updated 9/16/2010 10:43:07 AM ET By Sarah Jacobsson Purewal [PC World]
Pressured by law enforcement, advocacy groups, and Congress, Craigslist said it would permanently remove adult services from its online classified ads here in the United States. The move quickly sparked criticism by free-speech advocates who see Craigslist's shuttering of its adult services as a threat to free speech on the Internet.
Craigslist's lawyers told a House Judiciary subcommittee hearing on child sex trafficking Wednesday that it has no plans to reopen its U.S. adult services section, which it shut down Sept. 3 after heavy criticism from human rights advocacy groups and Congress who charged that Craigslist was commonly used in the global sex trade of women.
William Clinton Powell, the director of customer service and law enforcement relations for Craigslist, said that his company had "no intention to bring the category back" and "money is not a consideration." Craigslist skirted the issue of whether it would yield to calls by advocacy groups to stop running erotic services ads that appear on international versions of the Craigslist site outside the U.S.
At the end of August a group of 17 attorneys general requested, in an open letter, that Craigslist disable the adult services section of its site immediately. The letter explained that the "increasingly sharp public criticism" of the adult services section "reflects a growing recognition that ads for prostitution — including ads trafficking children — are rampant on it."
The letter also gave examples of how adult services ads on Craigslist were allegedly tied to sex crimes. It cited one story of two girls who were allegedly trafficked over the Internet through listings on the Craigslist site. Those two girls wrote an open letter in July 2010 requesting that Craigslist take the section down.
Craigslist responded with a request evidence of the alleged trafficking authorities.
Earlier this month Craigslist complied with lawmaker requests and put a black bar with the word "censored" over the section of the site labeled adult services. The move raised the question of free speech and the Internet — and whether or not Congress has the right to censor Internet.
According to the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), the Craigslist decision to "censor" its Adult Services section is an unfortunate one. The EFF points out that the attorneys general basically bullied Craigslist into making such a decision, as "over the past two years, Craigslist repeatedly offered to go far above and beyond their legal obligations to work with law enforcement officials," and "the AGs have inevitably rewarded completely voluntary, non-mandatory offers of cooperation from Craigslist with further demands and insults."
Of course, shutting down Craigslist's Adult Services section for good is unlikely to fix all the sex trafficking issues like that. As Elizabeth McDougall, a partner at Perkins Coie LLP (the law firm representing Craigslist), says, the ads will just "migrate to less socially responsible sites" that won't cooperate with law enforcement.
Showing posts with label opinion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label opinion. Show all posts
Thursday, September 16, 2010
Friday, February 26, 2010
Florida woman - sex predators target women as well as kids
This letter to the editor of the St. Petersburg (FL) Times shows the societal unwillingness to face up to the fact that sexual predators target women as well as kids. I agree 100% with this Florida woman's rant.
I cannot express enough how angry I am when I read an article like the one in the paper Wednesday regarding child sex offenders. The headline asks Have sex-offender laws made children safer? Instead I ask, Have they ever made women in Florida safer? The answer is no.
The term "sex offender" has been used by Florida politicians following the tragic death of Jessica Lunsford, and in turn by Florida newspapers. Such an emotionally charged term leads to the general public's immediate yet mistaken assumption that anyone legally registered as a sex offender is a child sex abuser, when in fact most registered sex offenders were convicted of sexually assaulting women.
I find it shameful that Jessica Lunsford's death resulted in an onslaught of politicians clamoring to be the first ones to show their support for a bill protecting Florida's youth. Does no one care enough about the incidence of rape against women in the state of Florida to think to protect them?
This article only barely addressed the issue of the misuse of the term "sex offender" as a catch-all term when it stated the concerns of Jennifer Dritt of the Florida Council Against Sexual Violence.
The council's Web site reports that 11,214 forcible sex offenses were reported in Florida in 2007 (statistics provided by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement) and only 3,064 arrests were made for said forcible sex offenses in 2007. The incidence of children as victims is significantly lower than that of women as victims.
All Floridians should look inside themselves and ask: What about the women of Florida? Don't they deserve protection against sex offenders too? This is an issue that our Legislature should address.
Stacey Kroto, Pinellas Park
I cannot express enough how angry I am when I read an article like the one in the paper Wednesday regarding child sex offenders. The headline asks Have sex-offender laws made children safer? Instead I ask, Have they ever made women in Florida safer? The answer is no.
The term "sex offender" has been used by Florida politicians following the tragic death of Jessica Lunsford, and in turn by Florida newspapers. Such an emotionally charged term leads to the general public's immediate yet mistaken assumption that anyone legally registered as a sex offender is a child sex abuser, when in fact most registered sex offenders were convicted of sexually assaulting women.
I find it shameful that Jessica Lunsford's death resulted in an onslaught of politicians clamoring to be the first ones to show their support for a bill protecting Florida's youth. Does no one care enough about the incidence of rape against women in the state of Florida to think to protect them?
This article only barely addressed the issue of the misuse of the term "sex offender" as a catch-all term when it stated the concerns of Jennifer Dritt of the Florida Council Against Sexual Violence.
The council's Web site reports that 11,214 forcible sex offenses were reported in Florida in 2007 (statistics provided by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement) and only 3,064 arrests were made for said forcible sex offenses in 2007. The incidence of children as victims is significantly lower than that of women as victims.
All Floridians should look inside themselves and ask: What about the women of Florida? Don't they deserve protection against sex offenders too? This is an issue that our Legislature should address.
Stacey Kroto, Pinellas Park
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
CSA - the elephant in the bedroom for adult relationships
The biggest hidden issue in adult romantic or sexual relationships, in my opinion, is child sexual abuse (CSA). Since a third of women and a sixth of men have been sexually victimized in childhood, it stands to reason that the effects of the victimization will carry on to the adult relationships that survivors have. This leads to physical problems like painful sex, and when a true partner (someone who is a peer) has sex with the CSA survivor, that sex can trigger the original abuse - leaving the partner in the position of revictimizing the survivor.
Another problem in adult relationships is the confusion of sex with love. This means that the woman (or man) will become sexually active because she believes that the sex partners she encounters love her, when in fact, they are using her in a similar manner as the original perpetrator used her during childhood.
If the CSA victim was abused by a member of the same sex, then this may lead to sexual identity confusion. Issues associated with adult aftereffects of male-on-male sexual abuse are explored here. Issues regarding woman on woman abuse are tackled in the book "The Last Secret - Daughters Sexually Abused By Mothers" by Bobbie Rosencrans.
If a woman (or man) hasn't gotten over earlier sexual abuse, can there be so much damage as to preclude the possibility of a consensual relationship? According to some researchers, this may be the case. Zurbriggen and Freyd (2003) said that if "consensual sex decision mechanisms" are damaged, then there cannot be consensual sex, even though coercion may not be involved. Damaged Consensual Sex Decision Mechanisms, according to Zurbriggen and Freyd, are "inaccurate beliefs, unhealthy cognitions about the self, a lack of access to one's internal affective state, and the presence of risk seeking decision rules."
Minimization of CSA's impact on adult sexual relationships is widespread. The damage of CSA does not stop with the victim reaching adulthood. According to these statistics, CSA survivors have a 60% chance of sexual revictimization in adulthood, and a 49% chance of being a DV victim. A 1998 study by Koss & Dinero stated that 2/3's of adult rape victims have a CSA history, as contrasted with 20% of the women without an adult vicitmization history.
Child molesters not only groom their victims for sexual abuse, but "pre-groom" their victims for adult victimization. Perpetrators who target victims of any age know prey from a distance. Suceptibility to revictimization takes place for reasons outlines in the link above. According to this survivor, the predators who take advantage of the CSA victim in adulthood are doing so from a position of power in the same manner as the original child molester did.
Predators seek power and control over their victim. “Power- The ability to control the behavior of others even against their will.” (Sociology Fourth Edition 1990)
Predators will use any means to dominate their victim. Most children lack the intelligence and physical strength to combat an adult predator. Trickery, praise, isolation, threats, pain, torture, blackmail are only a few means of control. And some adults lack the ability to combat a predator, especially if the adult was a victim as a child. An adult victim can become trapped and helpless just like a child.) And may revert back to their known survival tactics of the child victim.
A predator will physically attack a victim but a predator will also emotionally attack the victim and everyone else. Emotional attacks are very deceptive in nature and are done in full sight of everyone. It is the cooing, sweetness, complementary, smiling, showing great concern for others, or paying oh so special attention to others or to a certain person.
Predators display such warmth and speak loving kindness to their victim(s). And will display enthusiastic interest in their victim’s job, hobbies, field of study, or any interest of the victim; the predator will also be enthralled with the same thing(s).
In short, CSA can leave victims vulnerable to what could best be seen as adult sexual predation. Adult sexual predation, as explained above, and adult grooming serve the exact same purpose as child molestation - power and control over a victim. Adults who victimize other adults seek to entangle them in relationships which should never be though of as anything but an extension of CSA dynamics into adulthood.
Child sexual abuse can lead to many issues with trust, trustworthiness, and revictimization not just as children or teens, but also as adults. These detrimental effects are yet another in a string of reasons why child sexual abuse must be countered.
Another problem in adult relationships is the confusion of sex with love. This means that the woman (or man) will become sexually active because she believes that the sex partners she encounters love her, when in fact, they are using her in a similar manner as the original perpetrator used her during childhood.
If the CSA victim was abused by a member of the same sex, then this may lead to sexual identity confusion. Issues associated with adult aftereffects of male-on-male sexual abuse are explored here. Issues regarding woman on woman abuse are tackled in the book "The Last Secret - Daughters Sexually Abused By Mothers" by Bobbie Rosencrans.
If a woman (or man) hasn't gotten over earlier sexual abuse, can there be so much damage as to preclude the possibility of a consensual relationship? According to some researchers, this may be the case. Zurbriggen and Freyd (2003) said that if "consensual sex decision mechanisms" are damaged, then there cannot be consensual sex, even though coercion may not be involved. Damaged Consensual Sex Decision Mechanisms, according to Zurbriggen and Freyd, are "inaccurate beliefs, unhealthy cognitions about the self, a lack of access to one's internal affective state, and the presence of risk seeking decision rules."
Minimization of CSA's impact on adult sexual relationships is widespread. The damage of CSA does not stop with the victim reaching adulthood. According to these statistics, CSA survivors have a 60% chance of sexual revictimization in adulthood, and a 49% chance of being a DV victim. A 1998 study by Koss & Dinero stated that 2/3's of adult rape victims have a CSA history, as contrasted with 20% of the women without an adult vicitmization history.
Child molesters not only groom their victims for sexual abuse, but "pre-groom" their victims for adult victimization. Perpetrators who target victims of any age know prey from a distance. Suceptibility to revictimization takes place for reasons outlines in the link above. According to this survivor, the predators who take advantage of the CSA victim in adulthood are doing so from a position of power in the same manner as the original child molester did.
Predators seek power and control over their victim. “Power- The ability to control the behavior of others even against their will.” (Sociology Fourth Edition 1990)
Predators will use any means to dominate their victim. Most children lack the intelligence and physical strength to combat an adult predator. Trickery, praise, isolation, threats, pain, torture, blackmail are only a few means of control. And some adults lack the ability to combat a predator, especially if the adult was a victim as a child. An adult victim can become trapped and helpless just like a child.) And may revert back to their known survival tactics of the child victim.
A predator will physically attack a victim but a predator will also emotionally attack the victim and everyone else. Emotional attacks are very deceptive in nature and are done in full sight of everyone. It is the cooing, sweetness, complementary, smiling, showing great concern for others, or paying oh so special attention to others or to a certain person.
Predators display such warmth and speak loving kindness to their victim(s). And will display enthusiastic interest in their victim’s job, hobbies, field of study, or any interest of the victim; the predator will also be enthralled with the same thing(s).
In short, CSA can leave victims vulnerable to what could best be seen as adult sexual predation. Adult sexual predation, as explained above, and adult grooming serve the exact same purpose as child molestation - power and control over a victim. Adults who victimize other adults seek to entangle them in relationships which should never be though of as anything but an extension of CSA dynamics into adulthood.
Child sexual abuse can lead to many issues with trust, trustworthiness, and revictimization not just as children or teens, but also as adults. These detrimental effects are yet another in a string of reasons why child sexual abuse must be countered.
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Deborah King - incest survivors need to speak up to begin healing
The recent revelation by Mackenzie King of incest by her father on the Oprah show led to a second Oprah show about incest. Deborah King, a Huffington Post columnist, shares her story of sexual abuse by her father between 2 and 13 and states that healing is possible when survivors tell their stories. An excerpt is below.
When a victim refuses to be silenced, speaking up can heal much of the damage from the abuse. Until then, they often continue to deal with substance abuse, ill-health, promiscuity, depression, anxiety, and a host of other emotional and physical problems. Being able to speak your truth is an important part of the healing process from any trauma--and incest is a traumatic event, whether it's a one-time rape or an ongoing 30-year "relationship."
Deborah King is the Huffington Post's health and wellness columnist.
When a victim refuses to be silenced, speaking up can heal much of the damage from the abuse. Until then, they often continue to deal with substance abuse, ill-health, promiscuity, depression, anxiety, and a host of other emotional and physical problems. Being able to speak your truth is an important part of the healing process from any trauma--and incest is a traumatic event, whether it's a one-time rape or an ongoing 30-year "relationship."
Deborah King is the Huffington Post's health and wellness columnist.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Murphy to Goldberg - rape is rape!
Wendy Murphy's commentaries on victim's rights always leave you thinking. Even though this topic has been flogged to death in the last 2 1/2 weeks, it is interesting (and enlightening) to hear Murphy's opinion on the Roman Polanski case.
Saturday, October 3, 2009
If Polanski's assault of a 13 year old girl isn't "rape-rape," then what is?
A week ago today, celebrated director Roman Polanski was arrested by Swiss authorities for fleeing the United States after his conviction on the rape of a 13 year old girl after drugging and luring her to his friend Jack Nicholson's house for a photo shoot. Many opinions have been given in the week since his capture. Some of these opinions are found here, here, here, and here.
I write about this here because when drugging and forcing oneself on another is not seen as true rape, then other rapes, those which don't involve drugs, force, or minors, are more easily dismissed and minimized. By minimizing Roman Polanski's crime, people also minimize date and partner rapes against adult victims, because those rapes involve less coercion and older victims then the Polanski rape.
What is noticeable that only a few celebrities have publicly came out and said that what Polanski did to Samatha Geimer is rape. Not statutory rape, but, in Whoopi Goldberg's term, "rape-rape." These few celebrities include Chris Rock and Kirstie Alley. Most Hollywood celebrities are firmly standing behind their man.
One thing overlooked by most commentators who get that what Polanski did was a crime is that drugging and sodomizing anyone is what Whoopi Goldberg would call "real rape." Being 13 aggravates the crime, but adult status does not mitigate it. Even if Samantha Geimer was the same age as Polanski, and the director drugged then had sex with her, it would still be rape. The elements of the rape were the drugging, then forcing himself on the victim, not the victim's age. Age comes into play when drugs, force, or formal fiduciary positions are not used to trap and violate the victim.
If people can "debate" whether a drugged 13 year old girl in a powerful Hollywood personality's sexual lair was really raped, then they would have no problem at all dismissing a grown woman's claims that a director forced herself on her. If people aren't willing to see that status influences sexual coercion (whether non violent or violent), then they are certainly willing to ignore the rapes which occur between people in the same "peer" groups, whether date rape on campus, partner rape, or spousal rape.
If one person is willing to manipulate, coerce, or force sex from another, you have a victim and a perpetrator, not "lovers." The rapist (or sexual coercer) creates power difference in addition to whatever power differentials existed when he rapes his victim. All sexual or other advances before the rape in cases of date rape or "partner" rape are grooming, designed to let the victim's guard down before the attack.
When rape in such a clear case as Polanski's is minimized, then efforts into sexual assault prevention in other areas are also compromized. After all, say the rape apologists, if a 43 year old man with a drugged 13 year old girl isn't really rape, then the 25 year old man who had sex with his sleeping 25 year old "partner" definitely did not violate her.
Society has a long way to go to change these attitudes. The events of last week certaingly nailed that.
I write about this here because when drugging and forcing oneself on another is not seen as true rape, then other rapes, those which don't involve drugs, force, or minors, are more easily dismissed and minimized. By minimizing Roman Polanski's crime, people also minimize date and partner rapes against adult victims, because those rapes involve less coercion and older victims then the Polanski rape.
What is noticeable that only a few celebrities have publicly came out and said that what Polanski did to Samatha Geimer is rape. Not statutory rape, but, in Whoopi Goldberg's term, "rape-rape." These few celebrities include Chris Rock and Kirstie Alley. Most Hollywood celebrities are firmly standing behind their man.
One thing overlooked by most commentators who get that what Polanski did was a crime is that drugging and sodomizing anyone is what Whoopi Goldberg would call "real rape." Being 13 aggravates the crime, but adult status does not mitigate it. Even if Samantha Geimer was the same age as Polanski, and the director drugged then had sex with her, it would still be rape. The elements of the rape were the drugging, then forcing himself on the victim, not the victim's age. Age comes into play when drugs, force, or formal fiduciary positions are not used to trap and violate the victim.
If people can "debate" whether a drugged 13 year old girl in a powerful Hollywood personality's sexual lair was really raped, then they would have no problem at all dismissing a grown woman's claims that a director forced herself on her. If people aren't willing to see that status influences sexual coercion (whether non violent or violent), then they are certainly willing to ignore the rapes which occur between people in the same "peer" groups, whether date rape on campus, partner rape, or spousal rape.
If one person is willing to manipulate, coerce, or force sex from another, you have a victim and a perpetrator, not "lovers." The rapist (or sexual coercer) creates power difference in addition to whatever power differentials existed when he rapes his victim. All sexual or other advances before the rape in cases of date rape or "partner" rape are grooming, designed to let the victim's guard down before the attack.
When rape in such a clear case as Polanski's is minimized, then efforts into sexual assault prevention in other areas are also compromized. After all, say the rape apologists, if a 43 year old man with a drugged 13 year old girl isn't really rape, then the 25 year old man who had sex with his sleeping 25 year old "partner" definitely did not violate her.
Society has a long way to go to change these attitudes. The events of last week certaingly nailed that.
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Susan Estrich - No Means What?
Creators Syndicate – Every once in a while, and sometimes more often than that, someone sends me a clipping that makes me check the date twice and recheck the lines that look back at me in the mirror, only to realize I have been reading the same stories and writing about them for more than 20 years. Exactly the same. How can that be?
This one comes from Houston, courtesy of Lisa Falkenberg of the Houston Chronicle, who wrote the story, and a new group called CounterQuo (as in not the status quo) that is trying to make sure people see it. It's about a teenage girl who went to a club last summer with a friend. She met a man who drove her and her friend into a wooded area and then raped her while her friend ran for help.
The victim, now a college student, testified that she tried to resist her attacker, repeatedly hitting him in the face, but he brushed it away, threatened to put her "in the bayou" and told her he had killed five people and would kill her.
The jury convicted.
The judge wondered why she was on top.
No, he didn't just wonder, he actually asked her in the sentencing phase since the defense had wisely decided to have the judge determine his sentence and not the jury.
"Sending an innocent man to prison in the name of law and order is the greatest injustice this society can do," the judge said in explaining his approach to sentencing a man who had just been convicted of violent rape.
According to Falkenberg, "What shocked the victim most was when the judge questioned whether she was really raped since he found it 'odd' that was she was on top of Escobar during the assault."
I wrote a book called "Real Rape" in 1986. Its argument should be obsolete. It isn't. This case could have been the first chapter, if it hadn't been about all the times I had to convince people that I really was raped by a man who threatened to kill me with an ice pick. At least no judge ever asked me the question.
I know there are smart judges and stupid judges, just like there are smart and stupid versions of everything else in life, even things that often matter more, like doctors and politicians.
Still.
"I know these are tough questions, and I don't like to have to ask them," the judge said, according to the transcript Hildebrand reviewed. "It's just you understand that most rapes take place with the man on top so he has complete control of the female."
When the prosecutor objected to the question, the judge overruled him, saying he was allowed to consider the circumstances of the offense in determining the sentence.
The circumstances of the offense are whether she is on top? Of a man she believes has a gun, who has threatened to kill her and told her that he has killed before? As she is trying to stay alive while her friend races to get help?
The judge later acknowledged in a legal blog that he should have expressed his concerns in private. Actually, his concerns were stupid and offensive and would have been so in private, as well. The case is on appeal, so he is refusing to say anything more.
But here's the punch line: The guy didn't get away with it. After listening to the 911 tape of the screaming girls "for the sixth time," the judge sent him away for 25 years. He even said he was convinced, the judge I mean, that "no means no." That's why the rapist is appealing. That's why I'm not using the judge's name.
Some things have changed. This time, anyway, the rapist got punished by the system. Sadly, so did the victim. Again. Still.
To find out more about Susan Estrich and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.
This one comes from Houston, courtesy of Lisa Falkenberg of the Houston Chronicle, who wrote the story, and a new group called CounterQuo (as in not the status quo) that is trying to make sure people see it. It's about a teenage girl who went to a club last summer with a friend. She met a man who drove her and her friend into a wooded area and then raped her while her friend ran for help.
The victim, now a college student, testified that she tried to resist her attacker, repeatedly hitting him in the face, but he brushed it away, threatened to put her "in the bayou" and told her he had killed five people and would kill her.
The jury convicted.
The judge wondered why she was on top.
No, he didn't just wonder, he actually asked her in the sentencing phase since the defense had wisely decided to have the judge determine his sentence and not the jury.
"Sending an innocent man to prison in the name of law and order is the greatest injustice this society can do," the judge said in explaining his approach to sentencing a man who had just been convicted of violent rape.
According to Falkenberg, "What shocked the victim most was when the judge questioned whether she was really raped since he found it 'odd' that was she was on top of Escobar during the assault."
I wrote a book called "Real Rape" in 1986. Its argument should be obsolete. It isn't. This case could have been the first chapter, if it hadn't been about all the times I had to convince people that I really was raped by a man who threatened to kill me with an ice pick. At least no judge ever asked me the question.
I know there are smart judges and stupid judges, just like there are smart and stupid versions of everything else in life, even things that often matter more, like doctors and politicians.
Still.
"I know these are tough questions, and I don't like to have to ask them," the judge said, according to the transcript Hildebrand reviewed. "It's just you understand that most rapes take place with the man on top so he has complete control of the female."
When the prosecutor objected to the question, the judge overruled him, saying he was allowed to consider the circumstances of the offense in determining the sentence.
The circumstances of the offense are whether she is on top? Of a man she believes has a gun, who has threatened to kill her and told her that he has killed before? As she is trying to stay alive while her friend races to get help?
The judge later acknowledged in a legal blog that he should have expressed his concerns in private. Actually, his concerns were stupid and offensive and would have been so in private, as well. The case is on appeal, so he is refusing to say anything more.
But here's the punch line: The guy didn't get away with it. After listening to the 911 tape of the screaming girls "for the sixth time," the judge sent him away for 25 years. He even said he was convinced, the judge I mean, that "no means no." That's why the rapist is appealing. That's why I'm not using the judge's name.
Some things have changed. This time, anyway, the rapist got punished by the system. Sadly, so did the victim. Again. Still.
To find out more about Susan Estrich and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.
Sunday, April 12, 2009
Accountability in adult relationships may stop some violence
There is not much accountability when it comes to relationships between over 18s. Parental, familial, or friend's involvement in a budding DV situation can increase accountability.
Parents, do you know what's at stake when a predator gets access to your grown daughter's (or in some cases son's) life? None other that your child's sanity or life. It's not just minors who have vulnerabilities to predators - anyone can be a victim if they are in the wrong place with the wrong feelings towards the wrong person at the wrong time.
You, as a parent, have a track record. It may include disappointments, failures, and promises broken, but the basic parent/grown child relationship is there. Protecting your child is still a moral imperative even though it is no longer a legal imperative.
Abusers also have a track record. They might not be as obvious as a criminal history which includes rape, domestic violence or assault, but more subtle violations.
Parents, do you know what's at stake when a predator gets access to your grown daughter's (or in some cases son's) life? None other that your child's sanity or life. It's not just minors who have vulnerabilities to predators - anyone can be a victim if they are in the wrong place with the wrong feelings towards the wrong person at the wrong time.
You, as a parent, have a track record. It may include disappointments, failures, and promises broken, but the basic parent/grown child relationship is there. Protecting your child is still a moral imperative even though it is no longer a legal imperative.
Abusers also have a track record. They might not be as obvious as a criminal history which includes rape, domestic violence or assault, but more subtle violations.
If you are a parent, other relative, friend, or grown child, don't be afraid to intervene at the first sign of trouble. If someone is about to abuse your loved one, they have already lied to them about love. Love doesn't hurt, and hurt is not love. Adult status of the victim doesn't (and shouldn't matter) because predators target all age groups.
A predator who targets adults (whether a date rapist, domestic abuser, or other type) means to do the same type of damage to your grown child as a pedophile or hebephile does to minor kids. Yous should do the same types of protecting of your grown kids as you would if they were minors.
Sunday, February 8, 2009
Not Love - Abuse ; Not Caring - Control Not Consent - Coercion
Love isn't abuse and control. Someone who loves does not beat, rape, dominate, or humiliate. The person who is raping, beating, or hurting his "partner" is doing so to control and degrade. Any professions of love were false, designed to keep the victim's guard down so the abuse will be more of a surprise.
Unfortunately, attitudes towards women also help perpetuate abuse. When a 30 year old goes with a 15 year old, that's considered sexual abuse. Unfortunately, the adult status of victims makes it hard for sexual (or other sorts of abuse) to be recognized outside of formal authority. Many people who would support a 15 year old pressured into sex with a 30 year old blame the victim once she becomes adult.
Adulthood does not protect against victimization. Rape, sexual assault, and domestic violence can occur at any age. There are people who prey on adults just the same as people who prey on kids. In most cases, these folks are NOT strangers, but people who create relationships for the purpose of victimization.
Unfortunately, about one in eight marriages can be described as sexually abusive. Rape does not have to involve physical force.
There can be no such thing as true consent when one seeks to gain sexual power over the other. There can be no such thing as consent when two people have vastly different capacities for vulnerability, knowledge, or social standing. In these cases, there can only be legal consent, but abusers always have power over their victims.
There is only one solution to such a problem - getting out. Unfortunately, due to Stockholm Syndrome, where a victim still has feelings for their perpetrator, this is hard. But with the help of existing family and friends, it is possible.
Unfortunately, attitudes towards women also help perpetuate abuse. When a 30 year old goes with a 15 year old, that's considered sexual abuse. Unfortunately, the adult status of victims makes it hard for sexual (or other sorts of abuse) to be recognized outside of formal authority. Many people who would support a 15 year old pressured into sex with a 30 year old blame the victim once she becomes adult.
Adulthood does not protect against victimization. Rape, sexual assault, and domestic violence can occur at any age. There are people who prey on adults just the same as people who prey on kids. In most cases, these folks are NOT strangers, but people who create relationships for the purpose of victimization.
Unfortunately, about one in eight marriages can be described as sexually abusive. Rape does not have to involve physical force.
There can be no such thing as true consent when one seeks to gain sexual power over the other. There can be no such thing as consent when two people have vastly different capacities for vulnerability, knowledge, or social standing. In these cases, there can only be legal consent, but abusers always have power over their victims.
There is only one solution to such a problem - getting out. Unfortunately, due to Stockholm Syndrome, where a victim still has feelings for their perpetrator, this is hard. But with the help of existing family and friends, it is possible.
Sunday, February 1, 2009
Points to consider about abuse
Brian's Opinion
When stats show that one out of every 8 married women suffer sexual abuse, and one out of every 4 women suffer domestic abuse, it's time to radically rethink approaches to thinking about domestic abuse and violence. Some thought I've came up with are found below.
2) Unlike educator sexual abuse or CSA prevention, parents don't have a primary duty to protect their kids once they are grown. It becomes a secondary duty – but still a duty. When abuse at any age comes up, protection and support of their grown child should be the primary concern. This is why parental screening of all dates is recommended, even after 18.
In the case that an adult is being victimized, parents can still see changes in their grown child's personality both before and after the DV, rape, or sociopathic seduction. The grown child, in too many cases, will believe that there are in "love" with their abuser. Intimate partner sexual abuse is simply the culmination of same age or adult grooming.
3) In the same way that a predisposed molester can target 12 year old girls, the husband or "boyfriend" who rapes his target uses grooming techniques to isolate his victim, then strike. Since marriage or an exclusive relationship is one on one, then the marriage/relationship itself becomes the means of isolation of a victim from helpful family members/friends - women's advocates. Intimate "partner" sexual abuse is misnamed because partners imply parity, and in any case of abuse, the abuser always has power over their victim. Since there is no parity, there can be no partnership, and since there is deception, there can not be true intimacy.
Without the intimacy and partnership, and with power and control motives, there is just sexual abuse. Having said this, a more accurate characterization or "partner" sexual abuse would be adult grooming or adult sexual abuse.
4) I believe that laws and judges should take into account the victim's sexual abuse history in determining punishment. This is different from taking into account a victim's sexual history in recognizing that adult victims of DV or rape have more of a likelihood of a history of CSA or other child abuse – and are more likely to be assaulted in some form in the future.
Just like laws punish sex offenders greater if their victim was a child, perhaps laws should punish rapists and molesters of adults harsher if their current victim had been victimized before and much harsher if that victimization was CSA. Laws which take into account power, not just authority differences, should be enacted, and judges should take into account power differences when sentencing defendants.
In the late 90's – early 2000s, sex with inmates and therapy patients was criminalized. Sex with HS students 18 and over is slowly being criminalized. There is also a movement to criminalize pastor/ adult parishioner sex. These laws take into account authority, but there are other sexual coercers/abusers that have no authority, but create power over victims. Because they are not in formal positions of authority, their sexual abuse won't be recognized as such.
5) In an abusive relationship, abusers and victims are never peers or partners. Partners mean equality or parity between the two involved in a relationship. Any sort of abuser, even if not in a position of authority, never has equality with their victim because abuse is about power and control over others. In the case of adult abuse, the power and control dynamic is missed due to the adult status of the victim, in too many cases.
6) Adult status should not matter when victims over 18 are targeted. Victims are (usually) still someone's child, or in some cases, parent. There are many different ways that sexual predators gain power over their victims. Age and minor status is only one way to overpower a victim. Other ways include using professional or custodial status to get a woman (or man) to "consent" to sex or other acts under duress. Sociopathic seduction, the grooming of an adult victim for sexual abuse, is a 3rd way, one which doesn't involve minors or authority.
7) The loved ones of victims should be given a formal voice within the criminal justice system before their victimized family members or friends are hurt or killed. When a parent protects their grown kids from violence, they are simply taking their role of protector of their child (and minor grandchildren, if applicable) seriously. A lot of parental interventions fail because they have limited options when over 18 children are victimized. If there was a formal way for parents to intervene at the first physical signs of abuse, it could be a great tool in combating domestic violence and sexually abusive "relationships." However, if such actions are never comtemplated, then how could anyone know if such a course will work?
Monday, January 19, 2009
Korean courts recognize marital rape is a crime
A husband or a wife can no longer go unpunished for coercing his or her spouse into sexual relations. In fact, Korean society has so far tolerated forced sex in married life. But a local court made a landmark ruling Friday, recognizing marital rape as a crime for the first time here. The ruling is unquestionably designed to better protect spousal right to have sex or not.
The Busan District Court convicted a 42-year-old man of raping his 25-year-old Filipino wife, sentencing him to a suspended 30-month prison term. The husband, identified as Lee, said he will appeal to a higher court, claiming that his wife had tenaciously refused to have sex with him. It remains to be seen whether his appeal will be accepted or not.
In 1970, The Supreme Court overruled a guilty verdict in a similar rape case.The ruling on spousal rape also draws special attention from foreign wives mostly from China and Southeast Asian countries, many of whom have to endure domestic violence and other rights abuses from their husbands. The decision reflects this dire situation and growing calls for the better protection of rights of foreign spouses at multicultural households. It seems that the court has also given much consideration to the changing times in this globalized society.
In many Western countries such as the United States, Britain, Germany and France, marital rape constitutes a crime. The United Nations said in 2006 that marital rape is a prosecutable offense in over 104 countries. But the ruling is expected to touch off a heated debate as Korean society is still divided over this issue. Thus, it is necessary for the nation to build a consensus on spousal rape.The focal point is a right to sexual self-determination.
The court decision indicated that this right should be respected among married couples so that a husband or a wife can have sex with his or her spouse at his or her own will. In other words, married couples cannot coerce their partners into sexual intercourse against their will.
We have to bear in mind the district court's position that marital rape is against a constitutional right to lead decent life and pursue happiness as it damages a spouse's personality and human dignity. In this regard, we hope that the decision will put an end to spousal sexual violence and bring a significant change to the male-dominant patriarchal family system. We also expect that the court action will serve as an opportunity to better protect human rights of foreign wives who have come here to realize their Korean dream.
The Busan District Court convicted a 42-year-old man of raping his 25-year-old Filipino wife, sentencing him to a suspended 30-month prison term. The husband, identified as Lee, said he will appeal to a higher court, claiming that his wife had tenaciously refused to have sex with him. It remains to be seen whether his appeal will be accepted or not.
In 1970, The Supreme Court overruled a guilty verdict in a similar rape case.The ruling on spousal rape also draws special attention from foreign wives mostly from China and Southeast Asian countries, many of whom have to endure domestic violence and other rights abuses from their husbands. The decision reflects this dire situation and growing calls for the better protection of rights of foreign spouses at multicultural households. It seems that the court has also given much consideration to the changing times in this globalized society.
In many Western countries such as the United States, Britain, Germany and France, marital rape constitutes a crime. The United Nations said in 2006 that marital rape is a prosecutable offense in over 104 countries. But the ruling is expected to touch off a heated debate as Korean society is still divided over this issue. Thus, it is necessary for the nation to build a consensus on spousal rape.The focal point is a right to sexual self-determination.
The court decision indicated that this right should be respected among married couples so that a husband or a wife can have sex with his or her spouse at his or her own will. In other words, married couples cannot coerce their partners into sexual intercourse against their will.
We have to bear in mind the district court's position that marital rape is against a constitutional right to lead decent life and pursue happiness as it damages a spouse's personality and human dignity. In this regard, we hope that the decision will put an end to spousal sexual violence and bring a significant change to the male-dominant patriarchal family system. We also expect that the court action will serve as an opportunity to better protect human rights of foreign wives who have come here to realize their Korean dream.
Saturday, December 27, 2008
Marianne Mollmann - Biden and Clinton should champion rape victims' rights
This summary is not available. Please
click here to view the post.
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Brian's Rant - Kudos to father trying to protect daughter from Drew Peterson
Brian's Rant The last two times Drew Peterson married, his wives turned up missing or murdered. Someone’s grown daughter, sister, and friend was murdered, and all the hopes, dreams, and shared experiences they has with Stacy and Kathy came to a deadly end.
This father’s concern for his daughter is a pleasant break from situations where women have been isolated and targeted by adult sexual predators and abusive manipulative “partners.”
Parents have no legal authority after ages 18 or 21, but that does not mean the threat to safety ends. A parent’s role as protector lasts through life. Their sense of duty to their children does not diminish if they haven’t abdicated their moral authority or parental role.
Accountability needs to be reestablished in relationships before a restraining order or criminal charges are filed. Parental or other family involvement at the first sign of trouble would be a way to establish accountability before the situation escalates into criminal activity.
Abusive “partners” can be seen as someone who grooms a same (or similar age) partner into physical, emotional, or sexual abuse. Murder would be the extreme expression of this. It is a fact that parental involvement in a minor’s life protects against sexual (and other abuse). When parents step into dangerous situations involving their grown kids, they are simply continuing the concern for their kids they had for the 1st 18 (or 21) years of their life.
Assuming the allegations involving Drew’s last two wives are founded, Peterson is a danger to younger twentysomething women in the same manner as a pedophile is a danger to 10 year olds. The danger isn’t expressed the same way with the wife killer and the molester, but they have a specific grooming method, specific power and control motives for their crimes, and destroy lives equally as effectively. A parent can choose to monitor the situation more closely, and this is what Mr. Raines appears to be doing.
Parents who stand back and sit idly by when sociopaths, sexual predators, or other abusers target their grown kids aren’t just abdicating their parental responsibility, but also an abdicating their common sense. Why in the hell would you do nothing when you see your grown child being brainwashed into believing that her abuser has her interest at heart?
This is what an abuser or other predator wants - lack of family support. Your protective role does not end at age 18. It is a big mistake to assume that children over 18 have the knowledge to protect against all threats at all times. They need someone on their side to protect against subtle tactics of abusive “partners” who have insinuated them into their lives.
If parental involvement in minor children’s lives protect against sexual predators, why can’t parental involvement in their grown child’s lives protect against abusive “partners?” It’s about the tension between the parents’ desire to protect their grown child and the desire to be on an adult footing by the grown offspring. The live and let live attitude is appropriate when there is no abuse of any type. If there is any risk of abuse, parents need to be parents again.
Some things don’t change. Abuse is abuse, and the difference between a rapist of women and a molester of 12 year old girls is the victims’ age ranges. Parents can intervene in DV situations, but too many times, they choose not to until it’s too late, because they focus on autonomy, but forget the safety, if not life, of their grown kids are at stake.
The difference in these perp’s mentalities are only the method of abuse, the way they pick targets, and the age range of a victim.
If there is a consequence of interfering in a grown child’s life, the consequence of a dead woman is much, much more serious that interfering in a grown child’s abusive relationship. Parents will live with the knowledge and shame that they could not have done more for their daughter before her abusive boyfriend/husband took her life.
If you see your daughter (or son with bruises) or a personality changed for the worse, it’s time to say “Get away from my child! (or sister, or friend)”. People with personality disorders and a lack of morals are everywhere, and as I’ve been saying, and not all of them target minors.
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Dan Savage - 28 year old survivor pressured into rape roleplay by "boyfriend"
Dear Dan: I am a 28-year-old woman who has been with my boyfriend for two years. I would call it a stable, fulfilling, and kinky relationship. I consider myself GGG, and every time my boyfriend has brought up a kink or variation, I've been willing to try it. Some things became a permanent part in our play; others have gone into the "tried that, didn't like it" pile without any problems.
Recently, though, there has been a problem. Eight years ago, I was raped. I have had counseling, but I am still sometimes troubled by nightmares and flashbacks. My boyfriend knows this. Lately, though, he has expressed a desire to explore rape scenarios. His ideal setup would be to obtain my consent in advance, then, sometime when the mood struck him, he would "attack" and take me, and I couldn't say no or use a safe word. Once the "rape" started, he could do whatever he wanted, and I would not be able to stop it.
I don't think I can do this, not without sending me into flashbacks. I told him that, and as this is the only time I have flat-out refused to even try one of his ideas, I hoped that would be the end of it. It hasn't been.
He has been pressing it more and more, and there have been times when I've had to leave the apartment, I've felt so threatened. I've told him that if he keeps pressuring me like this, I will end the relationship. He's told me that by threatening to leave him, I'm manipulating him, and that I have no regard for his needs. But I just can't let him rape me, even in play. Am I really being out of line for not giving in to him on this issue and telling him that continued pressure for this would end our relationship?
Needs Her Boundaries
Dump the motherfucker already. Someone who has experienced a shattering sexual trauma—rape, abuse, a world-class betrayal—has to make a good-faith effort to put the pieces back together again before entering into a new sexual and/or romantic relationship. We all have a right to expect emotional support from our partners, but our partners have a right to expect that we will be able to meet their reasonable sexual needs.
You did all the right things after you were raped, NHB. You got counseling, you got yourself together, and you entered this new relationship ready to be sexual and more than capable of meeting your partner's reasonable sexual needs. You are, however, suffering from some common after-effects of sexual trauma—nightmares, flashbacks—that you do not have to apologize for and that he has to be considerate of.
And considering your history—and considering that your boyfriend knew about your history going into this relationship—ruling out rape play is perfectly reasonable on your part and should have been expected on his. Had this conflict ended with your refusal—even if it elicited a little sulking and douchebaggery on your boyfriend's part—I wouldn't be telling you to DTMFA. This rises to the level of DTMFA for two reasons.
First, no safe word? Unreasonable. No way for you to call a stop to it? What if he decides to rape you when you have the flu? Or when your parents are in the next room? What if your fucking appendix bursts in the middle of this "scene"?
While some rape victims—excuse me: survivors—develop rape fantasies, those fantasies are paradoxically about control; the "victim" in a fantasy rape scenario gets to pick her "rapist," decides the hour and circumstances, and can call a halt to it at any time. A rape role-play scenario you can't stop when you decide you're done isn't just a rape role-play scenario. It's potentially rape. Just say no.
Second, the pressure. Stitch together all the red flags in China and you won't have one as large the one your boyfriend has raised. He's pressuring you to consent to sex that he knows is highly likely to leave you feeling traumatized. His unwillingness to drop this, NHB, suggests a desire on his part to traumatize you for real, not for pretend. And if you're already leaving the house because you feel unsafe, I would suggest that he's already succeeded in traumatizing you.
You thought this was "a stable, fulfilling, and kinky relationship," NHB. You were mistaken. DTMFA.
Recently, though, there has been a problem. Eight years ago, I was raped. I have had counseling, but I am still sometimes troubled by nightmares and flashbacks. My boyfriend knows this. Lately, though, he has expressed a desire to explore rape scenarios. His ideal setup would be to obtain my consent in advance, then, sometime when the mood struck him, he would "attack" and take me, and I couldn't say no or use a safe word. Once the "rape" started, he could do whatever he wanted, and I would not be able to stop it.
I don't think I can do this, not without sending me into flashbacks. I told him that, and as this is the only time I have flat-out refused to even try one of his ideas, I hoped that would be the end of it. It hasn't been.
He has been pressing it more and more, and there have been times when I've had to leave the apartment, I've felt so threatened. I've told him that if he keeps pressuring me like this, I will end the relationship. He's told me that by threatening to leave him, I'm manipulating him, and that I have no regard for his needs. But I just can't let him rape me, even in play. Am I really being out of line for not giving in to him on this issue and telling him that continued pressure for this would end our relationship?
Needs Her Boundaries
Dump the motherfucker already. Someone who has experienced a shattering sexual trauma—rape, abuse, a world-class betrayal—has to make a good-faith effort to put the pieces back together again before entering into a new sexual and/or romantic relationship. We all have a right to expect emotional support from our partners, but our partners have a right to expect that we will be able to meet their reasonable sexual needs.
You did all the right things after you were raped, NHB. You got counseling, you got yourself together, and you entered this new relationship ready to be sexual and more than capable of meeting your partner's reasonable sexual needs. You are, however, suffering from some common after-effects of sexual trauma—nightmares, flashbacks—that you do not have to apologize for and that he has to be considerate of.
And considering your history—and considering that your boyfriend knew about your history going into this relationship—ruling out rape play is perfectly reasonable on your part and should have been expected on his. Had this conflict ended with your refusal—even if it elicited a little sulking and douchebaggery on your boyfriend's part—I wouldn't be telling you to DTMFA. This rises to the level of DTMFA for two reasons.
First, no safe word? Unreasonable. No way for you to call a stop to it? What if he decides to rape you when you have the flu? Or when your parents are in the next room? What if your fucking appendix bursts in the middle of this "scene"?
While some rape victims—excuse me: survivors—develop rape fantasies, those fantasies are paradoxically about control; the "victim" in a fantasy rape scenario gets to pick her "rapist," decides the hour and circumstances, and can call a halt to it at any time. A rape role-play scenario you can't stop when you decide you're done isn't just a rape role-play scenario. It's potentially rape. Just say no.
Second, the pressure. Stitch together all the red flags in China and you won't have one as large the one your boyfriend has raised. He's pressuring you to consent to sex that he knows is highly likely to leave you feeling traumatized. His unwillingness to drop this, NHB, suggests a desire on his part to traumatize you for real, not for pretend. And if you're already leaving the house because you feel unsafe, I would suggest that he's already succeeded in traumatizing you.
You thought this was "a stable, fulfilling, and kinky relationship," NHB. You were mistaken. DTMFA.
Sunday, November 16, 2008
Brian's Rant - what if sex crimes and DV against adults were taken as seriously as those against minors?
Brian's Rant
I’m thinking about what laws would have to do and accomplish if domestic violence and sex crimes against adults was treated like child sexual abuse.
It would mean that sex crimes as defined would be broadened and expanded to include grooming of not only kids, but also adults for sexual assault. It would mean that consent would be negated not just when it comes to minor status, but also under circumstances where two adults have different power (not just teachers, prison guards, and mental health professionals).
Sexual harassment could lead to criminal charges, not civil charges, and CSA victims may actually stay a protected class after 18 or 21 (due to statistics which state child molestation leads to a much higher risk of rape and other adult sexual victimization). Professional-client sex would be criminalized, as well as situations where repeat rapists have used “dating” to go after women (not just kids).
If DV was treated as seriously as CSA, parents would be able to file restraining orders on behalf of their grown kids under certain circumstances, regardless of the age of the grown child, and regardless of whether the abuser is a boyfriend, husband, or other person. A parent with a 32 year old child who has been married for 4 years and known her partner for 8 years has still known their child 4 times as long as the husband. Nothing can replace a bond between a parent and a child, but all other relationships can be abused.
These laws would recognize that “date” rape, maritial rape, and “boyfriend” rape occurs when sexual predators groom adult victims into a relationship when in reality, that “partner” is looking to abuse a woman in the same way pedophiles abuse 10 year olds. It would recognize the sexual relationship as a tool for the ASP (adult sexual predator) to dissolve the woman’s boundaries so he could rape her.
Also, DV could be prosecuted as a form of child abuse when the woman’s kids have to see their father beating their mother. I say child abuse because it’s a form of emotional abuse for kids to see violence. Studies show that kids who grow up with violence in their households are more likely to be involved with abuse as adults.
One thing that I do not get is why can’t courts order people who attack women (whether sexually or non-sexually) be barred from having contact with women as a group in the same way that RSO’s are often barred from contact with kids? In some cases, it would make sense for DV abusers and sex offenders who prey on adults not to have contact with that group of adults in the same way pedophiles can be barred from contact with minors.
I’m thinking about what laws would have to do and accomplish if domestic violence and sex crimes against adults was treated like child sexual abuse.
It would mean that sex crimes as defined would be broadened and expanded to include grooming of not only kids, but also adults for sexual assault. It would mean that consent would be negated not just when it comes to minor status, but also under circumstances where two adults have different power (not just teachers, prison guards, and mental health professionals).
Sexual harassment could lead to criminal charges, not civil charges, and CSA victims may actually stay a protected class after 18 or 21 (due to statistics which state child molestation leads to a much higher risk of rape and other adult sexual victimization). Professional-client sex would be criminalized, as well as situations where repeat rapists have used “dating” to go after women (not just kids).
If DV was treated as seriously as CSA, parents would be able to file restraining orders on behalf of their grown kids under certain circumstances, regardless of the age of the grown child, and regardless of whether the abuser is a boyfriend, husband, or other person. A parent with a 32 year old child who has been married for 4 years and known her partner for 8 years has still known their child 4 times as long as the husband. Nothing can replace a bond between a parent and a child, but all other relationships can be abused.
These laws would recognize that “date” rape, maritial rape, and “boyfriend” rape occurs when sexual predators groom adult victims into a relationship when in reality, that “partner” is looking to abuse a woman in the same way pedophiles abuse 10 year olds. It would recognize the sexual relationship as a tool for the ASP (adult sexual predator) to dissolve the woman’s boundaries so he could rape her.
Also, DV could be prosecuted as a form of child abuse when the woman’s kids have to see their father beating their mother. I say child abuse because it’s a form of emotional abuse for kids to see violence. Studies show that kids who grow up with violence in their households are more likely to be involved with abuse as adults.
One thing that I do not get is why can’t courts order people who attack women (whether sexually or non-sexually) be barred from having contact with women as a group in the same way that RSO’s are often barred from contact with kids? In some cases, it would make sense for DV abusers and sex offenders who prey on adults not to have contact with that group of adults in the same way pedophiles can be barred from contact with minors.
Saturday, October 25, 2008
From Lovefraud - predators seek partners who seek to please
In the Thursday, October 23rd, edition of the Lovefraud blog, Steve Becker, LCSW, writes about how predatory "partners" seek compliant victims.
It is no accident that narcissistic and sociopathic personalities will seek, and often successfully attract, partners who have their own issue: a tendency to dread the idea of disappointing or displeasing them.
This is admittedly a generality, but it’s a pattern I’ve observed in my clinical experience, and it makes sense. The exploiter, who regards others as existing principally to satisfy his or her wants on a continual basis, must by definition find in a mate someone who is highly motivated—and especially, highly afraid not—to satisfy him or her.
Thus one often finds the pairing of an exploiter complemented by a partner who is prone, perhaps compulsively, to look inward to himself or herself as the cause of the exploiter’s dissatisfaction.
Clinically the goal is to encourage the over-accountable, overresponsible partner to examine this aspect of himself or herself. This is necessary given the fair assumption that sociopaths and narcissists are unlikely to genuinely reform their characteristically manipulative, selfish ways.
I’m often surprised in my work by the tenacious investment exploited partners make in solving the needs and complaints of their self-centered mates. Of course they’ll never succeed, but as long as they continue owning the exploiter’s blame for the latters’ discontent, they can keep trying, keep striving to be a better mate—to become, finally, the good-enough mate the exploiter has claimed to deserve all along.
Let us emphasize the futility of this scenario—the exploiter really doesn’t want a satisfying or, for that matter, even a perfect, partner; rather what he or she wants is a partner who, in his or her insecurity, will continue to accept on some level blame for the exploiter’s unending, habitual exploitation.
The exploiter, in other words, is looking much less for the perfect partner than the perfect scapegoat. For this reason the sociopath and many narcissists will recruit these qualities in a partner—qualities, for instance, of high self-doubt, high guilt, high fear of incurring others’ wrath or displeasure, and a strong tendency to self-blame.
Moreover individuals possessing these qualities will tend to be drawn to individuals who seem to be their counterpart in many ways—for instance confident, self-assured, powerful-seeming, unself-doubting, and perhaps unself-reflective. They may harbor the fantasy that the latters’ seeming strength and confidently entitled attitudes may prove a salutary complement to their self-questioning, self-doubting natures.
And this is certainly possible—this complementarity can theoretically work—in situations uncomplicated by sociopathy or narcissistic personality.
But when the more confident partner is a sociopath, or narcissist, this complementarity of personalities becomes a set-up. The less confident partner, whose tendency is to self-destructively accept the exploiter’s blame for the latter’s rages, discontent, abuse and general misery, becomes the perfect foil, the perfect dupe, for the sociopathic or narcissistic partner, who has it made, so to speak.
Again and again I encounter wonderful, thoughtful, emotionally generous individuals who are trapped less by their exploitative partners than the intolerable idea of themselves as failed mates. The result is their often intensified efforts to be found satisfactory by, and to obtain validation from, the exploiter.
The exploiter is, of course, incapable of appreciating his or her partner’s devotion. But even if not, he or she would intentionally withhold such recognition anyway; his or her object, remember, rather than to uplift his or her partner, is calculatingly the opposite—to engender hopelessness and depression in him or her.
On and on the cycle goes, until the vulnerable partner, just as the exploiter has sought, finally feels so low, incompetent and disempowered that he or she can’t seriously imagine a different future.
By now a form of despair has set in—the despair of expecting to be found just as wanting in future relationships as the present. Dangerous resignation follows this hopelessness—again, exactly the outcome the exploiter wants.
It is no accident that narcissistic and sociopathic personalities will seek, and often successfully attract, partners who have their own issue: a tendency to dread the idea of disappointing or displeasing them.
This is admittedly a generality, but it’s a pattern I’ve observed in my clinical experience, and it makes sense. The exploiter, who regards others as existing principally to satisfy his or her wants on a continual basis, must by definition find in a mate someone who is highly motivated—and especially, highly afraid not—to satisfy him or her.
Thus one often finds the pairing of an exploiter complemented by a partner who is prone, perhaps compulsively, to look inward to himself or herself as the cause of the exploiter’s dissatisfaction.
Clinically the goal is to encourage the over-accountable, overresponsible partner to examine this aspect of himself or herself. This is necessary given the fair assumption that sociopaths and narcissists are unlikely to genuinely reform their characteristically manipulative, selfish ways.
I’m often surprised in my work by the tenacious investment exploited partners make in solving the needs and complaints of their self-centered mates. Of course they’ll never succeed, but as long as they continue owning the exploiter’s blame for the latters’ discontent, they can keep trying, keep striving to be a better mate—to become, finally, the good-enough mate the exploiter has claimed to deserve all along.
Let us emphasize the futility of this scenario—the exploiter really doesn’t want a satisfying or, for that matter, even a perfect, partner; rather what he or she wants is a partner who, in his or her insecurity, will continue to accept on some level blame for the exploiter’s unending, habitual exploitation.
The exploiter, in other words, is looking much less for the perfect partner than the perfect scapegoat. For this reason the sociopath and many narcissists will recruit these qualities in a partner—qualities, for instance, of high self-doubt, high guilt, high fear of incurring others’ wrath or displeasure, and a strong tendency to self-blame.
Moreover individuals possessing these qualities will tend to be drawn to individuals who seem to be their counterpart in many ways—for instance confident, self-assured, powerful-seeming, unself-doubting, and perhaps unself-reflective. They may harbor the fantasy that the latters’ seeming strength and confidently entitled attitudes may prove a salutary complement to their self-questioning, self-doubting natures.
And this is certainly possible—this complementarity can theoretically work—in situations uncomplicated by sociopathy or narcissistic personality.
But when the more confident partner is a sociopath, or narcissist, this complementarity of personalities becomes a set-up. The less confident partner, whose tendency is to self-destructively accept the exploiter’s blame for the latter’s rages, discontent, abuse and general misery, becomes the perfect foil, the perfect dupe, for the sociopathic or narcissistic partner, who has it made, so to speak.
Again and again I encounter wonderful, thoughtful, emotionally generous individuals who are trapped less by their exploitative partners than the intolerable idea of themselves as failed mates. The result is their often intensified efforts to be found satisfactory by, and to obtain validation from, the exploiter.
The exploiter is, of course, incapable of appreciating his or her partner’s devotion. But even if not, he or she would intentionally withhold such recognition anyway; his or her object, remember, rather than to uplift his or her partner, is calculatingly the opposite—to engender hopelessness and depression in him or her.
On and on the cycle goes, until the vulnerable partner, just as the exploiter has sought, finally feels so low, incompetent and disempowered that he or she can’t seriously imagine a different future.
By now a form of despair has set in—the despair of expecting to be found just as wanting in future relationships as the present. Dangerous resignation follows this hopelessness—again, exactly the outcome the exploiter wants.
Friday, September 26, 2008
Learning about sexual coercers from teacher-student sex
Another way to look at abusive relationships is from a power and control standpoint. My previous post looked at sexual coercers as adult versions of pedophiles who sexually abuse. This essay will look at coercers as having similar motives to teachers who abuse students and rapists.
When Groth categorized rapists back in the late 70s / early 80s, he talked about anger rapists, power rapists, and sadistic rapists. Anger rapists are motivated by anger against women, and sadistic rapists are motivated by a sexual attraction to hurting women. It is the power rapist that I'm getting after.
Power Rapist: A sex offender whose primary motivation for raping others is to feel powerful and exercise control over victims. Offender’s mood is one of anxiety.
The difference between forcible rape and sexual coercion is the lack of physical force, not lack of consent, lack or power differentials, or power and control motives.
Robert Shoop said about consent -
"The existence of freely given consent or, conversely, the absence of coercion, is a critical factor in distinguishing sexual abuse from mere sex."
Sociopaths work with coercion, so technically, all sex between said sociopath and his victim is non-consensual. Unfortunately, non-consensual sex between adults isn't taken seriously unless there is force, or a custodial or therapist/patient relationship. The main difference between a power rapist and a sexual coercer is the fact that coercers use manipulation while power rapists can be legally be charged with rape. Power and control is still the long term goal.
Relationships involving sociopaths should be seen in the same manner as teacher/student, therapist/patient, or guard/inmate sex because if a sociopath is only looking for power and/or sex, then there can't be a peer relationship with a sociopath and his victim, but only intimate or coercive sexual exploitation. If there is no power imbalance in the relationship, then he (or she) can't exploit it.
Sexual predators prey on people's kids, regardless of whether they are kids in actuality or adults. Parents have a role to stop sexual predators, and this includes predators who prey only on legal adults. If a mother is concerned about letting predators have access to kids through age 18, she should be just as concerned about sociopaths gaining access to her kids after 18.
If counselors or doctors had a reputation of abusing their clients, clients would never allow themselves to be vulnerable to the degree necessary in psychotherapy or medicine. Thus when professionals abuse their power and position, they not only injure the client and violate society's trust, they also damage their entire profession. This is why the standards of professional conduct and codes of ethics and laws make it clear. Sexual exploitation of clients is not to be tolerated, and it is the professional's responsibility to ensure this does not happen.
The difference between teacher (or professor)/student sex and sexual coercion between ostensible equals is the authority of the teacher, not the power the abuser or manipulator has over their victim.
It doesn't have to be teacher/student - it can be between two 20 year old students. The investigation of apparently consensual sex has a role to play in anti-rape programs and the understanding of sexual violence.
This touches on a major problem in relationships between over 18s – whether legal consent is actually consent. In some cases, sexual coercion is a legal (but unethical and immoral) tactic where psychological persuasion is used against a vulnerable adult victim.
It goes unrecognized when there are not formal authority or formal power differentials (i.e. professor/student, therapist/patient), but the power and control motives do not change. The difference between coercive sexual encounters among students or between “partners” is the lack of authority, not lack of power, lack of consent, or the betrayal of trust.
When a lynch mob hung a black man back in the 1930s, they had power, but not authority. When the state hung him for the murder of a white man or rape of a white woman, the state used its authority.
The difference between teacher/student or doctor/patient sex and other forms of sexual coercion is authority, not power or the betrayal of a position of trust. Professors have authority over students, and so do teachers. Prison guards have authority over inmates due to their formal status. A coercive “boyfriend” or husband does not have authority over his victimized girlfriend, but he has power and a position of trust he is abusing.
Sexual coercion + authority = professional sexual abuse or manipulation.
Professional “consensual” sex – position of authority = sexual coercion.
I believe that analysis of teacher/student relationships can be a glimpse into the world of power and control motives in legal, but coercive sexual encounters (i.e. not criminally chargeable as rape or sexual assault, but still victimizing.) The formal power motives of a teacher/professor who has ‘romantic” relationships with a student can be equated with the informal power of a “boyfriend” who has a psychologically and sexually controlling relationship with that same student.
Except for age and formal position of authority, there is no difference from a victimization standpoint between the 40 year old teacher and the 20 year old student and a sexually manipulative relationship between 2 20 year olds.
A power and control analysis can be done for relationships among students and relationships between faculty and “romantic” or sexual partners. In both cases, the rate of victimization (whether sexual or physical) approaches 1 in 4. Unlike teacher (or professor) student sex, power differences based on formal authority is not initially present. Like teacher/student sex, all abusers create or exacerbate existing power differences so they can take advantage of people.
Informed consent needs to be the norm in all relationships, not just fiduciary relationships. Whenever there are power differences in addition to gender, race, and class, they also must be accounted for. (I don’t include sexuality because 2 queer people in a relationship do not usually have to deal with oppressive sexuality unless there is internalized homophobia). For example, a 20 year old woman may not be a suitable sexual partner for a same age “peer” due to unresolved abuse issues.
There is no “partnership” in any abusive relationship because partners are peers, equals, and abusers by definition create power differences. Even if they are the same age and come from the same background, abusers can never be peers to their victims because that would take away the reason for their manipulation, deceit, and their scheming. Even if the abuser and the abused have wedding rings on each other’s hands, there is no real “romantic” relationship. There is sexual manipulation, but the idea is power and control disguised as “love”.
When Groth categorized rapists back in the late 70s / early 80s, he talked about anger rapists, power rapists, and sadistic rapists. Anger rapists are motivated by anger against women, and sadistic rapists are motivated by a sexual attraction to hurting women. It is the power rapist that I'm getting after.
Power Rapist: A sex offender whose primary motivation for raping others is to feel powerful and exercise control over victims. Offender’s mood is one of anxiety.
The difference between forcible rape and sexual coercion is the lack of physical force, not lack of consent, lack or power differentials, or power and control motives.
Robert Shoop said about consent -
"The existence of freely given consent or, conversely, the absence of coercion, is a critical factor in distinguishing sexual abuse from mere sex."
Sociopaths work with coercion, so technically, all sex between said sociopath and his victim is non-consensual. Unfortunately, non-consensual sex between adults isn't taken seriously unless there is force, or a custodial or therapist/patient relationship. The main difference between a power rapist and a sexual coercer is the fact that coercers use manipulation while power rapists can be legally be charged with rape. Power and control is still the long term goal.
Relationships involving sociopaths should be seen in the same manner as teacher/student, therapist/patient, or guard/inmate sex because if a sociopath is only looking for power and/or sex, then there can't be a peer relationship with a sociopath and his victim, but only intimate or coercive sexual exploitation. If there is no power imbalance in the relationship, then he (or she) can't exploit it.
Sexual predators prey on people's kids, regardless of whether they are kids in actuality or adults. Parents have a role to stop sexual predators, and this includes predators who prey only on legal adults. If a mother is concerned about letting predators have access to kids through age 18, she should be just as concerned about sociopaths gaining access to her kids after 18.
This is a letter to a site called Lovefraud, which focuses on sociopaths who groom women into relationships where there are no boundaries for the sociopath, but only sexual abuse, emotional abuse, and grooming for the victim.
Note that the controller was slowly changing how the woman in her mid 20s saw her parents and friends, and had her wear sexy clothing for him, but the sexy clothing only confirmed in his mind that she was a "whore." Note the parental involvement when the woman got out of the relationship.
It got to the point that my parents were afraid. My ex-boyfriend was losing control, and I was stuck in the middle. I would do anything for him, but then I did the one thing he forbade me to do. I got out. I realized that my parents didn’t hate me. I realized that my friends didn’t hate me, and I realized that I am stronger than he is and that I didn’t have to be his “good thing” anymore.
"I can say simply that when I was with him he was emotionally abusive, physically abusive, sexually abusive. He would always say, “You can’t rape the willing, and you know you’re always willing, don’t bother saying no, because I know that no means yes.”
A letter from a woman who replied to this original poster: Note the family concern.
But how many of us slowly give away our consent to a man like this because he’s eroding our sense of right from wrong? In my own similar situation, I thought I was being ever so avant garde and clever and cool and doing what was “hot” to please the man I loved. In truth, I was allowing him to debase and degrade me in ways that would horrify me if I found out someone was doing that to my sister or daughter. It wasn’t the actual sex that turned him on, I’m quite sure of that. It was the power and control and the knowledge that he could get me to say I was a consenting adult. In truth was a coerced and miserable woman trying too hard to please, but it happened so slowly that I barely noticed. My family did, though. They worried from the start, and I wish I’d listened to them and to other warnings I was given.
Teacher/student sex incidents are not "affairs," or "romances," even if the teacher is married, but with sociopaths, even affairs and marriages should be more properly seen as intimate (or coercive) sexual exploitation with an adult victim. A 56 year old doctor with a 30 year old waitress will usually have power over her, even if there has never been any doctor patient relationship simply because of economic and gender status.
If counselors or doctors had a reputation of abusing their clients, clients would never allow themselves to be vulnerable to the degree necessary in psychotherapy or medicine. Thus when professionals abuse their power and position, they not only injure the client and violate society's trust, they also damage their entire profession. This is why the standards of professional conduct and codes of ethics and laws make it clear. Sexual exploitation of clients is not to be tolerated, and it is the professional's responsibility to ensure this does not happen.
The difference between teacher (or professor)/student sex and sexual coercion between ostensible equals is the authority of the teacher, not the power the abuser or manipulator has over their victim.
It doesn't have to be teacher/student - it can be between two 20 year old students. The investigation of apparently consensual sex has a role to play in anti-rape programs and the understanding of sexual violence.
This touches on a major problem in relationships between over 18s – whether legal consent is actually consent. In some cases, sexual coercion is a legal (but unethical and immoral) tactic where psychological persuasion is used against a vulnerable adult victim.
It goes unrecognized when there are not formal authority or formal power differentials (i.e. professor/student, therapist/patient), but the power and control motives do not change. The difference between coercive sexual encounters among students or between “partners” is the lack of authority, not lack of power, lack of consent, or the betrayal of trust.
When a lynch mob hung a black man back in the 1930s, they had power, but not authority. When the state hung him for the murder of a white man or rape of a white woman, the state used its authority.
The difference between teacher/student or doctor/patient sex and other forms of sexual coercion is authority, not power or the betrayal of a position of trust. Professors have authority over students, and so do teachers. Prison guards have authority over inmates due to their formal status. A coercive “boyfriend” or husband does not have authority over his victimized girlfriend, but he has power and a position of trust he is abusing.
Sexual coercion + authority = professional sexual abuse or manipulation.
Professional “consensual” sex – position of authority = sexual coercion.
I believe that analysis of teacher/student relationships can be a glimpse into the world of power and control motives in legal, but coercive sexual encounters (i.e. not criminally chargeable as rape or sexual assault, but still victimizing.) The formal power motives of a teacher/professor who has ‘romantic” relationships with a student can be equated with the informal power of a “boyfriend” who has a psychologically and sexually controlling relationship with that same student.
Except for age and formal position of authority, there is no difference from a victimization standpoint between the 40 year old teacher and the 20 year old student and a sexually manipulative relationship between 2 20 year olds.
A power and control analysis can be done for relationships among students and relationships between faculty and “romantic” or sexual partners. In both cases, the rate of victimization (whether sexual or physical) approaches 1 in 4. Unlike teacher (or professor) student sex, power differences based on formal authority is not initially present. Like teacher/student sex, all abusers create or exacerbate existing power differences so they can take advantage of people.
Intimate sexual exploitation is defined very well by a specialist in teacher/student sex cases, Dr. Bob Shoop:
(Shoop, 2004, Sexual Exploitation In Schools, page 3)
The modus operandi of the intimate exploiter involves leading the youngster to believe the educator has a genuine desire for a mutually committed intimate relationship. The immature youngster is often mesmerized by the belief that a charming, smart sophisticated, attractive adult is interested in him or her.
Regardless of the sincerity of the adult’s motivation, the intent is irrelevant; the impact of the behavior is exploitative.
Informed consent needs to be the norm in all relationships, not just fiduciary relationships. Whenever there are power differences in addition to gender, race, and class, they also must be accounted for. (I don’t include sexuality because 2 queer people in a relationship do not usually have to deal with oppressive sexuality unless there is internalized homophobia). For example, a 20 year old woman may not be a suitable sexual partner for a same age “peer” due to unresolved abuse issues.
There is no “partnership” in any abusive relationship because partners are peers, equals, and abusers by definition create power differences. Even if they are the same age and come from the same background, abusers can never be peers to their victims because that would take away the reason for their manipulation, deceit, and their scheming. Even if the abuser and the abused have wedding rings on each other’s hands, there is no real “romantic” relationship. There is sexual manipulation, but the idea is power and control disguised as “love”.
Pedophiles, hebophiles, and sexual coercers - same acts, different target ages
Brian's Opinion
The problem of sexual abuse and assault is a well known, but underreported problem in all societies. People are outraged at sexual abusers of kids, but similar tactics used against adults are not as outrageous, even though the motives and goals of each predator are the same. Tactics used by one group often are found in the MO's of other groups.
It is well understood that children cannot consent to sex based on lack of experience and age compared to adults. It is also well understood by most that there cannot be true consent when there are sexual encounters between people in authority (like prison guards, therapists, or other professionals), even with adult targets. However, it's not well understood that predators and abusers ALWAYS come from a position of power over their victims, and that there can never be true equality between any victim of any sort of abuse and their perpetrator.
According to Leigh Baker in her book Protecting Your Children Against Sexual Predators (St. Martin's Press, 2002), child molesters go through 5 stages of abuse - detection, where vulnerability to sexual predation is assessed, the approach, subjugation, where control is gained by "friendly reminders" which escalates to more overt control, grooming, using "subtle and devious methods" to isolate and get physical gratification from the victim, and the actual abuse. The key is control, secrecy, and manipulation to keep a victim ensnared until they can escape.
The sexual coercer uses power in much the same way as a molester does, and in fact, some have explicitly compared pedophile seduction tactics to "seduction community" tactics. If an adult seducer uses these tactics against adult victims, their is no detectable difference except for age and illegality. Seductive sociopaths (or sociopathic seducers) worm their way into a vulnerable adult victim’s life by seducing, them attacking them in ways similar to pedophiles.
If the same acts characterize each group, then perhaps the same goals also characterize each group – power and control over vulnerable populations through “relationships” and sexual encounters. The names - pedophile, child molester, hebophile, or sexual psychopath differ due to different targets, but the purpose of their predation is the same - gaining power and sexual control over a non-consenting victim. Consent can never be there if the victim did not have information that she (or he) could have used to protect herself against the grooming.
Adult relationships feature changed boundaries. Boundaries have to change in order for a “partner” to gain access into another’s life, unless the partner was a friend from birth. A person’s boundaries did not always include their spouse, “boyfriend” or ”girlfriend” – boundary changes had to occur in order to accept a partner as a partner. However, boundaries can be changed in a sadistic, manipulative way, too. This is how many sexual coercers operate.
1. Changing boundaries of the victim
2. Turning victim against parents (whether 15 or 30, still a sign of control)
3. Manipulated sexual activity
4. Escalation of power and control
If this is the case, one can simply extrapolate from sexual abuse cases featuring teens or adults who have formal authority over others to figure out the true dynamics of sexually coercive relationships, as well as directly from websites such as Cyberpaths, Womansavers, and Lovefraud.
The ultimate goal of most relationships are sexual encounters. Even with the Christian (and Muslim) ideal of virginity until marriage, the goal of marriage is sexual unity, among other things. So the expression, not the goal, is different from the “no sex until marriage” crowd.
Perhaps those who compare the grooming tactics of pedo- and hebophiles to the seduction tactics of adults are far closer than they have even realized.
In fact, different predators have been compared to each other, as in this excerpt.
Former FBI Special Agent Robert Hazelwood, Dr. Park Dietz, and Dr. Janet Warren conducted a six-year study together on twenty women who had been the wives and girlfriends of sexual sadists. They used a protocol of 450 questions and published the results in the third edition of Practical Aspects of Rape Investigation. Most had been persuaded to engage in a variety of deviant practices, but in seven cases the men had killed numerous victims, engaging their partners in the crimes.
The woman all seemed normal. They were from middle class backgrounds and usually had no criminal record. They weren't abused or mentally ill. The thesis of the study is that the males targeted vulnerable women with low self-esteem and then gradually made them compliant. A similar dynamic plays out with teacher-predators, with the exception of the final step in the five-step process that the offenders followed to transform their partners:
· Identification: They know whom to target
· Seduction: They use all the normal techniques
· Reshape the target person's sexual norms
· Social isolation
· Punishment
· The women end up going along with what the men want, because the men have used psychological manipulation to change how they think and behave. Similarly with the teacher/offender situation, while it may be true many boys are willing to have a sexual relationship, it's also clear that the superior position of the teacher, her authority and her seduction tactics have some effect. Like male offenders, these women apparently feel entitled to do what they're doing and they engage the boy in a shared secret that feels exciting. They target them, use enticements, reshape their thinking about the appropriateness of what they're doing, and isolate them as a way to make them keep the secret. Those who threaten would then be taking the final step in this process.
If the same problems are present, then the same solutions should work. This means that loved ones (including parents) can recognize and stop those that can prey on their kids at any age. It may mean intervening and using drastic measures (i.e tactics similar to that one would use to detect predators of minors) to counter the predator's attacks.
Students should be taught that educators who cross the boundaries do so in a very innocuous manner. The process of grooming starts with seemingly innocuous relationships and gradually increases in intensity." (p. 104)
Coercers act the same way.
"The child molester has found a home in the world of youth sports, where as a coach he can gain the trust and loyalty of kids - and the prey on them. (p. 30)
A seductive sociopath finds a home with a "partner" where as a husband or boyfriend he gains the trust/loyalty/love of women to prey on them.
Relationships involving sociopaths should be seen in the same manner as teacher/student, therapist/patient, or guard/inmate sex because if a sociopath is only looking for power and/or sex, then there can't be a peer relationship with a sociopath and his victim, but only intimate or coercive sexual exploitation. If there is no power imbalance in the relationship, then he can't exploit it. Sociopaths prey on people's kids, regardless of whether they are kids in actuality or adults. Parents have a role to stop sexual predators, and this includes predators who prey only on legal adults. If a mother is concerned about letting predators have access to kids through age 18, she should be just as concerned about sociopaths gaining access to her kids after 18.
Parents should have access to their children's relationships, even atfer 18, 21, 25, or even 30. If someone has a child, and their child is seeing or even married to someone, parents should be involved. If the grown child's partner doesn't want parents involved (including in-laws), it should be a red flag.
If a sociopath preys on adults in the same way a child molester preys on kids, then the same tools that protect kids from child molesters should also protect adults from sexual predators. Education, parental (or other adult involvement), and tougher laws have helped in the fight against child sexual predators. They should help in the fight against adult sexual predators.
Sunday, September 14, 2008
Daily Evergreen editorial - defending yourself aganist rape
Defend yourself against rape -It’s not discussed enough
Tiffany Harms
The Daily Evergreen
Published: 09/12/2008
College-age women are four times more likely to get raped, according to the Rape Abuse and Incest National Network Web site. And here we are, college-aged and all, yet nothing is said to us about rape. Sure, you’ll find a poster here and there telling you to “go to the police” or “no means no,” but in my opinion, this issue, for how common rape is, hasn’t been talked about enough. You deserve to be educated. You deserve to know about your resources. So here it is, in your face. It’s time to start talking.
When I talked with Pullman Police Cmdr. Chris Tennant during the summer, he said the most common type of rape in Pullman – and everywhere else – is acquaintance rape.
According to the National Center for Victims of Crime’s Web site, acquaintance rape is “a sexual assault by an individual known to the victim.” This can be anyone you know, even someone you are dating.
Sadly, even though this is the most common – four out of five rapes are acquaintance rapes – it is also the least reported and the least talked about.
As everyone is well aware, rape is a touchy subject. It’s important at all times to keep the situation in perspective. While it is of the utmost importance that you remain vigilant, you should also keep in mind the dynamics of each individual situation.
Acquaintance rape is possibly the ultimate “gray area.” This is one of the reasons why it is so vastly underreported. But there are some consistent traits among attackers you can use to help identify and avoid them.
According to RAINN, the attacker will usually intrude upon or violate the victim’s personal space. This could manifest in the attacker revealing personal information to create a false sense of closeness or by “accidental” touching.
Be careful: This might come across as flirting, but pay close attention to the intensity. Usually when you first meet someone, they don’t tell you their life story, nor do they try to feel you up.
The attacker will also attempt to make the victim feel comfortable with them. This is called desensitization. The dangerous thing is the attacker is manipulating the victim into lowering their inhibitions and making the victim feel like their uneasy feelings are unfounded and incorrect.
If you initially feel uneasy about someone, hold on to that. You shouldn’t ever trust someone that hasn’t earned your trust. Finally, once the attacker has gained the victim’s trust, they will use it to isolate him or her from other people.
In all encounters with people, you should trust your gut instinct. If you feel weird about someone, restrict your contact with him or her or include other people in the conversation.
Unfortunately, alcohol or other drugs will completely throw all of this off. They can lower inhibitions, meaning that you might not notice if someone is coming on too strong, and you are more likely to do things that you wouldn’t feel comfortable with if you were sober.
Tennant said the most reliable way to protect yourself is to use the buddy system. If you’re going to a party, take a friend along with you, make a plan for the night and stick to it.
One of the trickier things to talk about is what will happen if you find someone you want to hook up with. Should your buddy screen the lucky guy/girl? Who will have the final say, you or your buddy? These are the kinds of questions you should have answers for ahead of time.
Keep in mind that if you met this person at the party, it’s probably not a good idea to run with it. One-night stands are never a good idea, as harmless as they may seem. If you find someone you like enough, get his or her number. There is always tomorrow.
Finally, when you do decide to hook up with someone, make sure you talk about it. Make sure it is something that you both want and are ready for.
Rape occurs when there is no consent. It may feel awkward to talk about sex, you may feel like you’re ruining the moment, but you probably shouldn’t be having sex if you can’t even talk about it.
Tiffany Harms
The Daily Evergreen
Published: 09/12/2008
College-age women are four times more likely to get raped, according to the Rape Abuse and Incest National Network Web site. And here we are, college-aged and all, yet nothing is said to us about rape. Sure, you’ll find a poster here and there telling you to “go to the police” or “no means no,” but in my opinion, this issue, for how common rape is, hasn’t been talked about enough. You deserve to be educated. You deserve to know about your resources. So here it is, in your face. It’s time to start talking.
When I talked with Pullman Police Cmdr. Chris Tennant during the summer, he said the most common type of rape in Pullman – and everywhere else – is acquaintance rape.
According to the National Center for Victims of Crime’s Web site, acquaintance rape is “a sexual assault by an individual known to the victim.” This can be anyone you know, even someone you are dating.
Sadly, even though this is the most common – four out of five rapes are acquaintance rapes – it is also the least reported and the least talked about.
As everyone is well aware, rape is a touchy subject. It’s important at all times to keep the situation in perspective. While it is of the utmost importance that you remain vigilant, you should also keep in mind the dynamics of each individual situation.
Acquaintance rape is possibly the ultimate “gray area.” This is one of the reasons why it is so vastly underreported. But there are some consistent traits among attackers you can use to help identify and avoid them.
According to RAINN, the attacker will usually intrude upon or violate the victim’s personal space. This could manifest in the attacker revealing personal information to create a false sense of closeness or by “accidental” touching.
Be careful: This might come across as flirting, but pay close attention to the intensity. Usually when you first meet someone, they don’t tell you their life story, nor do they try to feel you up.
The attacker will also attempt to make the victim feel comfortable with them. This is called desensitization. The dangerous thing is the attacker is manipulating the victim into lowering their inhibitions and making the victim feel like their uneasy feelings are unfounded and incorrect.
If you initially feel uneasy about someone, hold on to that. You shouldn’t ever trust someone that hasn’t earned your trust. Finally, once the attacker has gained the victim’s trust, they will use it to isolate him or her from other people.
In all encounters with people, you should trust your gut instinct. If you feel weird about someone, restrict your contact with him or her or include other people in the conversation.
Unfortunately, alcohol or other drugs will completely throw all of this off. They can lower inhibitions, meaning that you might not notice if someone is coming on too strong, and you are more likely to do things that you wouldn’t feel comfortable with if you were sober.
Tennant said the most reliable way to protect yourself is to use the buddy system. If you’re going to a party, take a friend along with you, make a plan for the night and stick to it.
One of the trickier things to talk about is what will happen if you find someone you want to hook up with. Should your buddy screen the lucky guy/girl? Who will have the final say, you or your buddy? These are the kinds of questions you should have answers for ahead of time.
Keep in mind that if you met this person at the party, it’s probably not a good idea to run with it. One-night stands are never a good idea, as harmless as they may seem. If you find someone you like enough, get his or her number. There is always tomorrow.
Finally, when you do decide to hook up with someone, make sure you talk about it. Make sure it is something that you both want and are ready for.
Rape occurs when there is no consent. It may feel awkward to talk about sex, you may feel like you’re ruining the moment, but you probably shouldn’t be having sex if you can’t even talk about it.
Sunday, September 7, 2008
"Partner" rape - sexual predation of adults
When one deals with the topic of “partner” rape, just like dealing with women abusing males, and really get what’s going on, then realize that anyone can be victimized, and that everyone needs to protect them selves from harm. Anyone can use the guise of a relationship to gain access to victims, then strike.
From a grooming standpoint, the “boyfriend” or husband rapist uses the courting phase to groom his (usually) adult victim into believing that there is a real relationship, but like the adult who has a sexual relationship with a teenager, the victim slowly loses herself in the “relationship” and is led down a path towards sexual predation, and if she’s not lucky, destruction. Destruction of her self, destruction of family ties, and in some cases, destruction of her life.
Unlike a priest of a teacher, the husband/ “boyfriend” abuser does not have formal power over his victim when he sexually abuses her, and the victim is usually adult. But he doesn’t need formal power. Abusers create power over their victims when formal authority does not exist. They then use that power to dominate, humiliate, and control their victim.
A word about seduction and grooming – Grooming takes place. In fact, some states formally call the crime “child seduction.” Likewise, Cyberpaths talks about adult victims being groomed.
I believe that people don’t want to think of husbands and boyfriends as grooming victims instead of dating partners because the whole idea of romance between adults feature the myth of an egalitarian relationship between loving committed couples. This, just like the myth of the helpful priest with a pure heart, and the dedicated teacher, needs to change. Sexual predators come in all ages, all sizes, and when dealing with adult victims, the initial approaches of a predator and lover are extremely similar, if not the same.
People don’t want to think about institutional abuse (and yes, marriage and straight sexual relationships are institutions) any more than they have to. The Catholic priest scandals which broke in 2002 and ongoing teacher/student sex scandals have eroded trust in formerly respected institutions. In a world of change and confusion, institutions can provide stability, comfort, and a sense of being to those seeking to be grounded in this life. But whenever there is secrecy and lack of accountability, abuse can thrive. Anyone with a lack of character, arrogance, and the motive to prey can, and in many cases will.
From a survivor’s website:
Here is a person whom you thought you knew intimately, with whom you share a history, a home and quite often children. Here is a person whom you have made love to on a frequent basis often over many years, with whom you have shared your most intimate secrets and fears, and whom you believe to love you, want the best for you, who would never intentionally hurt you. Marital rape is so destructive because it betrays the fundamental basis of the marital relationship, because it questions every understanding you have not only of your partner and the marriage, but of yourself. You end up feeling betrayed, humiliated and, above all, very confused.
What’s so sad about “boyfriend” or husband rape is that in many cases, it is the worst betrayal of trust that an adult (female) can face. The betrayal of trust when such an event occurs ranks up there with a father abusing his daughter, or a mother abusing her son, and is worse in some cases than teacher/student sex. At least with teachers, the power is already there and formalized, but a husband grabs power which should not be his for his own sexual gratification.
Parents have a role to play in preventing rape of their kids, even after 18. When talking to them about sexual predators, children need to be reminded that sexual predation does not stop at 18 (even though 62% of all hands on sex offenders target minors under 18).
Adult sexual predators seek to gain access to adult victims in much the same way child sexual predators seek access to kids. Child molesters can often be found as mother’s boyfriends or husbands or in schools and in organizations catering to kids. It only makes sense that adult sexual predators would be found where there are vulnerable adult victims – like in college, the military, in prisons or in the counselor’s office, or in adult sexual relationships, including marriage. College, the military, and romantic/sexual “relationships” provide sexual predators access to either many different victims, or one victim continuously, and in most cases, parents can’t monitor their grown kids in such situations.
When adult relationships end in sexual (or physical abuse), the relationship before the abuse should be better thought of as grooming, not dating.
From a grooming standpoint, the “boyfriend” or husband rapist uses the courting phase to groom his (usually) adult victim into believing that there is a real relationship, but like the adult who has a sexual relationship with a teenager, the victim slowly loses herself in the “relationship” and is led down a path towards sexual predation, and if she’s not lucky, destruction. Destruction of her self, destruction of family ties, and in some cases, destruction of her life.
Unlike a priest of a teacher, the husband/ “boyfriend” abuser does not have formal power over his victim when he sexually abuses her, and the victim is usually adult. But he doesn’t need formal power. Abusers create power over their victims when formal authority does not exist. They then use that power to dominate, humiliate, and control their victim.
A word about seduction and grooming – Grooming takes place. In fact, some states formally call the crime “child seduction.” Likewise, Cyberpaths talks about adult victims being groomed.
I believe that people don’t want to think of husbands and boyfriends as grooming victims instead of dating partners because the whole idea of romance between adults feature the myth of an egalitarian relationship between loving committed couples. This, just like the myth of the helpful priest with a pure heart, and the dedicated teacher, needs to change. Sexual predators come in all ages, all sizes, and when dealing with adult victims, the initial approaches of a predator and lover are extremely similar, if not the same.
People don’t want to think about institutional abuse (and yes, marriage and straight sexual relationships are institutions) any more than they have to. The Catholic priest scandals which broke in 2002 and ongoing teacher/student sex scandals have eroded trust in formerly respected institutions. In a world of change and confusion, institutions can provide stability, comfort, and a sense of being to those seeking to be grounded in this life. But whenever there is secrecy and lack of accountability, abuse can thrive. Anyone with a lack of character, arrogance, and the motive to prey can, and in many cases will.
From a survivor’s website:
Here is a person whom you thought you knew intimately, with whom you share a history, a home and quite often children. Here is a person whom you have made love to on a frequent basis often over many years, with whom you have shared your most intimate secrets and fears, and whom you believe to love you, want the best for you, who would never intentionally hurt you. Marital rape is so destructive because it betrays the fundamental basis of the marital relationship, because it questions every understanding you have not only of your partner and the marriage, but of yourself. You end up feeling betrayed, humiliated and, above all, very confused.
What’s so sad about “boyfriend” or husband rape is that in many cases, it is the worst betrayal of trust that an adult (female) can face. The betrayal of trust when such an event occurs ranks up there with a father abusing his daughter, or a mother abusing her son, and is worse in some cases than teacher/student sex. At least with teachers, the power is already there and formalized, but a husband grabs power which should not be his for his own sexual gratification.
Parents have a role to play in preventing rape of their kids, even after 18. When talking to them about sexual predators, children need to be reminded that sexual predation does not stop at 18 (even though 62% of all hands on sex offenders target minors under 18).
Adult sexual predators seek to gain access to adult victims in much the same way child sexual predators seek access to kids. Child molesters can often be found as mother’s boyfriends or husbands or in schools and in organizations catering to kids. It only makes sense that adult sexual predators would be found where there are vulnerable adult victims – like in college, the military, in prisons or in the counselor’s office, or in adult sexual relationships, including marriage. College, the military, and romantic/sexual “relationships” provide sexual predators access to either many different victims, or one victim continuously, and in most cases, parents can’t monitor their grown kids in such situations.
When adult relationships end in sexual (or physical abuse), the relationship before the abuse should be better thought of as grooming, not dating.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
