furthermore, there is significant evidence that Cosby roofied or drugged at least some of these women. A man who doesn’t want to type out the word “vagina” shouldn’t be commenting on matters that require maturity and thoughtfulness, anyway.

Accusations of fame-seeking

I don't believe Bill Cosby'd rape anyone. My hunch is these women are trying to link their names w/ a consistently successful entertainer.

— R. Deniston (@Obolerfan) November 20, 2014

Most of Bill Cosby's victims refuse to even go to the press, please tell me how all these women are just lying for fame?

— Kill Darren Wilson (@kim_tastiic) November 19, 2014

That’s why so many people have gotten famous through rape allegations. Really, it’s pretty much the way to get discovered now, along with America’s Got Talent and posting videos on YouTube. Never mind that some of these women–such as Janice Dickinson–are pretty well-known and wealthy in their own rights.

There have been a whole bunch of speculative pieces written about how we’ve all been able to ignore these rape allegations for so long. The most convincing argument I’ve heard is that Cosby isn’t the first powerful man, the first powerful cultural figure to face a case like this. Woody Allen and Jerry Sandusky are both good examples. People ignore the allegations out of a mixture of distrust of the victims and respect for the accused.

For those of you who still don’t believe that rape culture exists, well that’s it right there. Rape culture is a well-respected man being given a pass because it’s inconvenient and upsetting to take his 15-plus victims seriously.

Now, Netflix has postponed the standup special, NBC has cancelled the possible sitcom project, and TV Land has stopped showing reruns of the Cosby show. They probably shouldn’t be applauded too much–I highly doubt that any of the networks are doing this because they are convinced that Cosby is a rapist, but rather because they don’t want the bad publicity. And that’s one more good example of rape culture right there–when a woman comes forward with her story of being sexually assaulted, she’s accused of doing it for publicity’s sake; when networks pull the projects of rapists, they get applause.

Things are getting better in the United States. Our attitudes toward rape and sexual assault are changing, bit by incremental bit. But rape culture is still alive and well–just ask Bill Cosby.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Bill Cosby Allegations: A Striking Example of Rape Culture appeared first on Law Street.

There are few topics as loaded in the American consciousness right now as the crime of rape. The Department of Education launched a massive investigation into the way that universities and colleges handle rape allegations, and hashtags like #YesAllWomen and #BeenRapedNeverReported have led to raw, powerful discussions on social media. However, one of the most immediate issues when it comes to dealing with rape in this nation is the complicated way in which we prosecute it. The Washington State Supreme Court just made a ruling that sheds light into the difficulty that comes with trying a rape case.

There are obviously a lot of moving parts when it comes to rape prosecution — social pressures, lack of reporting, and institutionalized victim-blaming to name just a few. All of these are essential factors that affect every step of a rape prosecution, and that needs to be kept in mind. But on the most basic level, prosecuting rape is complicated because of one simple question that we still haven’t figured out: who needs to prove what?

Think of a murder case. The prosecution has to prove that the defendant murdered the victim. Because of the nature of that crime, there’s no paranoia about false accusations the way there is with a rape case. Very few people argue about what the victim was wearing, or whether they invited someone over, or whether they were drinking matter at all. There’s no claim that the victim didn’t make it clear enough that they didn’t want to be murdered. There’s no real consent argument to make, except for possibly in a doctor-assisted suicide case, but those are rare outliers, not a normal consideration. We as a people know that being murdered is horrible, and the person who commits the murder is in the wrong. In order to make sure that the right person receives justice,however, affirmative defenses do exist — the most well-known probably being self-defense or insanity. This is not to say that murder cases are straightforward, but rather that the idea of “murder” and how to deal with it in a court is significantly more understood and accepted.

Compare that to a rape case. Like I said, there are all the other issues to contend with first — lack of investigation, lack of reporting, intense cultural shame. For all of those reasons, and many others, the Rape Abuse and Incest National Network (RAINN) estimates that for every 100 rapes, only 46 are reported to the police, and only nine of those even get a day in court. Those abysmal statistics aside, when the case makes it to court there are even more compounded issues.

One of the big problems that we can’t seem to move past is the mere concept that rape can involve an act that in another context is not a crime. It’s different than other violent crimes in that way; no one can make that argument about murder or robbery. The inability to grasp that concept is what has led to national paranoia over false accusations and a perverted fascination about the actions of the victim.

And that brings us to the prosecution of rape — consent is so hard to define and prove that it makes even the ability to prosecute rape messy. A recent case in Washington highlights the issue. The State Supreme Court overturned a ruling that placed the burden on the defendant to prove consent in a rape case. This was a 1975 decision that made it so that the prosecution didn’t have to focus so much on proving there was a lack of consent, but rather the defendant had to show that there was consent. This protected the victim from unfair and inappropriate scrutiny. As Justice Susan Owens put it in her dissent:

In 1975, the legislature took an important step toward justice for rape victims when it modified the laws to focus on the conduct of the perpetrator and not the victim…. Not only does the majority’s decision invalidate years of work undertaken to properly refocus our rape law, but it also has serious implications for victims of an already underreported type of crime.

A move toward providing the most just outcomes whenever possible should be applauded. But within the context of how difficult it already is to prove a rape case and the horrible way our society usually deals with rape, it’s tough to imagine that this decision truly did that. There’s a lot that needs to happen to ensure that our justice system fairly deals with rape and sexual assault, and to be fair a lot of it, such as working to remove the stigma and societal judgment about rape, isn’t even really possible for the judiciary to do. That being said, this step backward in Washington has a lot of potential to be dangerous. There’s no perfect answer yet for how to best prosecute rape, but Washington’s step backward can’t be it.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Washington Courts Turn Back the Clock on Rape Prosecution appeared first on Law Street.

The grunge-pop diva we all know and love (or love to hate), Kesha, filed a lawsuit this week against her long-time producer claiming that he sexually and emotionally abused her for years. The producer, Lukasz Gottwald — “Dr. Luke” — was the one who discovered her at age 17 and convinced her to drop out of high school to pursue a career in music.

According to Kesha, the abuse started early and for the last ten years has kept her from moving to a different label, having control over her own music, and caused her to develop an eating disorder and subsequently enter rehab. She cites at least one count of rape following the consumption of a date rape drug, and alleges that Gottwald sexually assaulted her multiple times while forcing her to drink alcohol and take drugs. Gottwald has since filed an opposing suit, claiming defamation and breach of contract.

This is not the first time Kesha and Gottwald have been the subject of controversy. In 2013, around the time Kesha’s documentary “My Crazy Beautiful Life”  came out, fans started a petition to release Kesha from Gottwald’s control. The petition claims that  “Dr. Luke is controlling Ke$ha like a puppet, feeding her what she doesn’t want, and her creativity is dwindling and affected negativity (sic)” and that Kesha had little to no creative control over her most recent album.

In the short time since the lawsuits became public, skeptics have asked why Kesha waited so long to complain, or if she is just doing this to get out of her contract, and even saying she is lying because how can a sex symbol accuse someone of sexual assault?

These negative allegations aside, the majority of Kesha fans have shouted their support for the singer’s case, using the Twitter hashtag #StayStrongKesha.

An argument could be made for the idea that Kesha is making it all up to get out of her contract, but I just don’t think this is the case here. Her complaint has pages and pages filled with detailed and disturbing accounts of assault that span years. Accusing someone of sexual assault and rape are serious allegations that are not taken lightly, and if the victim is found to be lying the consequences are severe. Kesha is a smart woman, and by many accounts a near genius who was bound for lofty academic achievement before joining the music industry. Her intelligence does not protect her from being taken advantage of, since even the smartest men and women can be overwhelmed when in unfamiliar territory. It seems Kesha’s “mentor” knew this.

Saying that Kesha is lying because of her style, her sex symbol status, or her music is an argument that has no basis in logic. It stems from the idea that because someone dresses a certain way, or shares their sexuality more than others, they can’t cry “rape” when sexual predators target them.

It will be interesting to see how this case plays out, but Kesha and Gottwald obviously have some sort of toxic relationship that needs to end. Regardless of whether her claims are true or not, they need to be taken seriously. It doesn’t matter how famous a person is, or how long they waited to speak up; sexual assault is never okay and victims of it should be supported. Reacting negatively to cases like this discourages people in similar situations from coming forward, and encourages a society in which rape is covered up. Unfortunately, due to her fame and Gottwald’s counter case, Kesha’s fight has just begun.

Both Kesha’s lawsuit and Gottwald’s counter suit can be found here.

—

Morgan McMurray (@mcflurrybatman) is a freelance copywriter and blogger based in Savannah, Georgia. She spends her time writing, reading, and attempting to dance gracefully. She has also been known to binge-watch Netflix while knitting scarves.

Featured image courtesy of [rocor via Flickr]

Morgan McMurray

Morgan McMurray is an editor and gender equality blogger based in Seattle, Washington. A 2013 graduate of Iowa State University, she has a Bachelor of Arts in English, Journalism, and International Studies. She spends her free time writing, reading, teaching dance classes, and binge-watching Netflix. Contact Morgan at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Kesha Lawsuit: Victim Of Assault Or A Bad Contract? appeared first on Law Street.

A few weeks ago the White House began what it calls the It’s On Us campaign to end campus sexual assault. This campaign is a direct result of last April’s Title IX developments to try and change the way we look at consent and rape. As Vice President Joe Biden so sagely put it: “Violence against women is not a women’s issue alone, it’s a men’s issue.”

Last week the It’s On Us campaign continued its onslaught on campus sexual violence by releasing guidance to draft sexual assault guidelines, handle reports of assault, promote prevention, and outline exactly what “consent” means.

It is a little early to tell whether or not these guidelines and the new focus on changing college rape culture will have a noticeable effect, but since every education institution in the U.S. is legally obligated to follow Title IX policies, I’d say change is in the air.

This is only the beginning, though. While sexual assault on college campuses is more common and also more ignored than elsewhere in society, it is by no means the only place rape culture runs rampant.

But what exactly is rape culture? It’s where rape is widely recognized and accepted as a normal part of society. Where, instead of trying to prevent rape, victims are blamed. Rape, unfortunately, has become normalized in American society. The word “rape” can be heard to describe anything but the act itself, and there has been more than one occurrence of assault recorded and uploaded to the internet. As if showing themselves raping someone will give the uploader fame.

No, college is definitely not the only place rape culture needs to disappear. It is also not the only place that things like the Title IX developments may not be taken seriously.

By the time kids get to college, they have had at least seventeen years of rape culture exposure. They grew up in gender roles that encouraged male dominance and female submissiveness. They grew up being told that a girl who dresses in a short dress is “slutty” or “asking for it.” They watched movies like The Hangover where being roofied was turned into a comedy. When they finally set foot on a college campus for the first time, they had years of societal expectations ingrained into their heads.

Now, while many college students are eager to have their minds opened and changed by their chosen institution, not all are willing to let go of the beliefs they got from their parents and relatives. “It’s On Us” will no doubt have some positive effects on the number of sexual assault cases on campuses, and it is a sure sign that rape culture can be changed, but it is just one of the steps that needs to be taken.

It should also be noted that, along with rape culture existing outside the college campus, women are by no means the only ones who suffer sexual assaults. It is a truth that is not widely acknowledged that men get raped too. But, as I said before, men are brought up to be dominant and therefore are too afraid to admit a woman assaulted them. When we, in the words of Emma Watson, “see gender as a spectrum, rather than two sets of opposing ideals,” assault initiated by both genders, and the rape culture in which those assaults are normalized, will end.

If you would like more information on Title IX and its guidelines, go here.

Morgan McMurray

Morgan McMurray is an editor and gender equality blogger based in Seattle, Washington. A 2013 graduate of Iowa State University, she has a Bachelor of Arts in English, Journalism, and International Studies. She spends her free time writing, reading, teaching dance classes, and binge-watching Netflix. Contact Morgan at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Rape Culture Can (And Must) Be Changed appeared first on Law Street.

So this week in controversial t-shirt news, a market in the Philippines received a bit of backlash via Twitter over a top encouraging rape culture. Supermall, the major department store chain with several locations throughout the Philippines and China, promoted the offending item featuring the message “It’s not rape, it’s a snuggle with a struggle.”

In this case, I can’t really give Supermalls the benefit of the doubt. What’s even more bizarre about the product is that it was apparently featured in the little boys section of the store because you might as well get them to start disrespecting women as early as possible. There’s no way this could have been an oversight. Although I don’t know how aware Asian culture is regarding the topic of rape, the only excuse that I could begin to provide for Supermalls is that perhaps something got lost in translation. The word “rape” may not translate the same from Tagalog or Mandarin but I can’t see how “struggle” could mean anything other than something that implies difficulty, which is not a word that anyone would want to use to describe sexual encounters.

‘It’s not rape – it’s a snuggle with a struggle’: Store withdraws T-shirt after complaints http://t.co/jCnIn3jZt3 pic.twitter.com/gLMiAepsmI

— Daily Mirror (@DailyMirror) September 24, 2014

In response to all the Twitter backlash, Supermalls released the following statement:

Update on t-shirt statement. pic.twitter.com/cDTPamPC1e

— SM Supermalls (@smsupermalls) September 23, 2014

Why thank you, Supermalls as long as you’re sorry it makes it okay right?

What’s even more interesting is that Supermalls’ Twitter banner features a picture of a happy Filipino family with the statement “Everything’s Here for the Love of Lolo (Grandpa) and Lola (Grandma).” Because I’m sure wearing a shirt that promotes rape culture would make Lolo and Lola extremely proud.

Supermalls also apparently has its own foundation in which they “contribute to the welfare and well being of various communities,” according to its website.

While I’m not sure exactly how such a disturbing t-shirt came to be, the issue behind it only goes to further prove that many countries, including the United States, have a long way to go to erase the mindset of rape culture. The U.S. could learn from this incident in the Philippines and work toward spreading awareness about rape prevention while enacting laws that prevent such vile messages from being featured on advertisements and products.

Katherine Fabian

Katherine Fabian is a recent graduate of Fordham University’s College at Lincoln Center. She is a freelance writer and yoga teacher who hopes to one day practice fashion law and defend the intellectual property rights of designers. Contact Katherine at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Controversial T-Shirt News: Store Sells Shirt Downplaying Rape appeared first on Law Street.

According to a statement released by the Department of Defense on August 27, 2014, United States Army General Officer Michael T. Harrison was forced to retire recently with a reduced rank after being found to have mishandled reports of sexual assault. As I read the article published by The New York Times, I was expecting to find that some form of criminal action had also been taken and that there would be some recognition of sympathy for those victims whose cases had been mishandled. Instead, the consequences of this general’s actions were to retire as a one star general, as opposed to a two star. No criminal action was taken, and no justice to the victims was given.

If you have seen the eye-opening documentary ‘The Invisible War,’ then you know that it raised awareness for the appalling number of victims who are involved in sexual assaults in military settings, but also that it spurred legislation ensuring investigations of abuse were handled efficiently, and justice was given to the victims. As can be seen with Harrison’s case, these incidents are still occurring and as a woman myself, I still do not feel like enough is being done.

Susan Brownmiller, an American journalist, describes sexual assault in military settings as an unfortunate but inevitable by-product of the necessary game called war. Quite frankly, the punishment Harrison received is nothing short of a joke. After the amendment of federal policies regarding sexual assault in the military two years ago, I question Congress as to why this is still happening? This game we call ‘sexual assault in war’ is unacceptable. According to “The Invisible War,”

‘Since 2006, more than 95,000 service members have been sexually assaulted in the U.S. military. More than 86 percent of service members do not report their assault, and less than five percent of all sexual assaults are put forward for prosecution, with less than a third of those cases resulting in imprisonment.’

These figures should be enough to not only change punishment for the mishandling of reports of sexual assault, but to help victims come forward and receive justice for their traumatic experiences. As of 2014, according to the Department of Veterans Affairs, federal law now defines Military Sexual Trauma (MST) as one of the most frequent diagnoses given to veterans of warfare. If we know that so many individuals suffer from such traumatic experiences, why isn’t policy being changed? Even more importantly, why aren’t those who are meant to protect us doing their jobs properly?

Each military force dominates the way reports and investigations of assault are handled. This ‘in house’ shambles of a system is essentially allowing officials to get away with their own wrongdoings. We are allowing individuals to commit acts without fear of punishment or consequence. In order to lower the rates of sexual assault in the military, the focus needs to be on controlling the environment, and providing an alternative system for report of misconduct. I am no expert in changing legislation, and I am no intellectual genius on the makings of policy, but I am certainly no fool to being aware that victims are suffering, and legislators need to wake up and realize that this type of consequence is normalizing military sexual assaults.

Our common coping mechanism for crime is imposing laws to regulate punishment to those who inflict pain and suffering. By imposing taking someone’s gold sparkly badge away and giving him or her a silver sparkly one instead because they essentially ignored someone’s suffering, is unacceptable. Sexual assault and abuse is not normal, regardless of the situation, regardless of the setting, and regardless of the perpetrator. In order to enable victims to report their abusers, and in order to protect future men and women from the pain and suffering so many veterans go through, something needs to change!

Now more than ever, I cannot wrap my head around the fact that our same country who is fighting to protect us from terrorism, our country who is fighting for the rights of the thousands of innocent individuals losing their lives in the Middle East, can also be the same country that contains individuals being sexually violated and then silenced by the same exact people who are meant to protect us.

Hannah Kaye

Hannah Kaye is originally from London, now living in New York. Recently graduated with an MA in criminal justice from John Jay College. Strong contenders for things she is most passionate about are bagels and cupcakes. Contact Hannah at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Military Sexual Assault Remains a Major National Embarrassment appeared first on Law Street.

A men’s rights movement has gained momentum within the last several years with the goals of reclaiming rights for men in society. One offshoot of the movement, the Red Pill, is accused of being inspired by a largely misogynistic attitude. This accusation is based on the attacks on women for using and abusing men, and essentially being the “evil” of the sexes. In addition to its major presence on social media, Men’s Rights activists have attempted to gain awareness through conferences and rallies. The Men’s Rights Movement, still controversial in nature, has legitimate goals in that it is working to gain equal rights by advocating for the equal treatment of boys and men in professional, educational, and legal situations. Some feel that this is a hidden effort to disguise prejudice against women, yet men continue to protest their desire to be “equal” citizens in a society where they believe that women currently have all the power. Read on for more information about the Men’s Rights movement and its Social Media counterpart, the Red Pill Movement.

What is the Red Pill Movement?

The Red Pill Movement is comprised of a group of men who hold a certain animosity toward women, believing them to be manipulative, unfaithful, and narcissistic. They band together primarily through social media and rant about their hatred of the opposite sex. Men who “take” the red pill are choosing to live a life free of emotional attachment to any a woman for fear that she will use him for his status, money, or emotional stability. The term red pill has its roots in the 1999 movie “The Matrix.” The red pill symbolizes the consumption of the truth, whereas taking the blue pill results in pure ignorance. Advocates for the Red Pill Movement believe that by taking the red pill, or consuming this eye-opening knowledge, they are becoming aware of women and their antics.

Social Media

Reddit, a social media site where individuals can share information such as texts, photographs, and personal opinions, is the main platform of the Red Pill Movement. Here men rant about their misunderstanding of and hatred for the opposite sex. The theme of most threads is how women are cheating, lying, manipulative, and narcissistic. Members often communicate in a verbally violent and insulting manner toward females and share their negative experiences of being taken advantage of, used, and insulted by women.

The Men’s Rights Movement

While the Red Pill Movement is based on the belief that women are wicked in nature, the Men’s Rights Movement actually does have some concrete goals that members would like to accomplish. According to the Huffington Post, goals of  the pro-men’s rights group Canadian Association for Equality, are mainly to bring awareness about “shared custody of children, unhealthy perceptions of masculinity, declining rates of university enrollment, spousal abuse, and suicide.” Since the Men’s Rights Movement is fairly new, there hasn’t been any policy or legislation enacted yet. The main goal of the group is to draw attention to the issues that men face in a society that tend to focus more on gaining women’s rights and recognition.

Rape

The Men’s Rights Movement emphasizes how often they believe men to be wrongfully accused of rape. Members argue that society has created a stigma that victimizes women and paints a picture of men as violently sexual predators. Many posters and arguments of the movement highlight the idea that women are partially responsible for any sexual acts that occur, in that they consume alcohol and choose to have sex with a man who they then turn around and accuse of rape.

Child Custody

The movement argues that women often receive custody in divorce, and men are unfairly assigned the monetary responsibilities.

#Feminist single motherhood in a nutshell #feminismisawful #NoMRA #MRA @Typhonblue @JudgyBitch1 @AlyssMajere @icmi14 pic.twitter.com/uFyOcaWrIL — Chloé J.F. Berg (@ChloeShell18) July 17, 2014

Domestic Violence

The Men’s Rights Movement accuses society of labeling domestic violence as one sided, in that men commit of all of the abuse. Advocates for men’s rights argue that women are just as responsible for violence in the home, yet it goes unrecognized because of the negative stigma attached to men.

Suicide 

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Suicide among males is four times higher than among females and represents 79 percent of all U.S. suicides.” The Men’s Rights Movement aims to prevent this alarming epidemic in men. By providing support and encouragement to young men, members believe that this could eliminate some of the suicides that occur in response to emotional and mental disturbances and abuse.

A Voice for Men

A Voice for Men is a website that compiles information on the Men’s Rights Movement. The organization’s argument revolves around the theory of gynocentrism, the belief that males have bent to the demands of women for centuries. In addition to the organization’s website, the group has a social media presence on Facebook and Twitter dedicated to the Men’s Rights Movement. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dxcXldIFsbQ

The International Men’s Rights Conference 

The Men’s rights movement is increasingly gaining popularity on the grounds that women are the more powerful sex. According to activists, men face the adverse effects of a certain stigma that society has ingrained into them throughout history. At the first International Men’s Rights Conference held in St. Clair Shores, Michigan, both men and women gathered to discuss the issue. Men’s rights activists believe that men face difficulty in society, which has forced them to live out life as “second-class-citizens,” and that men are continuously blamed for rape. According to conference attendee Barbara Kay,

“The vast majority of women crying rape on campus are actually expressing buyer’s remorse from alcohol-fueled promiscuous behavior involving murky consent on both sides…It’s their get-out-of-guilt-free card.”

Men also blamed their feelings toward women on their early childhood experiences. According to Stefan Molyneux, “If we could just get [women] to be nice to their babies for five years straight, that would be it for war, drug abuse, addiction, promiscuity, sexually transmitted diseases.” Molyneux continued to say that women are responsible for choosing the abuser-types, or in his word “a-holes.” “Women worship at the feet of the devil and wonder why the world is evil,” he adds later. “And then know what they say? ‘We’re victims!”

Watch a spoof video below satirizing how women react to men at bars. All jokes aside, this comedic video is indicative of many of the views expressed by members of the Red Pill Movement.

This movement is not just in the United States but many other countries, as well, particularly in the East. Where feminism empowers women, the Red Pill or Men’s Rights  movement cripples them. In a disturbing piece written by Kim Tong-hyung, a professor of medicine at Seoul National University in Korea, Lee Yoon-seong blames women for the rape epidemic. Yoon-seong says:

“If there is money on the street, somebody will pick it up. If there is a woman walking around with sexy clothing, there will be somebody who rapes her …”

The Men’s Human Rights Rally

A men’s rights rally was organized in Toronto, Canada on September 28, 2013. Participants claimed that men are just as likely to face domestic abuse, have a higher rate of suicide, die earlier, and drop out of school as women. They argued that men make up “90 percent” of the prison population and are less likely to get a job after graduation. Thirty people fought for the movement to gain acceptance and recognition. This was a controversial rally, in that some people felt that it was simply a blow to women and masking an underlying current of misogyny.

Case Study: Elliot Rodger and the Santa Barbara shootings

In May 2014 a 22-year-old Elliot Rodger went on a killing spree in Isla Vist, California that was fueled by his resentment of the women who rejected him and the men who received their affections instead. Rodger left behind a video in which he stated, “You girls have never been attracted to me. I don’t know why you girls aren’t attracted to me, but I will punish you all for it.”

Watch the chilling video of Elliot Rodger before his killing spree.

Rodger was reportedly driven to murder because of the rejection he felt from most women. He complains of being a “22-year-old virgin,” and blames his lack of sexual success on the opposite sex. Clearly, there are other mental health issues that contribute to his feelings of rage, yet his outlet is to target what he believed was the source of his depression and anger for a good portion of his life. Rodger was not the only one who had these hostile feelings toward women; Men’s Rights advocates band together to speak of their negative experiences with women and rant about how they have caused them to live a life of misery and deceit. Some of the arguments are extreme, unreasonably blaming an entire sex for the source of a man’s unhappiness in life.

Rape as a Tool

Case Study: Rape Internationally

According to CNN, “rape has too often become the weapon of choice for frustrated young men who blame women, increasingly visible in the workplace, for their unemployment, and who hope to regain jobs by frightening women back home through sexual violence.” Men are being fueled by their anger toward women; they may feel threatened or humiliated by them and are using the most powerful tool that they have to attack in the most sexually aggressive and destructive way possible. Between 2006 and 2011, rape cases in India rose by twenty-five percent. Even more disturbing, only one quarter of the rapists were convicted. Rape is an increasing normality in India and indicative of the lack of support that women receive in the predominantly patriarchal society. Similarly, according to the Rape Abuse and Incest National Network, in the United States, 97 percent of violent rapists will not be convicted and 54 percent of cases are not even reported.

The International Campaign to Stop Rape and Gender Violence

The International Campaign to Stop Rape and Gender Violence works to alleviate some of the gender violence conducted against women internationally, specifically in times of war and conflict. Its main goals are to increase services offered to individuals who have been victims of violence and rape, gain justice for victims, and ultimately stop the aggression toward women.

Battling the Red Pill

Social Media to Combat the Red Pill Movement

In response to a society that seems to breed rape culture, the Twitter movement #YesAllWomen has emerged on Twitter. According to Time, the #YesAllWomen hashtag was created “to criticize the way society teaches men to feel entitled to women at the expense of their health, safety and, in [the Santa Barbara shooter] Rodger’s case, lives.” The online campaign was created to empower women, and expand on the belief that women are worth more than their physical appearance. It also brings awareness to how women are constantly placed in sexually offensive and uncomfortable situations. A recent post links to a list of (in)appropriate responses to cat-callers on the street. Tweets such as this one:

Because tweets like this should not exist #YesAllWomen pic.twitter.com/Ng84ItSXjD — Izabella (@izabellaanna_) July 14, 2014

Organizations Against Rape Culture

Organizations such as People Against Rape Culture, are fighting back by attempting to educate, collaborate, and advocate so that people will become more aware of rape culture. There are also organizations that include man’s involvement. Men Can Stop Rape has compiled a list of Men’s Anti-Violence Organizations. The group has also used collaborative methods, such as the Strength Campaign, to educate boys in middle schools, high schools, and universities and assist them in working on relationships with peers, teachers, family members, and members of their community.

Conclusion

Everyone is entitled to a personal opinion, therefore whether or not the Men’s Rights Movement results in any legislation is irrelevant to its existence as a legitimate movement. This holds true for the Red Pill Movement, as well; however, that it is breeding an extreme sense of animosity toward an entire gender. Governments must continue to educate and prosecute those people who violently and sexually violate women, no matter where the source of that anger comes from.

Resources

Business Insider: Inside Red Pill, the Weird New Cult For Men Who Don’t Understand Women

WorldNews Network: Deadly California rampage: Chilling video, but no match for reality

Washington Post: Men’s Rights Activists, Gathering to Discuss All the Ways Society Has Done Them Wrong

Times of India: Low Conviction Rate Spurring Sexual Assault Cases in India

TIME: The Most Powerful #YesAllWomen Tweets

RAINN: 97 of Every 100 Rapists Receive no Punishment, RAINN Analysis Shows

TIME: What I Learned as a Woman at a Men’s-Rights Conference

Southern Poverty Law Center: Men’s Rights Movement Spreads False Claims about Women

Ms. Foundation: Stopping the Violence Against Women 

Madeleine Stern

Madeleine Stern attended George Mason University majoring in Journalism and minoring in Theater. Her writing on solitary confinement inspired her to pursue a graduate degree in clinical counseling after graduation. Madeleine is an avid runner, dedicated animal lover, and a children’s ballet instructor. Contact Madeleine at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Red Pill and the Men’s Rights Movement appeared first on Law Street.

“Rape culture” is a term coined by feminists in the late 1970s to describe the way that society blamed rape victims and normalized male sexual violence. It described how our culture condoned physical and emotional harm toward women. It showed that we allowed women to get raped and men to get away with it. And sadly, the phrase is still apt throughout the globe today, 50 years later.

Yesterday, hundreds of people in Bangalore, India demonstrated outside a public school where a six-year-old girl was raped.

The incident happened at Bangalore’s Vibgyor School in early July, but it was only brought to light last week. No arrests have been made, but it has been reported that police have detained eight suspects in the case.

The pressure from the people of Bangalore is commendable, without their effort the Indian police force would not have taken this issue as seriously, and the girl’s rapist may have never been caught or even investigated.

We’ve come along way since the 1970s. It was in ’77 that Roman Polanski drugged and raped a 13-year-old girl before fleeing to France without serious public uproar.

Since then, there have been major advances in the feminist movement, and people are finally starting to change the way they think about rape. Here are some examples of how people are have started to change the way women can protect themselves:

• A trio of Indian students created “anti-rape underwear” that delivers shocks and alerts the police to potential assaults. The device is cleverly named Society Harnessing Equipment (SHE), and is equipped with a GPS system and pressure sensors that make it capable to send a 3,800 kV shock.

• A group of Swedish girls designed an “anti-rape belt,” also referred to as a “reverse chastity belt.” It has a complex labyrinth of a latch that the wearer has to unlock, which is impossible to do without two hands. “The rapist can’t hold you down and open it at the same time. It takes a while to figure it out if you don’t know what you’re doing,” one of the creators said.

• A South African doctor designed a condom called the “rape-axe” that is designed to dig into a rapist’s penis upon penetration. The jagged hooks cling on to the offender’s penis and create enough pressure to prevent the man from being able to urinate.

• Inventors added a little twist to the rape whistle: now there’s a keychain-like security device that sounds a loud alarm when pulled. The device is meant to scare the attacker while also alerting bystanders that you are in need of help.

• Two students at India’s National Institute of Fashion Technology created a jacket that is supposed to prevent sexual assault. The jacket discharges 110 volts of electricity when it detects unwanted pressure. A button is pressed by the person who is being assaulted, which then signals the jacket to stun the aggressor and temporarily disable him.

• A group of inventors created a test called Pd.id that determines whether or not your drink has been drugged. “The lighter sized sensor is dipped into your drink and performs electrical conductivity tests, temperature measurements, and spectroscopic analysis to determine the molecular makeup of your beverage.” If it does detect something, the sensor alerts the user with a red LED light.

So as you can see there is a lot being done to prevent girls from being raped, and while all these inventions are spectacular and innovative, there’s still one thing wrong; we’re placing the responsibility on women and girls. These inventions send out the message that prohibiting rape is up to the female, and that it is their own duty to make sure that they do not become a victim. Instead, we should be holding our men accountable and teaching our boys that it is their responsibility to respect women.

Many of our conversations these days focus on preventive behavior, telling women not to get drunk, what not to wear, when and where to go out. This is rape culture.

Rape culture is telling women to “be careful” when they leave the house, or to put on something “less revealing.” Rape culture is shaming women for who they sleep with, how they walk, how they talk, what they drink, where they go. Rape culture is protecting our men, and condemning our girls; and I think it’s about time we change that. Not all men sexually assault women, but at one point or another in their lives, most women will be sexually assaulted by a man. We’ve been to the moon, cured numerous diseases, taken flight, and beaten our preconceived prejudices. I think we’re advanced enough to stop shifting the blame off men, and start respecting our women. I think it’s time we stop accepting rape culture, and start refuting it. Don’t you?

Mic Drop

—

Trevor Smith

Featured image courtesy of [Chase Carter via Flickr]

Trevor Smith

Trevor Smith is a homegrown DMVer studying Journalism and Graphic Design at American University. Upon graduating he has hopes to work for the US State Department so that he can travel, learn, and make money at the same time. Contact Trevor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Yes. All. Women. appeared first on Law Street.

Happy Hump Day, folks!

Have you had your mid-afternoon pickmeup yet? I fucking hope so, because I’m not easing you into this today. We’re just going to cut right to the chase.

We’re talking about rape, today, folks.

Prepare to be simultaneously infuriated and irrationally happy.

About two weeks ago in Calhoun, Ga, it was prom night. The teenagers of Calhoun High School were pumped to get fancy and get down. Let’s all picture the jubilation of Footloose, for a moment, shall we?

Awesome. But post-prom, shit started to get a bit less Kevin Bacon and a bit more Steubenville, Ohio. At an after party — predictably held at a secluded cabin in the woods — nearly 30 students got super drunk. Things quickly spun out of control.

After several hours of heavy drinking, an 18-year-old woman found herself in a room with four of her male classmates, where she was allegedly gang-raped. The victim reported being unable to remember exactly who raped her, only recalling that it was multiple men, and that foreign objects were inserted into her vagina. The victim suffered severe internal injuries from the assault, including substantial, traumatic, vaginal tearing.

Cue feelings of shock and appall.

What the fuck is going on here, people? What. The. Actual. Fuck.

This is not the first time I’ve written about rape here at The F Word. In fact, I’ve written about rape a depressing amount. We’ve talked about the infamous Steubenville rape case, the reasons your rapist probably won’t be facing any consequences, and the fact that lawmakers in Michigan are forcing women to take out rape insurance.

The world is filled with fucking rape. This is news to no one.

But let’s take a moment and think about why in fuck’s name this shit keeps happening. Why are men consistently and violently forcing themselves onto unwilling women?

Because they feel fucking entitled, that’s why.

Awesome attitude, dude.

Alcohol and drugs and partying and short skirts — contrary to what Fox News and its ilk will have you believe — do not cause rape. Rape culture causes rape. It’s a culture that privileges men and other masculine folks as the arbiters of power to be wielded over an inferior class of women and feminine-presenting folks. It’s a culture that says “boys will be boys,” “penises have a mind of their own,” “men can’t control themselves.”

It’s a culture that tells women to carry pepper spray, to pull their skirts down, not to go out at night alone, not to drink, not to date.

It’s a culture that tells women not to live their lives freely, so as to avoid violent assault, all while giving men free reign to do whatever the fuck they want, consent be damned. This is a culture that tells men they own the streets. They own the world. And they own women’s bodies.

This guy. This guy all over the fuckin’ place.

We all know that this rape in Calhoun is no isolated incident. But let’s reiterate just how not isolated it is.

1 out of every 6 women in the U.S. has been the victim of sexual assault.

That’s a lot of fucking women. And those are just the ones who are reporting their experiences and being counted — if we take silent victims into account, the numbers soar higher. Not to mention all the men who get raped, all the trans folks, all the genderqueers who aren’t being counted because statisticians aren’t sure where to fit them into the equation.

Rape is a hugely, wildly pervasive problem, and its victims are paying a lifetime price.

But the rapists themselves? Ninety-seven percent of them will face no jail time at all. No consequences. No accountability. Nothing.

This is beyond disappointing.

Now, it’s important to note that the vast majority of men and masculine-presenting people are not rapists. All you “Not All Men!” devil’s-advocate-conversation-derailers, please save your breath. We are fully aware that not all men are violent, rapist fucks.

And this Calhoun case is living, breathing proof of that. It stands out from other recent high-profile rape cases — like Steubenville — in that the authorities have taken the victim’s allegations seriously, are pressing substantial charges against the alleged perpetrators, and have not carried out a gross, slut-shaming, rape-apologist smear campaign against the victim.

This is the part where we can all get irrationally happy. Authority figures simply doing their jobs shouldn’t be cause for shocked celebration, but it’s undeniably rare that a rape case gets handled appropriately. Bravo, Calhoun law enforcement! Thank you for rising to the level of our depressingly low bar! (I mean that in the most sincere, not-sarcastic way possible, I promise.)

But amid our relief that Calhoun seems to be doing things right, we can’t forget about why these things keep happening.

Those four high school boys gang-raped their classmate for the same reason Michigan legislators are forcing women to buy rape insurance. That’s the same reason Daisy Coleman’s house was burned to the ground after she tried to report her own rape. It’s also the same reason Elliot Rodger murdered six people in Santa Barbara after penning a manifesto about what a crime it was that women had failed to offer him their vaginas on a silver platter.

It’s because we live in a society that doesn’t teach men not to rape. It doesn’t expect men to treat women or their bodies with kindness and respect. It makes excuses for violent behavior, shifts blame to victims, and props up an overarching culture in which men feel entitled to a woman’s sexuality and bodily autonomy.

Not all men are rapists, murderers, misogynists, slut-shamers, or victim-blamers. But all men live in a world where they’re mostly allowed to be. And women? All of us get to live in fear of meeting the same fate as Daisy Coleman, or running into an Elliot Rodger — and then being blamed for our own irresponsibility for putting ourselves in a position to be harmed in the first place. Don’t believe me? Just ask #YesAllWomen. This shit is real.

So folks, let’s raise this bar. Let’s create a world where it’s not exciting to meet a man who doesn’t feel entitled to your body, or a cop who will take your rape case seriously. Let’s fashion a society where all people — regardless of their gender — can move through the world without the fear of violence and domination. Let’s do it together.

—

Hannah R. Winsten (@HannahRWinsten) is a freelance copywriter, marketing consultant, and blogger living in New York City. She hates tweeting but does it anyway. She aspires to be the next Rachel Maddow.

Featured image courtesy of [Eric Parker via Flickr]

Hannah R. Winsten

Hannah R. Winsten is a freelance copywriter, marketing consultant, and blogger living in New York’s sixth borough. She hates tweeting but does it anyway. She aspires to be the next Rachel Maddow. Contact Hannah at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post BREAKING: Cops in Georgia Are Taking a Rape Case Seriously appeared first on Law Street.

American University has a problem. Well, more specifically a small group of young men at AU have a problem. The “brothers” of Epsilon Iota, an apparent underground fraternity at the DC University, were outed in a major way recently when about 70 pages of their private emails, texts, and other communications leaked online. And trust me, it’s not good.

It’s important to note that this fraternity is neither recognized by the University, nor by any national chapter. In 2001, when they operated under the national organization of Alpha Tau Omega, they had their charter yanked due to hazing and underage drinking allegations. Instead of working with both institutions to regain their status, they continued to operate as an underground organization.

About two months ago, The Atlantic published an expose called “The Dark Power of Fraternities.” It’s an incredibly interesting read, and it focuses mainly on who is liable when things go wrong at fraternity parties. It has a lot to do with communication between the chapter and the national organization, but that article, in conjunction with this recent event does beg the question: What happens when there’s no accountability to the University or to a national organization?

So here are three things about this leak that are incredibly problematic, and what they can tell us about the concerning world of undergrad frats as a whole.

3. These emails indicate a coverup of some pretty awful behavior. 

Much of the conversation between these “frat” brothers involves an incident where a brother may or may not have hit a girl who was attending one of their parties. The guys seems to have a few goals. A very, very small percentage appear to want to figure out exactly what happened. The rest oscillate between blaming the girl, downplaying the abuse, and figuring out how to make sure that, “b*tches will still go to our parties.” Even the one brother who makes sure to emphasize that one should never hit a woman goes on to say that the priority needs to be formulating an excuse.

Abusive culture aside, there are just a lot of problems here. Because this is an underground organization, the actions that this young woman — who was probably abused in some fashion — could take were incredibly limited. She could bring suit at the University against the individual who hurt her, but given that this organization has absolutely no legal standing within the school, there’s not much they can do. There’s nothing preventing me and my friends from getting together and calling ourselves whatever we please as a club, and the school can’t do anything to stop that. And I’m not necessarily saying they should be able to — that’s my right in this country. What I am saying is that because this underground frat as a whole has no need to worry about getting in trouble with the school, they worry about things like “getting b*tches to still come to our parties,” without recognizing the consequences of their actions.

2. If it wasn’t for these emails, could anyone ever prove that the organization exists?

That brings us to our next point, and that’s one of accountability. These emails were leaked by someone who evidently got access to EI’s listserv — possibly a former brother, or someone who got a brother’s password, or whatever. But without these emails that do name some of the members, would this underground frat ever have been caught? It’s obviously operated for more than ten years, and has done an excellent job of never really having enough problems to shut it down entirely.

And what, exactly, can the University do about it? The University can maybe expel the students who said particularly inflammatory stuff, but unless they find every single one of these guys, the population will still exist on campus. They can still recruit new members if they want. The only thing the University can hope to do is catch enough members that staying involved seems to be too big a risk for those who remain. It s a gutsy move on the group’s part to remain unaffiliated from the University and from the national chapter — after all being affiliated with both of those institutions gives you legitimacy, money, and prestige. But they’ve done just fine, and I bet that they’ll keep doing just fine. And that’s a concerning notion to consider — that what this fraternity has been not only viable, but rather successful for the last decade.

1. These emails are really a perfectly horrifying example of campus rape culture. 

Here’s the really big problem with these emails, the part that elevates my internal yelling to full out banshee-like external screaming. I don’t even know where to start, partly because some of these are too disgusting to put on this website, and partly because there are just too many examples. This group consistently says overtly disgusting things about the women they interact with. These are, I swear to god, some of the more benign examples:

• “Get the b*tches in the right state of intoxication so the plows will be raining all over the place.” Great. Getting girls too drunk to consent. That’s not a gigantic, Texas-sized red flag. 
• “If your [sic] trying to get laid tonight bro don’t go with the Asians. They’re hit or miss. You gotta go straight w**re.” Racism and sexism. Charming. 
• “She had a friend who got raped at our house? I would like to meet this lying c*** and show her how african men treat their woman [sic].” I can’t even dignify this one with a comment. 

Believe me when I say that these are the mild selections from these emails. They constantly use disgusting, derogatory language to refer to women. Now, obviously they thought these emails would never get out, but it’s not just about a few people saying really dumb and gross stuff in private — it’s about the culture that this creates and propagates within this secret frat. Because this kind of language, this kind of culture, mixed with the lack of accountability and ability to be secretive is a veritable perfect storm.

—

Anneliese Mahoney (@AMahoney8672) is Lead Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Nejmlez via Wikipedia]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post American University Has a Serious Secret Frat Problem appeared first on Law Street.

It is sexual assault awareness month, and the accusations against Universities’ policies on sexual crime continue to come forth. Before we get caught up in the rage, maybe we should start by asking the obvious question: what role should universities actually play in handling sexual assault crimes?

 At the current moment, universities handle sexual assault cases mainly in two ways. One, they either attempt to squash the complaints of the victims, because the mere appearance of sexual assault on campus is bad for business. Or two, universities process the accusations, commit to an investigation, and set a trial for the accused. This alternative option can be ‘beneficial’ for business, because it makes the university appear to be tough on ‘rape culture’. For obvious reasons, I have a serious problem with the first avenue of simply trying to downplay the accusations of a possible victim. However, there is good reason for us to be skeptical of the alternative.

Universities should have zero involvement in the initial handling of sexual assault crimes, and for the reason mentioned before: colleges can benefit from looking tough on rape culture, and thus, they may institute policies that ensure this desired outcome, at the harm of the school’s own students, specifically the accused. To be fair, universities are in a difficult spot. When you take into account that sexual assault is extremely present on college campus — Sarah Lawrence College reports, “at least 1 in 4 college women will be the victim of a sexual assault during her academic career” — and the fact that sexual assault cases are extremely hard to prove, many women or men can feel helpless and turn to the university to deal with situation.

However, this is also a problematic solution. Since universities have interests outside of justice, they could very easily lose sight of the fact that we assume innocence until proven guilty within our nation’s conception of justice. Unfortunately, we already see this trend starting to actualize, as there are many cases where men have been convicted of sexual assault by their university, while considered innocent in a legal context. Consider the case of Dez Wells where, “local authorities have gone so far as to proclaim the defendant’s innocence[ and yet, he was] expelled from Xavier University on a disciplinary charge of sexual assault.”

If universities begin to convict students of sexual assault crimes, without their guilt being proven in court, two new major problems arise. The first would be those who may be innocent still carry the weight of the conviction. A student like Wells will leave Xavier with no degree, and the marking of a sexual predator. This has profound implications. Wells will most likely struggle to be accepted into another University with an explosion from Xavier — due to sexual assault — on his record. (Dez Wells has since been accepted to University of Maryland, however, his value as an athlete may have helped him in this endeavor. However a student like Peter Yu at Vassar College, who was convicted and expelled in a similar manner, may not be so lucky). The second problem arises from the fact that someone like Wells will have to carry the psychological burden of being identified as a ‘rapist’, yet his innocence was proclaimed by legal authorities, therefore, he shouldn’t have this problem.

These worries make way for another implication of relying on universities to handle sexual assault crimes. Universities cannot offer due process nor due punishment. I feel as though there is no need to say that rape is a serious crime, but I think we forget that it is when we expect an institution like a university to process such an offense. There is a reason that ‘murder’ would never be processed solely on a university campus, for the simple reason that such a serious crime requires proper due process and punishment. It seems apparent to me that we should view sexual assault in the same light. To convict someone of a crime as serious as rape, they should be protected by legal safeguards. Additionally, to ensure that proper justice is served, in the event that sexual assault was committed, we can only rely on the legal system to ensure the proper level of moral reciprocity.

These problems associated with colleges carrying out their own investigations and convictions of sexual assault crimes should deter us from demanding that they commit to action. We must remember that universities have goals outside of upholding justice, which can lead to unfair trials and convictions, ultimately harming students. Thus, students and activists against sexual assault should refrain from pointing fingers at the university. Instead, we need to establish a new avenue that makes it easier to process sexual assault cases, but within the legal domain. This is the only way to ensure proper due process and justice, and treat rape like the serious crime  that it is.

[Reason] [SLC] [ThinkProgress]Shortcode Generator

—

Bo Donoghue

Bo Donoghue

Bo Donoghue is a student at The George Washington University. Contact Bo at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Universities Should Stay Away from Rape appeared first on Law Street.

Good morning folks! How many appendages did you lose to frostbite on your way to work this morning? None? Good for you. I’m pretty sure the bottoms of my feet almost turned to actual ice yesterday, when I was evacuated from my burning office building.

Caption: Yes, I work here. And no, none of us crowded around the fire for warmth.

But! The polar vortex isn’t the only crazy thing happening this morning, unfortunately. More absurdity is happening out in Steubenville, Ohio, where convicted rapist Ma’lik Richmond was recently released from a juvenile detention facility.

In case you’ve already forgotten, Ma’lik was at the center of one of the most talked about rape cases of 2013. 16-year-old Ma’lik was a star player on Steubenville’s high school football team, Big Red, along with 17-year-old Trent Mays. The two boys were destined for big things — college ball, maybe the NFL — and they were all but worshiped in a town where football is described as a religion.

Then, one night, the two boys went to a party, where they met up with an extremely drunk young woman. A fellow high school student, this girl had allegedly been flirting with Mays via text message. Apparently, the two boys took her maybe-flirtatious text messages to mean that she was DTF, and they transported her from party to party with an all-male group of friends. Ridiculously drunk, the girl spent a fair amount of the night vomiting and lying around in an essentially comatose state. Unsurprisingly, she doesn’t remember most of the night’s events.

But cell phone cameras and social media accounts have pretty long memories. Almost instantly, photos, videos, text messages, and tweets documented the night she couldn’t remember. There were photos of Mays and Richmond holding her limp body by the arms and legs, while her head hung slack. There were photos of her lying naked, face down on the floor, in a home she’d never visited before. (Incidentally, that’s how she woke up the next morning.) There were videos of her being vaginally penetrated with Richmond and Mays’ hands.  And all of this happened while she was way, way too drunk to consent.

Ultimately, Mays and Richmond were convicted of rape and sentenced to serve time in a juvenile detention facility, where they would be “rehabilitated.” Feminists around the world rejoiced, just a tiny bit, that these young men were actually being held accountable. Because, as we know by the gazillion other rape cases that go nowhere — it’s depressingly common for accused rapists to suffer absolutely no consequences for their actions.

So, yay for that not happening! Right?

Sort of. Obviously, children being sent to prison is never something to cheer about. Furthermore, the media’s obvious sympathy for the rapists, and lack of empathy for the victim, was infuriating. Take this clip as an example — CNN spent six minutes lamenting the fact that promising, rapist lives were ruined, and barely mentioned how the victim’s life was affected.

So, the Steubenville rape case has been pretty maddening for everyone who doesn’t hate women. And the horror continues! When Ma’lik was released from juvenile detention this weekend — which isn’t necessarily surprising or irritating, honestly — he/his attorney/his attorney’s PR agency released a statement.

Oh, the agony of reading this statement.

You can read the full text here, but here’s the most important snippet:

“The past sixteen months have been extremely challenging for Ma’Lik and his extended family. At sixteen years old, Ma’Lik and his family endured hardness beyond imagination for any adult yet alone child. He has persevered the hardness and made the most of yet another unfortunate set of circumstances in his life.”

It goes on to ramble about how Ma’lik would like privacy from the media so he can be a normal teenager, hang out with his family, and move on with his life. It also makes ZERO MENTION of the victim. Not one time.

UGGGHHHHH

This is the worst non-apology ever.

Why? Let’s start with simple mechanics. Whoever wrote this train wreck of a press release can’t write to save their goddamn lives. “Hardness?” He persevered against “hardness?” I can’t. I cannot. “Hardness” is not a word that is acceptable to use, basically ever. Just for future reference. Also, SO MANY COMMAS ARE MISSING OMGGGG.

But let’s not get too carried away — obviously the content is what’s most important here. The fact that Ma’lik and everyone around him is so focused on whining about how hard his life has been as a result of this rape is seriously deranged. How difficult do you think the victim’s life has been?  What kind of “hardness” (I’m sorry, I couldn’t resist) has she had to persevere against? A whole fuck of a lot, I’m betting.

It’s clear that Ma’lik — or at least the people who are speaking for him — has gone through his “rehabilitation” process without actually taking responsibility for his actions. He’s emerged without apologizing for the immeasurable harm he inflicted on his victim. He’s still solely focused on how this whole ordeal affects him.

Folks, I don’t know about you, but I’m totally sick of this rape culture that pours sympathy on rapists while blaming, shaming, and ignoring victims.

That’s some seriously anti-feminist, anti-woman, pro-violence douche-y-ness.

So let’s put a stop to that, shall we? Thanks a ton.

—

Hannah R. Winsten (@HannahRWinsten) is a freelance copywriter, marketing consultant, and blogger living in New York’s sixth borough. She hates tweeting but does it anyway. She aspires to be the next Rachel Maddow.

Featured image courtesy of  [marsmettnn tallahaassee via Flickr]

Hannah R. Winsten

Hannah R. Winsten is a freelance copywriter, marketing consultant, and blogger living in New York’s sixth borough. She hates tweeting but does it anyway. She aspires to be the next Rachel Maddow. Contact Hannah at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Steubenville Rapist is Released and Issues Grammatically Incorrect Non-Apology appeared first on Law Street.

Merry Christmas Eve, folks!

Today, I’ve got ridiculousness upon ridiculousness. And it’s infuriating.

Salon reported today, via Raw Story and NBC News, on Rachel Bradshaw-Bean, a young woman from Texas who was raped in the band room at Henderson High School back in 2010, when she was just 17 years old. This is the first time Rachel has spoken out to the media about her experience – and she’s telling an awful story.

In an interview with NBC, Rachel recounted how in 2010, when she initially reported the rape, her school told her to “work it out.”

Are you kidding? Go kiss and make up with your rapist, sweetheart, no big deal.

I can’t.

News of the assault traveled to a school vice principal the following day, and Rachel was sent to a health clinic for examination. The clinic confirmed that her injuries were consistent with her report.

Despite the fact that medical professionals confirmed Rachel had experienced a rape, the Texas police informed her and her parents that no charges would be filed.

NO CHARGES WOULD BE FILED.

As in, you got raped, darling, but no one really cares. Get over it.

WTF?! This is the actual worst.

Except it’s not! Because things got worse for Rachel. Her high school opted not to carry out its own, independent investigation — which is required by law under Title IX. Instead, they decided to ship Rachel and her attacker off to a disciplinary school for 45 days with charges of “public lewdness.”

That’s right. Public fucking lewdness. How dare you get raped — how indecent of you!

So, Rachel’s mom tried to transfer her daughter to a different school. You know, where maybe she wouldn’t get treated like a criminal as punishment for being the victim of a sexual assault. And guess what? That didn’t pan out. Since Rachel was technically suspended from her original school, no other school would take her in. Ridiculous.

Seriously so bad.

So, Rachel and her family went to the ACLU, where they were told that, sadly, their situation was far from unusual. According to the ACLU, school officials often don’t understand the laws, so they don’t put much stock in following them.

The Department of Education does, though. A year after Rachel’s ordeal, it ruled that Henderson High School had violated Title IX by failing to investigate the attack, and by retaliating against the victim with her exile to a disciplinary school. As a result, the school was given a 13-point plan for Title IX compliance, mandatory staff training around rape and sexual assault, and was ordered to pay for Rachel’s counseling.

I’m glad that at least there were some consequences for this shit hole of a case.

There are so many issues here. Let’s start with the fundamental lack of empathy or concern for Rachel. WTF. This is misogyny at its finest. Misogyny, if you’re rusty on your Women’s Studies vocab, is defined as having a hatred for women. And that’s all I can really explain this as. Hatred of women. Because how else do you understand such heartless behavior? Here’s a person who was violently attacked. She’s in physical pain, she’s mentally and emotionally traumatized — this is a terrible thing that’s happened. People should respond with some empathy, am I right? There should be a collective desire to help the victim heal, and to teach the perpetrator never to cause this type of harm again.

That’s what should have happened. But it didn’t. Instead, Rachel was treated with carelessness at best and outright contempt at worst. Why would you treat a victim that way? It’s disgusting.

Seriously gross.

Moving right along, let’s tackle this issue of telling women to get over it. I’m so, so, so very sick of this sentiment. And I hear it way too often.

When someone is hurting, and they’re told to get over it, do you know what they’re hearing? They’re hearing that they don’t matter. That their feelings, and experiences, and their pain doesn’t matter. They’re being dismissed, denied, and ignored. And when that happens, a fundamental lack of trust forms in the space where healing should have started. Because, how do you feel safe in a world where you fundamentally don’t matter?

You don’t.

That’s where we’re at right now, people. And we’ve been here for a long time. Every time a woman like Rachel gets brushed aside, women everywhere are being reminded that we don’t matter. Not really. Not in this moment, not in this society.

So, for Christmas, let’s change that, shall we? Let’s use all those warm, fuzzy feelings of love and goodwill, and let’s start transferring them to all the people who need it most. Some of those people will be like Rachel. And some of them will be in totally different, but equally awful, circumstances.

Either way, let’s spread the love this year. We could all use a little extra.

—

Hannah R. Winsten (@HannahRWinsten) is a freelance copywriter, marketing consultant, and blogger living in New York’s sixth borough. She hates tweeting but does it anyway. She aspires to be the next Rachel Maddow.

Featured image courtesy of [The Untrained Eye via Flickr]

Hannah R. Winsten

Hannah R. Winsten is a freelance copywriter, marketing consultant, and blogger living in New York’s sixth borough. She hates tweeting but does it anyway. She aspires to be the next Rachel Maddow. Contact Hannah at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post All I Want For Christmas: Stop Telling Rape Victims to Get Over it appeared first on Law Street.