Location vs. Issue - a few thoughts on the recent school shootings in the US

(The link above will take you to a CNN article that will provide a little context to the follwoing comments:)

Maybe I'm missing something - educate me if I am . . .

I'm reading with dismay, sadness and anger the news about the latest shooting in a school - and the response to the shootings leaves me equally dismayed, saddened, and upset.

Here's what I don't get - in two of the three recent shootings we find a male aggressor targeting females. However the news and even the White House seems to focus on the 'school shootings' in the broad terms of 'violence in our schools'.

These are acts of violence against women and girls. These are acts of violence against children - power over the powerless. These are acts of violence by men (in all three shootings we witnessed male aggressors).

Perhaps I understand 'school shooting' to mean that a student shot other students, faculty, and/or staff - I'm not sure 'school shooting' applies to older men (not associated with the school) attacking women and girls in a school setting.

And while I find that I sometimes am confused by the language used to describe or report many events - there seems to be a glaring and dnagerous omission in the reporting of these stories and in the government response to these most recent events.

The shootings which most recently occured are about men's violence - two of them specifically about men's violence toward women and girls. Violence in our schools? That's a location but not the issue.

On educating men . . .

This post is more of a question - something I'd like any random reader to comment on:

When it comes to the education of men on issues related to assault, harassment, stalking etc. (especially when these men have committed acts related to relationship violence)- is it best to be specific about behaviors when educating them or do men become too defensive in a direct address the hear the message? Is it better to challenge men to larger oppression issues?

I'll admit I tend to be a 'to the point', 'to the behaviors' kind of educator. If a man is sexually harassing a woman - let's identify and address healthy behaviors first and then target specific behaviors that are unhealthy - and usually I end a program with ways we can all help to end said form of violence.

I've recently run into others who feel looking more generally at issues of oppression might be a better approach . . .

I'm looking for thoughts, feedback, research . . .

Thanks!

On men . . .

This is a somewhat random post - not that these thoughts are ever far from my consideration – but I suppose this is random given the content and nature of the previous posts (I thought I’d let CNN off the hook for the moment).

I believe that men need to make conversation about healthy masculinity and healthy relationships as common as they might talk about sports, or work, or the weather. I believe that men need to find it easy to show signs of affection and care as easy as passing a beer to a good friend.

I had an amazing conversation with a co-worker this week, a male who I'm not very close to but we've been working on a project and I'm learning a great deal from him.

His father is sick. Now I know when my Dad was in the hospital I brushed it off a bit - my fathers condition was serious but when asked I would minimize the impact of the events on my life. Perhaps, in part, it was because I didn't want to think of the worst that could happen to him but I know in part I was keeping up with that bizarre tough guy image I think men ‘should’ have. Men, after all, should be able to carry their burdens, right? Wrong . . .

Understand I'm not suggesting that at the slightest sign of emotional distress men need to cry. But I do believe emotional honesty is more 'healthful' than not. In this situation with my co-worker I saw a man who was able to share this experience in a measured but open manner. He was being real. Not hiding.

I don't know how emotional honesty can be measured. I'm sure there is a test somewhere to measure one’s ability to be emotionally open. What would interest me to know is if men who are more emotionally honest are living healthier lives. Not just physical health but do these men have less abusive relationships, are these men incarcerated at a lower rate, is drug use/abuse down among these men, are they happy.

We so often connect being emotionally honest to a less aggressive life, to less aggressive behaviors. I'd like to think that's true. I think from what I've witnessed it's true.

I was watching "A History of Violence" - more to the point I was watching the extras to the movie. There is a piece in the extras about the films trip to the Cannes. And there is this moment at the Festival de Cannes, after the film is shown and the audience is applauding, that Viggo Mortensen walks over to the David Cronenberg and Mortensen gives Cronenberg a kiss.

I don't traditionally think of myself as surprised or shocked by men kissing men. But in this moment I was surprised, I was shocked, excited and sad to see the two men share this moment. It seemed so real, so honest, so genuine. So much like something I've not been open to. Again I'm not suggesting that men kiss every man they meet but the emotional openness, the ability to express oneself was what astonished me. The honesty in it all, the expression of care and affection was startling. I was not ready for that.

And it seemed so natural, commonplace - like talking about a soccer game on any random afternoon.

I believe if men could act so openly or talk so naturally as I cite above we might actually be less violent and less destructive. And not only less violent to women and children but to other men and ourselves, maybe even to the planet.

And I don't have the 'hard' data to support this position but I do have this hunch that things would be better. I’ve been going at it the ‘old way’ for a long time now – maybe it would be okay to explore a ‘new way’.

the word is: CONSENT

Here are two more articles brought to you by CNN:

Tutor says sex assaults are sacred ritual

Polygamist gets 45 days for sex with teen bride

There is this idea in the area of sexual assault prevention and crisis services that I'd like to share with you - it's called: CONSENT.

Here's the short of it . . .

A person must be of a particular age and mentally able to understand choices and understand the consequences for choices they are making before engaging in sexual activity.

A person must not only be able to make a choice for themselves - a choice that is not forced or coerced - but they must actually make the choice for themselves before engaging in sexual activity.

To be of an age where a person is able to understand choice and to have the mental and emotional faculties to understand choice and then make a choice freely are inherent in this concept of CONSENT.

CONSENT is an active process - it is not an assumed process – I cannot assume that you want me to go into your home and take your television. That would be wrong.

If you had a young child in the house and I asked the young child, "Can I take your television?" And they say, yes. And I took the television - that would be wrong.

It would also be wrong for me to take the television from a person who is under emotional duress or extreme emotional stress, drunk, mentally handicapped, or is other wise being lied to, misled, misdirected, threatened, forced or coerced in anyway.

Why is it when I talk about taking a television we all understand what's 'right and wrong', but if I talk about 'sex' if I talk about my want and desire to have intercourse with another 'things seem to get murky' - why is this???

Some people think CONSENT is about the younger persons age only, that's not always true, laws vary state to state, country to country - the age of the older person is also a factor many times. Understand why this is . . . an older man has certain advantages over a child of sixteen - mentally, emotionally, physically (an older person is often more mentally adept, can be more emotionally literate and physically larger/stronger) - an older man (or woman for that matter) should never, ever use these advantages to take advantage of a child sexually - not ever.

An older man (or woman) should never, ever have sex with children who are mentally or physically disabled. Do I really need to go on with that one?!

There is a independent consultant, Alan Berkowitz (check out his web site for more information: http://www.alanberkowitz.com/), who helps colleges, universities, public health agencies and communities design programs to address health and social justice issues. He has an article on CONSENT that's worth a read - here's a brief excerpt:

Determining Consent

Consent can be defined as present if four conditions are met. These conditions are not absolutes, but the greater the degree to which they are present, the greater the chance that both parties are consenting. They can be used as guidelines for achieving mutual, uncoerced consent in intimate relationships. The four conditions are the following:

1. Both parties are fully conscious;
2. Both participants are equally free to act;
3. Both parties have clearly communicated their willingness/permission; and
4. Both parties are positive and sincere in their desires.

Edited from an article by Dr. Berkowitz (http://www.alanberkowitz.com/articles/consent.pdf).

No CONSENT = NO sexual activity.

Under age, under the influence, never gave CONSENT = NO sexual activity.

It's a pretty easy formula. It's time we educate others about this. Or maybe I'll just come and 'borrow' your television some evening while you're out . . .

the word is: CONSENT!!

Keeping Sane . . .

For every person involved with the issues addressed in this blog - be that person a survivor, a friend, a family member, ally, counselor or educator, etc., it important to remain sane.

What do I mean by that? I think at times I find it easy to obsess on my role in this work. To dwell too long on the stories I hear and the situations I am privileged to know about. To be able to get away and find some rest from this work, have a peaceful moment where I'm not dwelling on the pain and what-ifs, is critical.

I'm no good to myself or others if I'm worn out from too much worry and too much stress. If all I do is ruminate on the pain I witness - if I get too caught up in my own pain. If all I do is focus on the events of one persons inhuman treatment of another then I begin to lose my grip on the goodness life can offer; I start to lose the belief that 'good' can exist, that 'good' can even be generated in this world.

I guess I write this (and again like so many other things with this blog - this won't be the last post on this topic) to remind myself and wish for everyone else a peaceful night, a restful night, a night of healing play/enjoyment. Tonight I wish some 'good' to everyone who reads this. While it may seem far away, 'good' is out there and we all deserve it.

On Stalking . . .

From CNN - Wed, July 19, 2006

John Cusack says he has a stalker
Actor obtains restraining order in Los Angeles court

LOS ANGELES, California (Reuters) -- Actor John Cusack, star of such offbeat films as "Grosse Pointe Blank" and "Being John Malkovich," obtained a restraining order Tuesday against a woman he claims has been stalking him.

***
Okay, I have several thoughts I want to share here:

One, I'm often asked about male victims - yes, it happens. Women can be as abusive and as violent as men. Some men abuse other men, some women are violent to other women, as some men are abusive to women, and as we see here, some women are aggressive to men.

I believe all relationship and sexual violence crimes are under-reported - I have a lot of respect for Mr. Cusack for reporting this woman and her behavior. I also believe it is never okay for anyone to hurt or scare anyone else and if a person is feeling threatened or is attacked - I hope they feel they can report the crime and get the help the feel they need.

When I talk about men answering the call to end violence I am also addressing situations and circumstances where men are being victimized. In situations where relationship and sexual violence occurs it is most often it is men who are the aggressor, and it is more often than not men who are acting against women. However it is no less disturbing when a woman is the aggressor and/or a man is being victimized.

Two, I wish, when situations like this are reported, we could find words other than "claims" or "says" - these words to me feel dismissive of the survivors feelings.

I believe we need to be very clear when we are addressing the victims feelings in these situations. People in Mr. Cusack situation will often report feeling fearful. We need to find a way to let the victim know what they are feeling is real. "Claims", "says" doesn't seem to be the most supportive language.

This isn't to say that the accused should be judged 'guilty' by the press or public opinion - the accused has the right to their day in court.

But the victims feelings are real and as a culture we've too easily dismissed the fear some report feeling.

And what is this "Cusack says he has a stalker" - he "has a stalker" - I have a funny feeling reading that . . . Is the author of the article is suggesting that this is Cusack's stalker, is there some kind of 'possession' or 'ownership' (perhaps not the right words either) on his part of this stalker. It's a bit glib, "he has a stalker."

John Cusack reports someone is stalking him. The stalking is happening to him - and it's something he doesn't want. The stalker is not 'his' stalker (like we should all rush out and find our own stalker now! It's the hip thing to do!). The title of the article seems to suggest some participation on Cusack's part in his being stalked. He does not want to be stalked, he does not want a stalker, this is not his stalker - the stalker is stalking him.

While I'm on the use of language here - the reporter writes "he claims [the woman] has been stalking him." "Has been" - very passive; the stalker 'IS' stalking him - thess events are not happening in the past. This stalking is happening now! We can't minimize the event and by putting it in past tense - she 'has been' stalking him - no, she is stalking him now.

Three, what was CNN thinking posting a report about stalking in the Entertainment section of their website? I understand Mr. Cusack is an actor and therefore part of the entertainment industry. But the 'bigger reality' here: he is a person (just a normal human like you and I) who obtained a restraining order against another person who is stalking him. Is this really entertainment?

CNN has a section of their website devoted to the Law - it seems, given the subject of past articles posted there that an item like this regarding stalking would be better served in that section of the website.

To me this is another example of the press misreporting and misrepresenting an issue related to stalking and assault which further lends to a misunderstanding of these issues.

News - and What We Don't Read or Hear on the Tape at Eleven.

I’m often sent news articles by friends from a local paper somewhere in the United States or around the world with a ‘news report’ about a sexual assault or some other form of relationship violence. Sometimes these things come over a listserv. I read them but I am also pretty frustrated with what I most often see in the paper.

I’m sure as I continue to develop this blog I will put a few ‘news’ items up here with my thoughts – today however I think want to express my frustrations with the reporting of sexual and relationship violence issues.

Let’s stick to sexual assault and the media today (there a lot to say on this and this entry needs some kind of boundary). Too often what the press 'knows' isn’t what really happened. The press may have a smattering of information, real facts or real details, but the whole story is never there. And for me 'who did what to whom,' while perhaps of interest, isn’t helping end the system of violence against women found in our culture.

Remember as you read this that I’m a male – and I want to be clear that I am male who does not suffer from some form of ‘male guilt’ about assault and relationship violence issues – that’s not why I do what I do, or write what I write. I’m simply a guy who happens to work with an issue that is too often misunderstood and misreported – and I’d like to aid in adding some clarity to the issue. With that said, let’s continue:

What isn’t reported when there is a sexual assault is that we live in a culture that permits sexual assault. In America we have a culture that gives privilege to men. Women as a group, while making great strides toward equality over the past 100 years, are still not in a place of equality in our society. If you doubt that, look to the hard numbers – women still earn less than men (check out this link: http://www.iwpr.org/pdf/Updated2006_C350.pdf) - in 2006 women are still earning less than men! And we all know money is power.

Now I don’t mean to reduce the issue of wage disparity to a sound bite – I know (as the GAO report explores) that there are many factors that influence an individuals pay and I’ve heard many arguments about what allows for this wage disparity exists. The point that seems to be repeated in every report I've read is women are treated in a manner as to be less than equal and men are given power greater than thier female counterparts (in this case power is represented by money, money is power). And the problem with power is that it is too often and too easily 'misused'.

When I look at toys for young girls and boys I find another example of our cultural that works to disadvantage women. This is a generalization (and again I fear another silp into a sound bite) but girls get dolls and girls are taught to nurture (not that this is a bad thing) while boys get Star Wars figures and boys are taught to battle the evil forces (again, not a bad thing in itself). As a culture, however, we tend to not reward the nurturer. Showing care for another isn’t part of the “go get 'em” culture I’ve seen rewarded in the workplace. We don’t seem to value authentic caring and so we don’t reward acts of caring – we do seem to value the “go get 'em” culture and in turn we reward acts that are in line with "go get 'em" (in my example that reward is seen in who earns more money and, remember, money equals power).

So how does this all fit the discussion about how the media reports on sexual assault?

I have never seen a newspaper article explore the responsibility we share in an assault, our culture, the society we support and participate in; I’ve never seen my local paper run a ‘news’ article exploring the idea that we are setting up an imbalance between women and men from those very early childhood days that sets the stage for one group (most often men) to have the ability to believe they can take control or power-over another (most often women). I've never seen an article in my local paper tease out the power issues in our society that mirror the power and control dynamics of a sexual assault. If we can treat someone as less than in the open, in the boardroom, it too easy to do the same and worse elsewhere.

I’m not saying that there is a direct one-to-one relationship between playing with dolls and Star Wars figures to a sexual assault. “Because she played with Barbie and he played with an X-Wing fighter means he raped her” – no, I don’t think like that. What I am saying is that I believe the former (the culture and cultural messaging) contributes to a society that allows the latter (sexual assault). I never read ‘news analysis’ that explores this link.

I’ve read about car accidents where there was an investigation into the factors that make that particular intersection dangerous. “Hey, everyone, dangerous intersection! Cars crashing! Blind spot. We need traffic lights! We need signs! We need to fix that!” We’ll address the factors that contribute to car wrecks in that story. And hopefully the problem will be fixed.

Sexual assaults happen every day but we won't stop sexual assaults until we address the factors which contribute to that crime. We need that conversation and I'm not hearing it in the media. We live at the dangerous intersection everyday and we need to fix that!

What I read and hear too often in a sexual assault story is “he said, she said” – and that’s getting us nowhere. I’m a prevention education specialist – you know what I would like to see in the paper: nothing. No news about sexual assault, no mischaracterization of the issue, no misreporting and no ‘duck and cover’ from the accountability we all share when an assault happens. I’d like there to be no sexual assault news because there is nothing to report on – because no one attacked another person – it didn’t happen.

We can make that happen. But we need to look at why sexual assaults are happening and address those factors. We can't fix the problem if we don't know what the problem is.