feministhemes.com

In looking for an image to go with the links I posted on sexual assault earlier this week, I came upon these posters.  They are from 2007 class project, and as far as I can tell the campaign no longer exists (you can check out the original link here).  I don’t doubt that the motives here were well-intentioned, but I think that the posters that the students developed are a prime example of how we talk about sexual assault, rape, and domestic violence in our culture.

Myth #1: Rape doesn’t count unless she was a virgin

This poster says “No one has the right to take it by force.”  Reasonably and appropriately, “it” means sex.  However, the imagery here of a bruised and wounded cherry doesn’t imply “it” as sex – cherries are a notorious symbol of virginity.  The poster essentially says “No one has the right to take [your virginity] by force.”  The truth is that no one has the right to demand or force sexual contact ever, regardless of virginity or purity or anything.  Whether a woman* has had sex before or not, even whether she has had sex with the partner demanding sex or not, does not negate her right to say no at any time, for any reason.  Rape and sexual assault have nothing to do with “cherries.”

Truth #1: No one has the right to force sexual contact, under any circumstances

Myth #2: Victims of sexual assault are irreparably damaged

As a graduate student in the field of psychology, I would be about the last person to say that survivors shouldn’t seek help.  However, the image of a shattered plate that needs someone to piece it back together is not a very flattering metaphor for survivors of sexual assault.  Even the use of the word “survivor” rather than “victim” begins to return power and control to the individual.  Survivors need to regain a sense of strength.  The fact of the matter is that no matter what happened, she survived. In fact, many in the field of psychology have begun taking strength based approaches to working with clients, allowing the individual to “own” their own change and recovery.  This is especially important for survivors of rape and abuse.

Truth #2: Survivors have more strength than they know

Myth #3: You need to talk about it to get better.  Now.

Again, I would be the last person to say that assault survivors don’t need help.  However, there are not rules about these things.  Remember that tip above about the survivor taking her power back?  Shaming survivors into seeking services is counterproductive.  First of all, as with any other type of recovery or change, there is nothing that the people around someone (friends, family, therapists) can do if that individual isn’t ready for change to happen.  Many people do find that talking about what happened has a healing effect – but that talking needs to happen on her time frame, not yours.  The best thing that you can do is let her know you’ll be there when she’s ready.

Truth #3: She’ll talk when she’s ready.  Be there, but don’t be forceful.

Myth #4: Victims are too busy defending their abusers to face the facts

This is quite possibly the most victim-blamey poster of them all (although you could probably make a strong argument for each of them to win that prize).  This poster essentially says “We can see you’re messed up, quit making excuses.”  There are lists a mile long of reasons that women stay in abusive relationships, and many of the reasons are understandable.  Just like any other decision one must make, there is a cost-benefit ratio that must be considered, and leaving is much harder than it sounds.  Defending one’s abuser and/or minimizing the abuse are just two of many psychological self-defense mechanisms that may be involved.  Rather than blaming women who stay, we should work towards making it easier for them to leave.

Truth #4: Leaving isn’t easy, and survivors need support to get out of an abusive relationship

*For the purposes of simplicity I’ve used female pronouns throughout this post, but another common myth is that only women can be assaulted.  Men may also be survivors of sexual abuse, assault, rape, and domestic violence and are less likely to come forward for help due to cultural attitudes about “masculinity” and “victimhood.”  Although the post uses female terms, all of these points also apply to males.

I hope that seeing these posters in a new light helps you understand how deeply ingrained our stereotypes about sexual assault victims are – even when trying to help we might imply these blaming, shaming messages.  Think critically about the language and imagery we use in day to day life (whether it be talking about sexual assault only when it happens to “nice girls” or using the word “rape” casually ex. “That test raped me!”).  Be aware of these myths and truths, and educate the people around you when they fall into those traps, too.

This post is a soapbox, but bear with me.  I didn’t hide it behind a cut because it’s not something that I feel like I should hide behind a cut, in my mind, my life, or my blog.  I beseech you to stick with it, it was an important experience for me.

Yesterday I gave a lecture on sex to 250 college students at a college that is 80% LDS (Latter Day Saints aka Mormon).  Then I gave it again to another 250 students.  The night before my lecture I did some feminist reading to pump myself up.  This was apparently a bad idea, as I proceeded to pass the night restlessly, having nightmares about my lecture turning into a riot over abortion.  The class wouldn’t listen to me, and parents of kids from my high school youth group harassed and condemned me.  Whoa.

The lecture itself went fine (both times).  About two thirds of the students attended, and probably only 8-10 got up and left in the midst of the lecture (less than when I gave the same lecture last semester).  A handful stayed after each period, some to challenge what I had said (which is both fair and welcome), and others to shake my hand and thank me for discussing what is here a very (very) taboo subject.

The lecture begins with myths and truths about sexual motivation factors, such as hormones, drugs and alcohol, erotic materials (porn!), attraction to partner, cultural values and meaning, and evolutionary perspectives.  Part two of the lecture targets sex crimes: the differences between sexual assault (umbrella term for many sexual offenses) and rape (specific form of sexual assault).  I discuss prevalence rates, stats about the relationships between victims and rapists (stranger rape vs. date rape, acquaintance rape, marital rape, etc.).  I emphasize that rape is about power and control and their arousing properties, not sexual desire, citing the example that in this state the youngest reported rape victim is 2 months old, the oldest 94 years.  I discuss how to help a survivor, what to say, what not to say, and list campus and community resources.  Then shit hits the fan.

Some people leave when I bring up porn.  Some people leave when I indicate that rape is not a rare crime.  But the real exodus begins when we start discussing sexual orientation as a spectrum rather than a binary system.  I discuss the differences between biological/physical sex and gender identity.  I discuss the differences between sexual identification and sexual orientation or attraction.  I discuss how these constructs don’t always “match.”  Then we experiment with the Kinsey scale, discussing the possible 0-6 ratings of a series of individuals in vignettes (including research findings that suggest greater arousal to gay porn in homophobic versus nonhomophobic straight men – another exodus from the classroom) to illustrate the point that fitting people into boxes isn’t as easy or effective as we’d like.  Next, I ask students to generate a list of factors that they consider to be involved in determining sexual orientation.  What makes someone gay?  What makes someone straight?  I don’t ask students to discuss these ideas out loud, because things get wildly out of hand when this occurs.  Instead, I discuss the evidence for and against elements like environmental, biological, and cultural factors.  I conclude that these research findings suggest that “reparitive therapy” – attempts to cure someone of same sex attraction – is not possible, and does more harm than good: a stance that is supported by numerous professional associations including the American Academy of Pediatrics, American Psychological Association, and National Association of Social Workers.

Is it a perfect lecture?  Certainly not, and I’d give just about anything for the department to let me teach the sex and gender class (which is offered only once every-other year).  But its worth it.  Terrifying at times, but worth it.  And once I’m up there talking about sex, sharing new perspectives, and shaking up taboos I love it.  I love the students that stay after to ask more questions respectfully.  I love the students that shake my hand and thank me for introducing and briefly discussing rape and GLBTQ issues respectfully.  I love that I can create an atmosphere for 50 minutes in which students can feel safe.

But yesterday there was a moment that I didn’t feel safe.  Between the two lectures an older gentleman in the second section approached me about what he heard during the tail end of the first lecture.

“So this is a lecture about being gay, then,” he said.

“Actually, it’s about sexual drives -” I began.

Dude: “Are you gay?”

Me: “- sexual motivations -”

Dude: “Are you gay?”

Me: ” – sex crimes -”

Dude:  “Are you gay?”

Me:  “Will you let me tell you what the lecture is about?”

Dude:  “Will you answer my question?”

By this time other students were trying to get the guy to back off.  “Why does it matter?” they kept asking him.  I held my own – I explained what the lecture was about, that the professor had asked me to present on these topics (Dude: “This is not in the syllabus, you know that?  This is not in the course description,” repeat x10), and that he was not by any means required to stay.  He kept asking if I was gay.  He wanted to know my “angle.”  I wish I had said “Sir, would you feel comfortable answering that question with such interrogation?”  I wish I had said “Sir, can you explain to me how that is relevant?”  Instead I said “I’m currently in a committed relationship -” he has a knowing and disapproving look on his face “-with a male.”  Commence eyes bugging out of said dude’s head.  I continued, “I have never been in a relationship with a woman, but I see no problems with that.”

He concluded that I was an “advocate” (apparently that’s a bad thing?) and proceeded to inform me that this information is not in the textbook (it is) and won’t be on the test (it may) and is not outlined in the syllabus (neither is classical conditioning, Freudian theory, or a multitude of other specific Psych 101 topics), and that he would be leaving.  I thanked him (and thanked god that that was over and I wouldn’t have to put up with him through the next 50 minutes).

Students thanked me after class for this and apologized for their classmate.  I was happy to face off with him – defending my sexual orientation or my beliefs about sexual orientation is something that I rarely have to do and a burden that I will gladly bear when I can in the hopes that others might not have to, even for five minutes.

Was is as bad as my nightmare?  No, it was fabulous.  It was empowering.  It was inspiring.  But it sucktd that that could happen.  It sucks to be bullied by a student.  It sucks to face off with hatred, because it sucks that that kind of hatred exists.

Diablo Cody has done it again, folks.  The United States of Tara is complex, smart, progressive, and entertaining, and well worth your time.  The show is about a suburban family coping with the typical stresses of work, school, and relationships with a twist: Mom’s got four personalities.

Tara’s persona’s aren’t the most accurate representation of mental illness, although they do manage to use accurate terms: Dissociative Identity Disorder rather than Multiple Personality Disorder – something that Tara regularly has to correct others on.  Instead, her persona’s illustrate the various stereotyped roles women navigate – T, the wild, rebellious, and promiscuous teenager; Alice, the overly-sweet but passive-aggressive 50’s housewife; Buck, the grungy, rough and tough masculine side; and Tara herself who is trying to live a “normal” modern life with her husband and two children while coping with a buried childhood trauma that led to the development of these personas.  As Tara gets closer to that lost memory a fourth alter arises: Gimme, the animalistic child.

But the show isn’t just about Tara.  It’s about family.  Read the rest of this entry »

Particularly if you are in the academic world (grad students and junior faculty, I’m looking at you) I highly recommend you check out the Gender Bias Learning Project website.

Joan Williams and her colleagues at the Center for WorkLife Law at UC Hastings College of the Law has put together a fantastic interactive, educational website that illustrates the many ways that gender biases and double standards can create hurdles for women in the workplace.  The site is filled with fun videos that illustrate different biases, suggestions for overcoming them, and conversation starters that can be used with friends and coworkers.

I’m still exploring the site and really enjoying it, but I’m more of a reader than a viewer, so I kind of wish there were more written resources available on the site.  It would also be great if there were some sort of student version of this project.  Clearly, working women face these problems every day, and I think that  a great way to start preempting these issues is to educate our young people (high school and university students), not only to make them aware of the issues, but to help nip them in the bud.

In my own experience as a TA and lab instructor I always try to find ways to incorporate diversity issues, including the implications and influences of gender, race, religious beliefs, socioeconomic status, and sexual orientation.  Reactions are always (predictably) mixed with some students thinking in new ways and others wondering why we’re wasting our time talking about dumb issues.

To those of you who teach, how do you approach these issues?  To those of you who are and have been students, did you ever have any instructors that did an exceptional job of incorporating these issues?  What are your recommendations?

Shoutouts to Alethea Joy for bringing this project to my attention!

If you have a Netflix account, you probably know about their frequent recommendations of movies they presume you’ll like based on how you’ve rated other flicks.  Sometimes they’re right on and the suggest other favorite movies you just haven’t rated yet.  Sometimes you give their suggestions a chance and wonder what they were thinking.  Sometimes they keep recommending the same movie over and over and over again until you finally give in and watch the thing just to keep it from popping up again.  The latter is how I ended up watching Phoebe in Wonderland during my sick-day last weekend.  And I was pleasantly surprised to see how well Netflix knows me!

Phoebe in Wonderland is a sweet story about a little girl’s own struggles with reality.  Themes in the film include mental illness, bullying, homophobia, and motherhood, each of which are tackled tastefully and authentically. I found myself deeply engaged with the story and impressed by the maturity with which each of these difficult topics were engaged.
Read the rest of this entry »

“Hogamus, higamous, man is polygamous.
Higamus, hogamous, woman monogamous.”

- Wililam James (1842-1910)

William James is credited with developing the first American psychology lab, and is considered one of the founding fathers of the field.

“We will be our own role models, and the role models for other men and boys.
Rejecting some of traditional masculinity, we will embrace what is useful to us
and sometimes create new definitions of what it means to be a man…
We choose to respect, listen to, seek equality with and share power
with the women in our lives and to encourage other men and boys to do the same.”

- Ben Atherton-Zeman

Ben Atherton-Zeman is a spokesperson for the National Organization for Men Against Sexism.  This quote was featured in an article of the June 2009 issue of Psychology of Women Quarterly.

For one year of her life, Norah Vincent experienced life as her male alter-ego, Ned. Her experiences compose her first book, Self-Made Man, and provide a unique window into the world of men as interpreted by a woman.

Vincent explains that her journey, although an experiment in identity, has nothing to do with her own gender identity.  She explains that although she grew up as a tomboy, she is “wired” as a woman, and her year as Ned took quite a toll on Norah.

The first theme described in the book is friendship.  Ned joins a bowling league, and learns the rules of male friendship, camaraderie, and mentorship from his three teammates.  As a lesbian disguised in drag, Norah feared what would happen to her if she were “outed.”  After a few weeks on the team, she learns that she entered the bowling alley with far more judgements and prejudices than she encountered.

Other chapters are less uplifting.  Through Ned’s eyes, Norah sees the behavior of men in their natural habitats.  From the underbelly of strip clubs to the uphill battle of the dating scene, Vincent struggles to cope with the experiences of Ned’s adventures without losing sight of Norah.  The inside jokes, thinly veiled sexism, and machismo push Ned to his limit, and the inability to express her emotional reactions to the experience leaves Norah feeling isolated and depressed.

Self-Made Man is one of the most interesting books that I’ve read in months.  It’s a page-turner which I finished in just a few sittings.  The book left me wondering how to separate the subjective and objective truths of Vincent’s experiences, and what it really is like to be a man.   In Vincent’s words,

I don’t really know what it’s like to be a man.  I never could.  But I know approximately.  I know some of what it is like to be treated as one.  And that, in the end, was what this experiment was all about.  Not being, but being recieved.

I highly recommend this book, and welcome the reactions of any male readers to Norah’s interpretations of Ned’s experiences.  Check out Norah Vincent’s website for more information about her writing.

Lie to Me is a crime drama of a somewhat different sort – instead of cleaning up gruesome crime scenes or chasing bad guys down dark alleys, the show revolves around the subtle behavioral cues used to detect whether an individual is telling the truth or lying.  Never having watched the show before, but with an interest in the psychological concepts at play, I decided to give it a try with tonight’s episode, Moral Waiver.  And what an episode to start with!

One of the storylines of this episode revolves around a female soldier bringing an accusation of rape against her sergent.  Two investigators are working on the case; Dr. Cal Lightman, the man in charge of the company, and Ria Torres, a young employee of whom Lightman is a strong critic.  After listening to the testimony of the alleged victim and the accused, Torres is convinced the rape occured, while Lightman is certain it did not.  Furthermore, Lightman tells Torres that she is biased in the case because she is a woman (and upon further investigation into the show on my part, a childhood sexual abuse victim).

Rape is clearly a serious crime, and it is far more common than we like to think.  According RAINN (the Rape Abuse & Incest National Network), 1 in 9 American women will experience rape in her lifetime.  It is estimated that 60% of rapes go unreported.  And more than 90% of reported rapes are true.  This means that if a woman reports a rape, you can be nearly certain that she is telling the truth.  Using a false accusation as a plot device may be low, but we’ve come to expect little from the world of CSI:SVU and the like.

In the show’s defense, it is mentioned that only 8% of rape accusations are false, and it is eventually revealed (spoiler alert) that the soldier made the accusation with the goal of protecting the other women serving in her platoon.  The sergent engaged in a “consentual” sexual relationship with a former female soldier who went MIA after being denied a transfer request.  Eventually the sergent is convicted of rape for exchanging physical safety for sexual favors with the MIA soldier in question.

In other words, the bad guy gets it in the end.  In a world where rape is a crime that brings shame upon the victim, rather than the perpetrator, and all too often accusations are not treated seriously, is the use of a false rape accusation appropriate as a means to an ends when it comes to our entertainment?

“There’s great hope for this world.  Women will win! Give them a little more time and the added strength they’ll develop out of this war and they’ll begin to control things in a serious way.”

- William Moulton Marston, 1942

William Moulton Marston was a Harvard psychologist who developed the idea for Wonder Woman in 1941.

« Older Entries