Wednesday, May 21, 2008

Kobe, Consent, and Credibility

It's funny that Dave should invoke Kobe Bryant today, as I was dealing with some of the very issues that his case raises this morning at work. I help facilitate a program that trains students to be informed and supportive peer allies for survivors of sexual assault and relationship violence. Today we were training our university's Orientation Leaders, the fine folks who have signed on to spend their summer shepherding the incoming first-years through the two-day testing and indoctrination re-education welcoming ritual required of all new students. Generally speaking I enjoy leading these workshops, but today's session was a little odd.

The students were exactly what you would expect from a group hand-picked by administrators to represent the institution: outgoing, engaged, talkative, opinionated, and thoroughly, scrupulously "normal." Typically the training attendees are a self-selected group of students who already have an interest in feminist/gender issues generally and interpersonal violence in particular. For this bunch, however, the training was mandatory, which meant we were starting from a very different place. This was readily apparent in both their reactions to the information we presented and the (many, many) questions they asked.

These kids learned a lot of what they "know" about sexual assault from Kobe and, more immediately (especially given our proximity), from the Duke lacrosse case. To say that they had deeply internalized and unexamined rape myths would be a huge understatement. Don't get me wrong: It was obvious that many of them took seriously the idea of being an ally and they wanted to learn how to be supportive. But it was equally clear that they were torn as to which was the bigger, more relevant, or scarier issue: the prevalence of sexual violence in our society (and on our campus) or the "epidemic" of false reporting.

That women routinely lie about being assaulted was an undercurrent that ran through all parts of our discussion. We talked about the legal definition of sexual assault, and it was apparent that several young men saw the law as a "trap" -- a maze of technicalities that could be exploited by vindictive women to "get them." We talked about reporting options and resources for survivors, and their reactions seemed to indicate a belief the legal and student judicial systems were titled in the favor of survivors. There was a palpable fear of men (the real "victims") being hauled into court or slapped with a no-contact order or kicked out of school. We talk about some scary stuff for sure; I guess my fears just lie elsewhere in this whole discussion. It's not like I don't know these attitudes exist, but this was still an eye-opening experience.

Media coverage of high-profile rape cases also has deeply ingrained the idea that a victim's credibility is always at issue. Our job in these trainings is to help participants be supportive, nonjudgemental listeners who can help steer their peers toward the appropriate campus resources. But the questions and scenarios that this group raised returned again and again to the issue of determining if the person who was hypothetically disclosing to them was telling the truth. Where's the proof, they wanted to know? How are we supposed to verify these stories? And how do administrators or authority figures determine the veracity of the stories they hear? How can they be sure that someone is not lying about being raped just to move to another dorm room on campus? How can they be sure that a stalking victim seeking a no-contact order against a fellow student is not just "out to get them?"

[What I find totally vexing about the whole idea of "proof" is that this concern only goes one way. They demand a certain standard of evidence, yet completely disregard empirical data that doesn't square with their worldview. We give them FBI statistics about the very low level of false reporting in rape cases. Their response: "I don't care what the statistics say; we all know that people (read: women) make stories up all the time." Where is the evidence to support this? On our campus last year there was one reported case of sexual assault. ONE. Various campus agencies took 31 additional "blind reports" where a student disclosed an assault but did not wish to go on record or file charges. This is on a campus of more than 20,000 students. Where is this epidemic of lying and scheming? If women on this campus are "crying rape," they certainly aren't doing so with authorities. Where is the evidence? Where is the proof?]

One last thing that came up today, and which revisiting the Kobe case only underscored for me, is how much confusion there seems to be around the issue of consent. This is baffling to me. Is it really such a radical notion that sex should be consensual and that consent should be clear and explicit? In his settlement statement Kobe admits that he "now knows" that sex with his accuser was not consensual. Help me out here, someone: Is it really that hard to tell whether or not you have consent? And if it's not clear, is it really that big a deal to clarify somehow?

I had a really sweet and earnest kid today who was clearly struggling with this. He got completely flustered and said to me, "It sounds like you're saying that unless you stop and ask permission for everything you do with someone in bed, it's rape," as if he were imagining that the law (or humorless, sex-hating feminists like myself) required both parties to sign a permission slip for every sex act. Do these people not communicate with their partners at all? Can they really not tell the difference? Or does this just get back to their fear that consent actually doesn't matter at all in a culture where women are just going to lie about it later?

And don't even get me started on the issue of alcohol and consent. When we alert them to the fact that state law stipulates that someone who is under the influence of alcohol or drugs can't legally give consent, they go ballistic. Which I guess is understandable, given that the hookup culture which predominates today's college social scene makes unplanned, often random, drunken encounters the norm. They really are not at all prepared to face, much less to assume responsibility for, how risky their behaviors actually are. What I find amazing is that the fear focuses not on the chance that alcohol introduces/heightens the risk that something might happen to someone against their will, but rather that alcohol might be used as "an excuse" to "get someone in trouble." (Again, not to minimize the potential damage that a false rape report might do to a young person and their reputation...but where is the data that backs up this fear? How many hundreds of drunken hookups happen every single weekend on our campus alone? And how many times has this resulted in a guy's life being "ruined" by morning-after regret? How many men on campus have been disciplined or expelled -- or even investigated or tried? Who is holding them accountable or making them "prove" their innocence? Where are the numbers to back this up?)

At any rate, today confirmed for me that Kobe is, indeed, a role model to young people. And they have thoroughly internalized the "lessons" that he has taught them about sex, rape, consent, and who is a "victim." Thanks, Kobe!

9 comments:

  1. great post ash.

    I wonder... how much of the attitude can be traced to the complete lack of sex ed in modern high schools?

    ReplyDelete
  2. How about this explanation, which is offered only as an attempt to explain the idiocy/obstinance of today's male youth.

    What if they have internalized that rape is such a horror, that they not only are terrified beyond all data of being accused of rape, but also terrified of some day soon raping someone in a drunken hookup.

    This explanation also helps explain that while they don't think it's rape, there is no one arguing that it is perfectly fine to rape someone. I mean, they don't respond by arguing that it's cool that you call them a rapist or that women do deserve to be raped or like it, but rather they argue that what they do (or might do) is rape at all.

    I will say this, it is not easy to tell how drunk someone when you are shitfaced yourself. It is perfectly reasonable to argue that maybe it would be best to not have sex with someone while you are shitfaced, but as you acknowledge in your post, that's the freaking culture they are walking into.

    In other words, you have your group of young men who's only experience of college is getting hammered every Thursday, Friday, and Saturday and looking to get laid. And then they run into you who tells them that the whole playing field of their lives has this major minefield where one random move is the wrong move and you are hit with a rape allegation.

    You scare the hell out of them. So they argue with you. I think they hear you more than you think. They don't want to believe it, as it's kind of a mind fuck. They'll believe you more and more as they get older and the danger to them becomes lessened (well some of them).

    You're right that society gives them an out with the "consent" issue. They can't change their whole lives, so they latch on to the flimsiest of excuses and are fascinated by cases where consent is argued. Not only is it the easiest alibi should there be an actual accusation, it is also the easiest/best suave for the conscience.

    Just throwin' it out there. Smack it back.

    ReplyDelete
  3. End of the third paragraph...
    but rather they argue that what they do (or might do) is NOT rape at all.

    And mega dittos on the "great post."

    And not at all trying to argue these men are "victims" of their culture, just try to argue that they are young, ignorant, and scared. Maybe.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Unfortunately, ez, I think the problem goes deeper. I had sex-ed classes starting in the fifth grade, with birth control discussed in a factual manner starting in the sixth. I must have had five or six of these sex ed classes. But they were heavy on the scary STDs and really, really clinical. There was no talk of anything beyond the technical aspects of putting on a rubber, etc. I think there's some sort of deeper dysfunction that makes people incapable of empathy.

    On the other hand, I'm sure the lack of sex ed ain't helping things.

    ash: if I could offer a little advice that I think might be helpful... It seems that the overall goal of this program is to make sure that people who feel that they've been sexually assaulted. As much as we wish we could pull the wool from the eyes, we have to work with what we've got. One thing I've learned from organizing is that oftentimes, if you can get the person to do the right thing, the intellectual framework will follow. I actually have a lot of thoughts about this, but it's late right now, and I'm very tired, so perhaps tomorrow?

    ReplyDelete
  5. D'oh. There should be a referencing to getting the services they needed in my note to ash. But you probably knew that.

    Ok. Late. Tired. Sleep.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The crazy thing is, this program isn't about indoctrinating them or scaring or shaming them. We aren't railing about the patriarchy or going on about rape culture or telling the men in the trainings that they are all potential rapists. In the sexual assault section we go over the legal definition in the state of NC, present some DOJ statistics about survivors and perpetrators, talk about some common rape myths, and tell them what resources they can offer survivors if someone discloses to them.

    Dave, Wobs -- you've both made some good points that I want to address directly, but I'm also tired and need to go to bed.

    These were good kids, by the way. Sweet, respectful kids, not the surly frat boys with the low-pulled-down baseball caps sitting slumped in their chairs in the back row of WMST 101.

    ReplyDelete
  7. EZ: I think we need more--and different--sex ed at all levels. Not just the technical details and "always use a condom" variety, but something that emphasizes respect and communication as part of sex. Along the same lines, we need to rethink "violence prevention" to be less about women being "safer" by walking in pairs at night, etc. and focusing more on eradicating the attitudes that make sexual assault common. Not that I am holding my breath on either, of course.

    Dave: I'm with you on the alcohol and consent issue. You're right, it IS scary and I should have anticipated that response. What is more perplexing, though, is their attitude *throughout* the training--especially their (apparently) deep-seated skepticism about reporting/prosecution options and resources for survivors. I've never heard so many questions raised before about the possibility that someone might (or that women routinely do--they didn't say this, but that's the logical endpoint of their line of reasoning) "abuse the system," whether by filing false/frivolous charges or "taking advantage of" the safe room policy that gets them moved to a new dorm room/apartment, or "getting out of" doing school work. And again, I have no reason to think that these were misogynist creeps. But even when we were working through scenarios where all that was asked of them was to lend a sympathetic ear to someone who said they were being sexually harassed in class, a couple of the guys said they would want to see the behavior for themselves before to "verify" the story before even being willing to say "Wow, that sounds bad. I'm sorry that happened." I was pretty unprepared for that.

    And Wobs: You are absolutely right, and a major goal of all of our work in this area is "meeting people where they are." But in this case I think we misjudged how not-quite-on-board some of the OLs were. I'll definitely do things differently next time and use this feedback to revise the presentation we give during Orientation!

    ReplyDelete
  8. I've got some ideas to play around with that I'll try to post later. This post really made me think on this a lot!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Brilliant. And I like Dave's comment below too. If I ever teach WGS 101 again, I would like to use this post in class. It brings back flashbacks of a certain class I taught that had a group of similar students and I couldn't believe that I was on trial for arguing what you are here and probably didn't handle it was well as I could have. I would react and teach it differently today. I think Dave is right about their listening though. Especially big kudos to the communicating part - I do think that is hard to teach someone though. Social skills and hence sexual skills seem like they may be hard to teach some people, not impossible, but challenging.

    ReplyDelete