MN Summit on Sexual Violence Prevention Kicks Off Today

I'll be attending this evening's reception which kicks off the Minnesota Summit. While I won't be attending tomorrow's full day session, it will be well represented by both topic experts and community leaders.

I'm thrilled that both the Minneapolis Star Tribune and the St. Paul Pioneer Press published opinion pieces supporting the effort of primary prevention.

In late November the Albert Lea Tribune published a guest piece by Patty Wetterling about the primary prevention of sexual violence and the Minnesota Summit. She was also in the St. Cloud Times.

Too often when sexual violence is the focus in the media it is about what goes horribly wrong or it involves statements that get the reality of sexual violence appallingly and dangerously wrong such as the recent Ask Amy column in the Chicago Tribune.

Primary prevention of sexual violence is not an insurmountable task. Research has shown that rapists make choices to rape. Those choices can be supported by pervasive victim blaming (rape as a lesson to teach women and girls not to drink and rape as something victims ask for in some way, for example) and they can be supported by denial of rape by those who are not obvious monsters.

However, those choices can be opposed while only choices which respect other people's bodily autonomy are supported. All sexually violent actions can be seen as unacceptable with no excuses allowed.

This contribution for or against sexual violence is within each person's control. The power of this contribution is immense. Those who sexually harm others or who are tempted to do so are listening, hoping for you to support them. Just as I know that disclaimers are meaningless so do they. When people say, "I don't support rape, but ..." rapists anticipate the help they are about to get.

We need to be as passionate about this effort as we are when a high profile attack happens after a systemic failure because that's the context of most acts of sexual violence. We cannot be complacent just because most failures are pervasive rather than specific such as then Gov. Huckabee commuting the sentence of Maurice Clemmons who went on to rape a girl and murder 4 police officers.

Huckabee supported the release of rapist Wayne DuMond who after his release for raping a distant relative of Bill Clinton raped and murdered at least 1 woman. DuMond was awaiting trial on a second woman's murder when he died in prison. The reasons for Huckabee's bad decisions which contributed to innocent people's murders reflect on what so many people believe such as letting who the victim is and letting the perpetrator's visible signs of remorse or repentance overwhelm the facts of those cases.

Primary prevention is about preventing perpetration rather than being focused on preventing victimization. The second focus leaves the core problem of sexual violence intact and too often causes people to be tightly focused on judging the actions of sex crime victims sometimes to the point of making those who choose to be sexually violent passive agents while victims who are publicly condemned or worse the sexually violent can be positioned as victims of the victim's choices.

Victims don't tempt people into rape. Society does when rapists are excused because they raped someone who committed the non-crime of flirting.

We need a no tolerance policy for the excuses which empower rapists and anyone who commits sexual harm.

Rapist's Lies Just Bad Judgment If Rapist Drunk?

From the Chicago Tribune's Ask Amy column:

Dear Amy: I recently attended a frat party, got drunk and made some bad decisions. I let a guy take me to "his" room because he promised that he wouldn't do anything I wasn't comfortable with. Many times, I clearly said I didn't want to have sex, and he promised to my face that he wouldn't.

Then he quickly proceeded to go against what he "promised." I was shocked, and maybe being intoxicated made my reaction time a bit slow in realizing what was happening. [...]

This situation of a young woman getting clear agreement on limits before being alone with a young man and then having that clear agreement immediately disregarded is one where too many people see the person at primary fault as the young woman who didn't assume the young man was a liar and a rapist even if everything else about him made him seem like a non-rapist.

Ask Amy columnist responds accordingly:

Dear Victim?: First of all, thank you. I hope your letter will be posted on college bulletin boards everywhere. Were you a victim? Yes.

First, you were a victim of your own awful judgment. Getting drunk at a frat house is a hazardous choice for anyone to make because of the risk (some might say a likelihood) that you will engage in unwise or unwanted sexual contact. You don't say whether the guy was also drunk. If so, his judgment was also impaired. No matter what -- no means no. If you say no beforehand, then the sex shouldn't happen. If you say no while its happening, then the sex should stop.

No, Amy, she was not a victim of her own awful judgment. She was a victim of someone who premeditated rape. That you confuse these two shows your awful judgment.

Nothing this young woman described indicates in any way that she engaged in unwise or unwanted sexual contact. Getting drunk at a frat house is only hazardous because of the risk of alcohol poisoning and because of the presence of young men who feel entitled to rape young women who drink alcohol and who believe they can get away with this crime.

That this young woman says she was too shocked at the quick transformation of a decent guy into a rapist to kick or fight doesn't negate the reality of what she experienced. Taking advantage of someone's shock is a premeditated act not a result of any confusion.

It doesn't matter if the young man was drunk since he was clearly sober enough to assure this woman that he understood and respected her boundaries and when they were alone he was able to quickly shift from "safe guy" to "rapist guy."

This behavior has been studied by researchers like professor David Lisak who has debunked the idea that this young man's actions can be dismissed as simply a matter of impaired judgment. That you are not a journalist doesn't excuse you from your personal responsibility for spreading misinformation. Please read the rape fact sheet (pdf) and Understanding the Predatory Nature of Sexual Violence (pdf) he wrote before you write or say another word about this letter to you or about rape.

Not assuming that someone, even a frat boy, who seems like a decent human being will commit rape at the first opportunity is not what makes someone a victim. Being in the presence of someone who is only pretending to be a decent human being and who then commits rape is what makes someone a victim.

The primary hazard doesn't come from this situation, it comes from rapists who know how a large number of people will respond to disclosures of sexual violence committed in this situation. You in your position as the Ask Amy advice columnist may think you make it clear that you're against rape, but because of the context you fail to be clearly against all rapes and instead become an ally to this young woman's rapist.

This response makes rape at frat parties normal and the rightful consequence of a girl or woman getting drunk at a frat house. Any subsequent backtracking that "no means no" becomes meaningless butt covering. This undermines the concept that each of us has a legal right to bodily autonomy no matter what we do or how vulnerable we are.

Amy then goes on to quote from the RAINN website and offer practical advice on STDs and pregnancy prevention before going off-track again.

See a counselor to determine how you want to approach this. You must involve the guy in question in order to determine what happened and because he absolutely must take responsibility and face the consequences for his actions, just as you are prepared to do. He may have done this before.

There is no need to do more to determine what happened. She did not consent and he understood she wasn't going to consent. Involving the man in this suggested way opens the door to a multitude of excuses for his decision to disregard her clear sexual boundaries and his choice to commit rape.

He indeed may have done "this" before but by not naming "this" as rape Ask Amy reduces or eliminates his personal responsibility for his actions and undermines the rightful consequences for rape.

This is not only backwards thinking, it assumes that all young men are premeditated rapists who will rape at the first opportunity while on a practical level excusing them for doing just that. Without this assumption of all men (or all frat men) being rapists, any view of this young woman as being a victim of her own bad judgment is nonsense.

If frat parties are this dangerous then those who host these parties should be held legally responsible for creating situations where rape is frequently presented as a natural consequence of girls or women attending.

This young woman's supposed bad judgment is a direct result of people who repeatedly tell young women that non-stranger rape can be avoided if they have the good judgment to just clearly communicate their boundaries and ensure those boundaries are clearly understood.

If young women believe this so-called rape prevention advice and are raped anyway those people aren't likely to admit that they are steering young women dangerously wrong. Instead they will find another reason to make rape the consequence of the rape victim's decisions.

This backwards view of rape as the consequence of the victim's actions must stop if we are serious about wanting to prevent rape. Until rape is rightly viewed as a consequence of rapists' actions and choices and those people are always viewed as those who should be held legally and morally responsible for the sexual violence then rape will continue to be appallingly common.

Carnival Against Sexual Violence 83

Welcome to the December 1, 2009 edition of the Carnival Against Sexual Violence.

Quick FYI for those unfamiliar with blog carnivals and who wonder about this terminology, the term refers to collections of related blog posts. Check out blogcarnival.com for more information.

I'm now on Twitter as Abyss2hope so if you Twitter please follow me and then let me know you arrived from this blog through the @ reply or DM.

Thank you to everyone who nominated a post or who wrote a post against sexual violence whether it was nominated/selected or not. Nominations that came in after the nomination deadline will be considered for the next edition of the carnival.

If you support the purpose of the carnival, you can help get the word out about it and all of the posts included in the carnival.

Here are the selections for this edition of the carnival against sexual violence:

gender

In He walks the wooded trail, she walks the well-lit road posted at Stop Street Harassment!, we get a discussion about how often gender-based violence negatively influences the choices of women who haven't been personally victimized.

legal

In Sexuality and Gender Law Clinic Supports “No-Condoms-as-Evidence-of–Prostitution” Bill posted at Gender & Sexuality Law Blog, we get a discussion about the often conflicting goals of wanting to collect DNA evidence and wanting to reduce sexually transmitted diseases.

In U.S. Sailor Acquitted of Rape, Despite Admission of Physical Force posted at The Curvature, we get a discussion about how bigoted attitudes trump evidence.

In Judge Advocate?: Court Of Appeals Of Ohio Finds Judge Didn't Abuse Discretion By Asking 89 Questions To Witness In Domestic Violence Trial posted at EvidenceProf Blog, we get a discussion of a case where the defense attorney wanted a conviction overturned because of the number of questions the judge asked the victim in the case.

In NJ Parole Board Finds Sex Offender Polygraph Testing Effective posted at Sex Crimes, we get a discussion of post-conviction testing.

In Should Lawyers Be Banned From Having Sex With Their Clients? posted at Above the Law, we get a discussion about the balance between wanting to ensure ethical behavior and confidentiality issues.

media watch

In Rape Kit Backlog and Systemic Problems In Rape Investigations posted at abyss2hope: A rape survivor's zigzag journey into the open, I discuss the CBS news report about the current state of rape investigations in the US.

In Hey You "Pussies" Pretend To Hit "B*tches" And Become A "Gangsta" While You Learn About Violence Against Women posted at Feminist Peace Network, we get a discussion of a Danish awareness campaign which encourages virtual violence against a woman in an effort to discourage violence against women as being cool.

In Dispatch Series on Domestic Violence is Excellent posted at The Madrigal Maniac, we get a discussion of reporting on the fear, pain, and obstacles to justice that victims of domestic violence face.

personal stories

In I am Strong but Fragile - What Rape Does to Your Life posted at A Place to Talk about Rape, we get a discussion about how feeling unsafe as a child, being molested and raped and raped again as a teen, can lead to issues as an adult.

In Gun To My Temple posted at Always Musing, we get a survivor's recounting of how her sister's boyfriend exploited her fear in various ways prior to rape.

In Edge of Destruction posted at rmott62, we get a discussion of how an external victory can be followed by internal turmoil.

raising awareness

In Stats about sexual violence in college against women posted at Tufts University Survivors of Rape, we get important information for those in college and for those who will being going to college.

In RCASA Friday Facts: Sexual Harassment? A Guide for Teens posted at Rappahannock Council Against Sexual Assault Blog, we get a discussion about the difference between flirting and sexual harassment and what teens can do if they are being harassed.

In Fundamental Conflict Between Rape As Crime Second Only To Murder And Proceeding When Other Person's Willingness Not Certain posted at abyss2hope: A rape survivor's zigzag journey into the open, I discuss how disclaimers are meaningless when people tolerate actions which are not genuinely consensual.

recovery

In Violence Unsilenced: Trauma and Bearing Witness posted at Dr. Kathleen Young: Treating Trauma in Chicago, we get a discussion of a site which allows survivors to gain connections and find ways to break their silence.

research

In Homelessness and Sexual Assault posted at abyss2hope: A rape survivor's zigzag journey into the open, I discuss Australian research on how sexual violence prior to or during homelessness require a trauma-informed approach to services for the homeless.

In Meet The Predators: But Which Ones? posted at The Curvature, we get a discussion of how the surveys asking men about their sexual violence misses some men who have been sexually violent because of the limited scope of the actions measured.

In Predator Redux posted at Yes Means Yes Blog, we get a detailed discussion of research on sexually violent men done by professor David Lisak.

That concludes this edition of the carnival against sexual violence. Thank you for taking the time to visit this carnival and thank you to the authors of all the posts included in this edition.

To nominate a post (your own or someone else's) to the next edition of carnival against sexual violence, use the carnival submission form. If you have any problem with the form, please let me know so your submission can be considered for the next edition.

Links to everything related to the carnival can be found on the blog dedicated to this carnival, http://carnivalagainstsexualviolence.blogspot.com/

Marcella Chester

Technorati tags: carnival against sexual violence blog carnival rape crime politics sexual assault feminism sex

Why Demanding Communication of Lack of Consent Is Dangerous

I've challenged other feminists who under certain conditions support placing some legal responsibility onto the person who doesn't want sex or sexual contact. Too often those feminists assume I'm being artificially nitpicky when I talk about the dangerous legal consequences of ever placing any responsibility onto the person who isn't consenting.

To these feminists the idea that the person who isn't consenting can do absolutely nothing and be completely passive seems irresponsible and may be seen as contributing to someone who doesn't have the other person's consent proceeding with the assumption that no response is acceptance.

Because they view clear communication in personal interactions as good they don't see what is bad in including this good idea in sex crimes laws.

Now there is an overturned sexual assault conviction in Connecticut which shows the danger I see in the position held by some of my fellow feminists.

The state Appellate Court in Hartford on Tuesday set free a Bridgeport man convicted last year of sexually molesting a severely handicapped woman.

Although the woman cannot speak and testified by using a special computer device provided by the state, the appeals court ruled she is not physically helpless, as defined by the state law under which a Bridgeport Superior Court jury convicted Richard Fourtin. [...]

The woman has severe cerebral palsy and cannot verbally communicate. She is so physically restricted that she is able to motion only with her right index finger.

In order for the woman to testify during the trial, a small video camera was placed over her and a tray affixed to her chair. On the tray, the prosecutor placed a board printed with the letters of the alphabet along with the words "yes'' and "no'' on top.

After each question, the woman's left hand would push her right hand, with the index finger forward, across the board to either spell out a word or answer yes or no. It was an exhausting process that lasted four days.

But the appeals court said it was not convinced that the woman is helpless.

And why wasn't this woman helpless?

Because the woman could screech, bite, kick and scratch. Unfortunately, this belief that if someone can do something even once then they could do it instantly when sexual contact or activity is unwanted. None of these actions would help her get away from Fourtin so the assumption needs to be that any of these would repel him or any other sex criminal.

This idea goes back to the idea that most non-stranger rapists are merely failing to understand someone else's lack of consent. If their victims were better communicators these rapists allegedly wouldn't be rapists.

Implicit in this ruling is the assumption that if the victim didn't screech, bite, kick or scratch that she must be assumed by the criminal law to have consented or there must be reasonable doubt about whether or not she was consenting even though there is no evidence that she communicated actual consent.

This goes directly back to the position that many people defend as being reasonable when that position is not reasonable and directly helps sex offenders get away with sex crimes that those people recognize as sex crimes.

If you go to a car dealership and test drive a car, say wonderful things about that car, you have not consented to buy that car simply because you didn't say, "No, I'm not buying this car." It would be absurd to demand that all car shoppers' absence of consent must be clear.

Nobody who goes to a car dealership needs to be empowered to always say no in order to avoid unwanted car ownership or car ownership which comes at too high of a price.

If a shopper says, "maybe" or "I'll think about it" or says nothing everybody gets that there is no consent. So this concept is not a difficult one. Yet many people -- including those who vocally oppose rape -- continue to have trouble with this concept when it comes to sex or sexual contact.

Too many people, including judges, seem to need a reminder that the basic concept of consent is a positive agreement not just the lack of an extremely negative response. The backwards view of legal consent when it comes to sex and sexual contact needs to be abandoned by everyone who doesn't support sex crimes.

There can be no excuses allowed for continuing to support a view of consent which leaves those who did not consent so vulnerable to sexual abuse and then to being abandoned by our legal system.

Carnival Deadline Tonight

Just popping in from my holiday week away from blogging for a quick reminder.

Tonight at 11 pm is the next deadline for the Carnival Against Sexual Violence so please take a few minutes and nominate a post you've written or a post you've read.

For anyone unfamiliar with blog carnivals, these are collections of blog posts on a variety of topics. You can browse the list of carnivals some of which are active and others which are not.

Holiday Week Plans And Questions

My blogging this week will be light to non-existent because of my plans for this holiday week which include working on turning the work I've done on this blog and putting it into book format. Right now the tentative title for my planned book is: They Serve Beer to Rapists.

In this book I will be focusing on:

1) Helping people see where our society supports a victim-critical, rapist-sympathetic view of rape and how this view is grossly ineffective at preventing rape and causes survivors extra trauma.

2) Helping people reject this view and replace it with a healthier model which puts the responsibility for sexual violent actions back where it belongs.

Are there certain posts or portions of posts on Abyss2hope which people have found particularly helpful in these 2 areas of focus? Any other ideas related to this book are welcome.

Feel free to email me privately at .@hotmail.com.

Fundamental Conflict Between Rape As Crime Second Only To Murder And Proceeding When Other Person's Willingness Not Certain

Since I started blogging over 3 and half years ago I have watched many people who claim that rape is a crime second only to murder or who use some other way of expressing that they find rape to be horrific quickly shift the focus away from this belief to finding most victims of rape to be at fault for their own rapes.

This gives us statements such as inviting trouble, deserved rape and many other statements which put the responsibility for rape prevention and most rapes onto potential victims.

The claim that rape is second only to murder if mentioned again by these people is used only to dismiss certain rapes because they don't seem horrific to that person. But there is a fundamental problem with this maneuver.

If a person truly believes that rape is horrific and is absolutely opposed to rape then that person will be sure never to commit rape and won't leave their fate as a rapist or non-rapist to chance or probability or within another person's control.

If something when done to a stranger is horrific (stabbing, for example) then it will still be horrific when done to a non-stranger. When this is not the case then the crime itself is not considered horrific at all by that person.

Even so-called non-horrific rapes have measurable long term consequences to the victim beyond STDs and pregnancy. Rape has serious physical health (pdf) and mental health consequences including the increased risk of the victim later committing suicide. This contradicts statements frequently made by rapists and their defense attorneys that being convicted of felony rape is an unjust punishment for an act which was over in minutes or a little longer. The act of murder can be over in seconds, but that doesn't mean the impact of this crime is over just as quickly.

If people truly believe rape is horrific they won't dismiss it as if it has no real consequences for certain victims.

Because of my rape at age 15 I like many rape survivors abused alcohol in an attempt to cope with my trauma and at around the first anniversary of my rape I came dangerously close to dying of alcohol poisoning. The events of that night would not have happened if I hadn't been raped. My boyfriend's decision to rape me twice almost killed me. But many people still dismiss the seriousness of my rape because, "it was just date rape."

People who believe rape is horrific will never be dismissive about the consequences of rape and will hold onto their belief that rape is horrific no matter what. Even the possibility of committing rape will be absolutely horrifying.

When people truly believe that rape is horrific then guessing that proceeding won't be rape will be seen in the same way as guessing that a gun is unloaded before aiming it at another person's heart and pulling the trigger.

Few people would ignore all those who "accidentally" shoot someone they know while looking for any excuse to blame the person who was shot. But many people excuse those who rape someone they know and don't care if that rape victim later commits suicide because of that rape. "The date rapist didn't mean to kill her he just wanted sex that she was withholding unfairly," would be an intolerable excuse if rape was truly believed to be horrific.

They wouldn't need to view the person holding the gun or the person who rapes as evil to condemn that person's behavior and demand that this practice stop immediately. They wouldn't limit themselves to teaching children what to do the next time someone tries to rape them or points an allegedly empty gun at their heart.

When another person seems likely to consent someone who truly believes that all rapes are horrific will find it imperative to make absolutely certain that the other person has freely consented before each sexual action. Miscommunication will not be a possible cause of rape for these people because if rape is even the slightest possibility that will be enough to stop them.

Losing out on potentially consensual sex will be an acceptable price for ensuring that nothing they do harms someone else. Learning later that in an iffy situation that someone was freely consenting will be fine because that is better than learning later that in an iffy situation that someone was NOT freely consenting.

Living with a missed opportunity will be better than living with the reality of becoming a rapist.

This belief doesn't lock boys and men into fear anymore than understanding the importance of treating every gun as if it is loaded locks people into fear. This belief means that the person will not interact with anyone else sexually as if they are an object. Instead they will learn to integrate verbal and non-verbal communication into their sexual interactions and will learn to avoid situations where another person's freedom of choice is limited. Sex will be something they do with another person and never to another person.

When rape, with no exclusions and conditions, is truly believed to be horrific then those people don't need to be sold on the importance of them making sure what they are doing is fully and freely consensual.

Homelessness and Sexual Assault

From Homelessness Info (Australia) I found a paper on this often overlooked topic of homelessness and sexual assault:

The paper shows the significance of the issues of sexual assault and abuse to the issue of homelessness. It describes the high prevalence of sexual assault of people who are homeless, particularly of young and adult women. It documents ways that standard homelessness "solutions" may be unsuitable for homeless people who have experienced sexual assault. It suggests ways an explicit recognition of sexual assault could be incorporated into Australia's new approach to homelessness.

There are 2 main issues: the increased risk of sexual assault against people while they are homeless and how prior sexual assaults can impact homelessness.

The second issue is something that many service providers aren't fully aware of and because of this lack of understanding survivors can lose access to important resources including crisis accommodations.

The report suggests taking a trauma-informed approach and to have trauma-specific services to meet the needs of the homeless and in services designed to help people with long-term housing and employment.

This is important because in too many cases where the helping systems themselves fail it is the person who isn't helped who is incorrectly given the responsibility for the failure.

Read the entire report Australian Centre for the Study of Sexual Assault (pdf).

It Takes 2 Not To Tango (Rape)

A comment at The Sexist: On the Difficulty of "Saying No" by J.M. caught my eye:

Amanda [Hess]: “It’s not the victim’s duty to stop a violation, it’s a violator’s duty not to violate.”

Nice theory, how’s it working for the thousands of women who are raped every day across the globe because the violator’s sense of duty is either temporarily or permanently on hold? In the real world, it takes two not to tango.

This view of the sexual assaulter and the person being sexually assaulted as dance partners is almost as pervasive as rape itself. Many times in this so-called dance the victim is the one presented as leading. We see this in terminology like inviting trouble.

If this analogy is accurate then it takes 2, the victim and the potential murderer, not to murder someone. How dare we say that it is someone's duty not to murder J.M. and it is not J.M.'s duty not to be murdered? Don't we know that if we view murder victims as having a duty to stop their own murder that the murder rates will go down?

Using his analogy if he makes someone angry for any reason or goes into a high crime area, even unintentionally, he is beginning a tango which could end with someone trying to murder him and he should be held responsible for his contribution to the attempt on his life. That would change the dynamics of a criminal trial and would introduce the same fundamental problems victims of sexual assault experience after they report.

Once people buy into the false premise that rape victim and rapist are doing a tango it gets hard for those people to view rape as an intolerable crime. Rape becomes something victims opt into. This directly contributes to helping people turn off their sense of duty not to rape, either temporarily or permanently.

No wonder as J.M. mentioned thousands of women are raped every day across the globe.

In reality, if it takes 2 to keep rape happening, or not happening, then those 2 would be rapists and those who refuse to put complete moral and legal responsibility for each rape onto the rapist thereby helping that rapist put his (or less often her) sense of duty either temporarily or permanently on hold.

This faulty view of mutuality in sexual assaults is pervasive even in those who are opposed to sexual assault. On Twitter recently a man tweeted about seeing a sexual assault on a bus and in addition to seeing the assault as bad he found fault with the victim as well.

SUPREMEdonuan
@abyss2hope I didn't equate anything, I simply said its wasn't good he had his hand in her shirt and it wasn't good she let him.

The problem with this response is that semantics matter and using identical labels does equate 2 unequal actions. This supports people like J.M. who evaluate the actions around rape and sexual assaults using the tango analogy.

In areas where it is rare for people to actually equate the actions or inactions of victims to the actions or inactions of perpetrators this semantic equality may not matter, but in sexual violence it is far too common for victims to be viewed as equally responsible or even more responsible (she led him on until it was too late for him to stop, for example) for sexual violence than the person who committed that sexual violence.

I challenged SupremeDonuan on his assumption that the woman actually let that man do anything to her and pointed out that the most common response to sexual assault is paralysis.

What many people see as a choice of someone being assaulted to do nothing is actually a physiological freeze response (pdf). When the victim is later able to describe what happened this is frequently called morning-after regret or retroactive non-consent by those who either don't know or don't care about the reality these labels deny.

So when he wrote: "she could've spoke up if she felt in danger" he is making a baseless assumption which again contributes to the idea of sexual assault as a mutual responsibility. If an observer who noticed something wrong believed that the young woman being assaulted could have spoken up easily then the man assaulting her could buy into that same narrative and tell himself that what he is doing is consensual when it is not.

No matter how popular the tango narratives or similar ones are they are not a valid substitute for the freely given consent of the other person and these narratives should never be a valid defense.

Those who say that these narratives are valid must support their use in evaluating all non-sex crimes or they don't truly believe in the validity of these narratives. If a teenage boy having his iPod stolen by a much larger man who sits next to him on the bus freezes those people must treat that non-response in the same way a girl's non-response to being groped is treated. It can't matter if those people know of a case where another boy was stabbed when he struggled to keep his iPod. The narrative is either valid for all types of crimes or it is completely invalid.

Just as non-violent thefts can escalate to physical assault or even murder so too can sexual assaults escalate. Not all sexual assault victims survive.

Being sexually assaulted in the presence of witnesses is often described as a safer situation than being assaulted in private, but that isn't the case for many rape victims who are also assaulted by some of those who witnessed the initial assault while the remainder of the witnesses do nothing to stop the violence such as the gang rape victim in Richmond, CA.

The potential risk that keeps many sexual assault victims from speaking up or seeking help is not limited to stranger rapists.

Flor Medrano, 30, told officers at the LAPD's Wilshire Station on Wednesday that the man, with whom she had an off-and-on relationship, had raped her and had been abusing her physically, according to police officials. [...]

Then, as officers watched for the man from an unmarked patrol car, they heard screaming and when they failed to reach Medrano by cellphone, they rushed to her apartment. Inside, they saw a man stabbing her. One of the officers fired and fatally wounded the man.

Medrano didn't survive this stabbing. She turned down the option of going to a shelter so she may have assumed that her rapist would not escalate and for that assumption some people will blame her. Yet the tango analogy encourages the minimization of the violence she reported as being relationship issues which barely cross the line into criminal behavior.

If the tango analogy is valid then if a man who witnesses a murder is himself murdered to prevent him from testifying he must also be viewed as failing at his duty.

The reality is that the tango analogy helps rapists and it helps murderers. It does not help keep anyone but violent criminals safer.