In observance of Sexual Assault Awareness month, I wanted to shareA friend of mine sent me a link to a very interesting talk by Susan Brison. She is a Philosophy Professor for the Study of Ethics and Human Values at Dartmouth College. I encourage to watch the talk for the full breadth of her argument (and also to hear her excellent singing voice) but if you are short on time I will summarize her main points.
Her principle argument is that rape, while important in a legal sense, is perhaps an unhelpful way of addressing the problem in general. Dr. Brison suggests that rape be re-framed as gender-based violence. She argues that outside of the prison system, rape is a crime that is almost entirely committed by men. She makes an excellent analogy to racism at one point. She says racism is a word that we talk about when bigotry against people of certain races occurs at a societal level. She argues that we have no similar word for sexual violence perpetrated by men, even though it is just as prevalent (if not more prevalent) than racism.
In relation to this she also talks about how we define rape, which is “sex without consent” and that this is a harmful definition. While again she admits the value of consent especially from a legal point of view, she also argues that this might not be the best way of addressing rape as a gender-based societal problem. She makes a number of compelling arguments, but there were 3 that really caught me:
1. We don’t view consent as relevant when it comes to murder.
2. Having sex in the definition of rape individualizes the act and implies a connection. And the act of rape isn’t just an individual harm, but instills fears among women or males that might be victims of rape.
3. In surveys of middle school and high school women, they sometimes report that they will consent to sex because they are afraid of being raped.
For me, the last point really muddied the waters of consent for me.
I can’t do her entire argument justice here, but I will transcribe a bit of what she said which I think is really important:
“If we lived in a world without pervasive sexism, where women and men were genuinely held to be of equal worth, a victim would be able to perceive a gender-based crime against her as an anomaly…something truly random. But in the actual world, in which because of pervasive sexism, victims of gender-based violence are often viewed as lacking credibility and perpetrators are rarely brought to justice, a sex crime, for a victim can be a brutal confirmation of an already unjust status quo.” -Susan Brison
I recently watched this clip from Last Week Tonight with John Oliver about public defenders. It is not a slam against public defenders, but rather a criticism of a system in which anywhere from 60-90% of people arrested cannot afford lawyers and rely on public defenders, but there are just far too many of them for public defenders to do their job adequately. This leaves many defendants with less than adequate representation. As a result over 90% of cases by public defenders end in plea bargains, even when the people aren’t guilty. That’s a quick summary, but watching the clip is well worth the time and speaks for itself.
And I started to think about the entire philosophy of justice we have in this country and got really sad about it all. It would be one thing if we had a beautiful ideal and we were continually striving towards it, but it seems that there is enough of a portion of this country that feel justice is working fine, and that if you are in a position to be arrested than you simply have some sort of punishment coming your way. The system is rigged from the police procedures that target low income people knowing that many can’t afford to fight back and will pay fines whether they were really guilty or not, to the court system which puts low income people at a severe disadvantage, to the prison system which profits from long jail sentences for minimal crimes. And once they are in there, opportunities are so low once they get out. As President Obama said, we have 5% of the world’s population, but 25% of the world’s prison population and compared to other western nations with similar standards of living we are one of the least safe nations. The violent crime rate is down 40% from what it was in 1980 and yet prison populations have increased by over 400%. Something is definitely not right.
And my question really is why is it this way? As poverty continues to grow in this country why do we continue to punish the most impoverished of our people for simply being in poverty? I’m not saying that there aren’t people who commit crimes and that we should just let it happen, but when you look at the environment and challenges they face, those who criticize rarely have experienced such adversity. Sure there is always a small portion who rise out of poverty but for the most part the poor are simply exploited for their labor or for their money. On average, we don’t give them a living wage, we don’t give them access to equal education, we don’t give them equal access to quality health care, and we don’t give them equal access to healthy and affordable food options.
But they all deserve it right? Making those bad decisions when they had so many good decisions open to them. Do we not have a responsibility to raise the less fortunate up? Do we just leave those who haven’t had the opportunities we had to languish and justify it with the idea it’s their fault they are in this position? What about forgiveness? What about compassion? How can we paint such a large population of our country with just one color and ignore the tapestry of lives that exist there? As the top income earners continue to suck away the wealth of the bottom 99% why do we turn our attention downwards, kicking those at the bottom instead of shaking the tree more to let the fruit fall to the ground? Some people in this country act like if we just eliminated the poor the country would be a better place, but in fact it would be chaos and nothing would remain. No soldiers to fight our wars, no workers to pick our food, serve our food, work in retail, and all the other jobs we don’t even notice get done everyday. And even if the void could be filled, the capitalist policies our country function on would simply shift more of us down to the bottom, while the rich keep benefiting.
Welcome to an economy built on consumerism and profit. To answer the real question why, one simply has to follow the money. It is to the benefit of the rich to keep the population of a large portion of the country poor. Because there is only so far wealth can grow, it is finite and if the populous has more, they have less. Life, liberty, and happiness for all citizens of this country take a backseat when money is involved.
I know this post was ranty and I try to put more logical discourse, but just sometimes you just look at these large systems that are so difficult to change when you are just one person and see millions upon millions of people being impacted by a system that is simply not there to help them, and in the long run doesn’t help the rest of us either. I made a resolution with myself about a year ago then when I moved strongly by something emotionally I need to not just complain but do something positive, even if it’s just donate some money to a worthwhile charity. Although perhaps on the periphery of the central theme of this post, there is something that I have been sort of procrastinating getting involved in for some time and I am happy to say I am procrastinating no longer. I have decided to be a CASA volunteer which is a wonderful program where the volunteer acts as an advocate for a neglected or abused child in court until the system finds them a good and safe home. Incarceration is a strong possibility for children who grow up in broken homes and maybe helping in this way I can help a few kids stay out of the prison system in this country.
Instead of just getting upset and complaining I have decided to be proactive. I recently posted about the Indiana business owners who openly admitted to not wanting to serve gay people and received $500,000 dollars in donations. While such support for hateful attitudes upsets me, I have decided the best way to answer this was to try and match that by raising money in an equal amount and support a local organization in Indiana who is trying to make things better for the LGBQT community. So I started a charity fundraiser page. While a goal of $500,000 may be ambitious, and perhaps other people had the same idea, even if I raise only the money I have donated to start things off, then at least I am doing something positive I figure.
So I’m asking that you please give what you can and share this message on social media, blog sites, personal webpages, and/or e-mail. If finances won’t allow for a donation at this time, I hope you can still pass this post along and ask your friends to donate if they can. Thank you all for loving! Below is the link for donating:
The discussion of free speech has once again risen up after the Charlie Hebdo massacre. For some interesting reads please take a look at this article on the Ethics of Free Speech and this article that presents a Muslim’s perspective on the situation. Many of the ideas in these articles are important and so I wanted to throw them out first so that I don’t repeat their points too much. If you’re too lazy to read them (I barely had time to write blog posts anymore so I understand)though I’ll list some important points that are guiding my thoughts right now:
The argument for freedom of speech often gets turned into a “Those who want that freedom” and “those that don’t”. This is a false dichotomy because generally the disagreement lies where along a spectrum of “Freedom” we must draw the line on free speech.
Is freedom of speech always a good thing?
Words have power
When the news broke about what happened in France on January 7th, I have to say my reaction was not one of surprise. Muslim extremists are nothing new, and given the anger that was sparked when Danish cartoonists depicted the prophet Mohammed in their publication, I just wasn’t surprised.
Now this not to say that I didn’t think it was a terrible tragedy. Of course it is. I don’t want anyone to think that my position is that those at Charlie Hebdo got what was coming to them. There is a difference between not being surprised and thinking such an act of violence against them was deserved. There is no question that these Islamic extremists have got it wrong. They don’t understand their faith, they will fail in achieving whatever dream world they want to live in, and they will simply cause more harm to others and themselves with time. I can say that with certainty, in the long run, they will fail to get what they want and it is clear that all good people should and do oppose their aims.
Before looking at Charlie Hebdo let’s take a closer look at this whole cartoon depiction of Mohammed stuff. Perhaps by putting things into context you will understand why I was not shocked to find that this happened. First, we can agree that killing somebody over such a thing as a cartoon, no matter how offensive,
From the South Park Wiki. The picture of Mohamed was available, but I chose to show Buddha instead. I’m okay with that. 🙂
is ridiculous. That being said it is not unreasonable for someone to be offended when their religion is ridiculed. People do it all the time, they just don’t go all the way to killing somebody. I am sure there are many other moderate and peaceful Muslims who were offended by Charlie Hebdo or the Danish cartoons previously. And of course some number close to 100% of them never killed anybody over it. Satire, comedy and comic depictions of religious figures is not new, but it is relatively new. Such things quickly got you killed in Europe not so long ago if you tried to ridicule Christianity or religious leaders. And while I believe the world as a whole, on average, progresses forward in terms of morality and reason, there are pockets of people going in reverse. As an example, I find it interesting that prior to 9/11 there was no outcry about a South Park season 5 episode in which various deities from other religions banded together to save the day. I guess Mohammed was not ridiculed but still a cartoon is a cartoon. This episode was even available after 9/11 for a number of years and has only recently been pulled. I guess it was off the radar for awhile and perhaps South Park Studios didn’t want to take the chance anymore. The point is that the backlash against Islam post 9/11 seems to have had a more polarizing impact on Islam and the west, such that those who wish to do us harm have looked for more reasons to do so. Therefore, it seems to me, those who perpetrated the attack on Charlie Hebdo would have likely found another target had they not been drawing cartoons, but their doing so simply added them to a list of possible targets. Crazy people generally don’t have good reasons to cause such harm, so should we be surprised that in a country with a lot of Islam vs French tension, where a magazine is ridiculing Islam that this simply puts them on the radar of the crazy people? Personally I don’t think so.
Now let’s get back to freedom of speech. We can also agree that it’s important, but just because you have the freedom to say something that doesn’t mean you should. If you’re wife asked you if she looked fat in something, then you would have the freedom to tell her the honest truth, but I think you know how well that will work out for you. Also having freedom doesn’t necessarily mean that there aren’t consequences for exercising that freedom, and law may have very little to do with it. In truth, I have the freedom to go and kill somebody. But there are consequences to that action. Those consequences may simply be a fear of getting caught, more often than not though it is our own moral center that prevents us from doing such a thing. We may even have a good reason to do so, but I also think about what my friends and family would think about me, how I would provide for my child, the times I would miss with my family, etc. We are free to do a lot of things when you think about it, but our choice to act on those freedoms must be weighed against the consequences of our actions.
One of the Charlie Hebdo satirists said “We can’t live in a country without freedom of speech. I prefer to die than to live like a rat” in regards to whether he was
worried about angering Muslim extremists. While I can feel a certain amount of respect for someone who lives by their convictions, I do wonder about the value of that conviction. Of course, the chance of dying from a terrorist attack in the west is extremely small, and perhaps if he knew that there was even a 10% chance of being a target of Muslim extremists, he might not have been so sure of himself. I am also opposed to religious extremism (or really any kind of extremism) but if I am going to have convictions on the matter that are worth dying for, satirical cartoons seem like a strange way for me to take a stand. If we want to defeat extremism, are satirical cartoons helping the situation? I doubt if any extremist has looked at one of their cartoons and said to his fellow crazy Jihadists “Hey guys…you know what…I didn’t get it before but this cartoon has really shown me we’re being ridiculous. Let’s just relax and maybe talk to some more moderate imams about interpreting the scripture in the Koran more carefully”. Furthermore it seems one of the best way to quash Islamic extremists is actually by having most of the Muslims who are more moderate on your side. Doing something that most Muslims find offensive, might not anger them into attacking you, but it doesn’t exactly win their hearts. Therefore if anybody thinks that drawing satirical cartoons of Mohammed is in any way taking a stand against Islamic extremists then you are quite simply wrong. It does nothing but divide people. At best, those who appreciate the cartoons are a group of secular intellectuals who appreciate the wit and who already agree with the points you are making. At worst, those who appreciate the cartoons are bigots wishing to eradicate all Muslims from their country. The point is, such cartoons aren’t helping and are most likely making things worse.
What people seem to forget is that 1) being right isn’t always the most important thing, and that 2) even if you want to be right there are multiple ways to make your point. Richard Dawkins is right about a lot of things, and yet many people, even humanists, atheists, and agnostics think he’s an asshole. In thinking about these cartoons, I was reminded about my confrontation with the gay bashing fundamentalist Christians who came to our campus. I asked the main guy point blank “Even if you are absolutely 100% right do you think that your offending and insulting them is going to convince them to your point of view?” He was sure that they were going to hell and so he felt that what he was doing was the strongest most direct way to get them to change their sinful ways. Anybody else of course can see that such anger and unkindness would never win the hearts of those they intend to save. The only people who are supporting them are those who already agree with them. So even though Islamic extremists are crazy, they don’t understand their faith, they cause harm, and their actions will ultimately cause them to fail to achieve their over arching aim, how we expose the extremists for what they are is just as important. Being martyrs is one of those possibilities, but the freedom to draw cartoons of the prophet Mohamed just seems like a silly way to make that stand.
Freedom of speech is an extremely important one to a free society. Speech has the power to sway. As it sways it can raise the consciousness, inspire, and lift men and women to more. However, speech also has the power to divide, misinform, offend, anger, and mislead. To quote Uncle Ben Parker “With great power, comes great responsibility”. I don’t wish for any government to censor publications like Charlie Hebdo. Taking away freedoms doesn’t help the situation either, and is never an answer to terrorism (i.e. The Patriot Act). Nevertheless, no matter how “in the right” we think we might be, let us also think about how we communicate our message. Freedom of speech is an important one to fight for, but there are many other good things to fight for and so it’s important to not get so lost in one fight that we start to lose the others.
There is one solution that really solves all our problems. It’s just two words. In these two words there is no more hunger, no more war, no more cruelty, or rape. There is equality amongst gender and races. People can have guns and don’t have to have taxes imposed on them. Everybody makes smart decisions about their health, about sex, about when to be a parent, about how to be a parent, and raise their children well.
You probably know people like this, and you know people who advocate it because it’s so obvious and easy. It’s called Personal Responsibility. I capitalized it because it’s so important and because it is the answer. Alright, I’m done blogging.
…hang on…nope…I just remembered something. We don’t live in a utopian fantasy.
You shouldn’t need to have a law that tells you to wear a seat belt or text while driving I know this is important so I drive safely
You shouldn’t need a law that forces you to get health insurance or makes you be a responsible employer and take care of your employees by giving them a living wage
You shouldn’t need to have laws that force you to hire women and minorities as it should be self evident that gender and race don’t matter and that ultimately it boils down to who is best for the job
You shouldn’t need to have gun control laws. One can be trained how to use a gun and keep it in a safe place away from children
You shouldn’t need to impose regulations on corporations.
You shouldn’t have taxes imposed on you. If something is important I’ll be happy to contribute some money to someone who will do what needs to be done.
You shouldn’t need to get welfare because you can work.
You shouldn’t need money as an incentive to work.
You shouldn’t get raped if you are personally responsible about what you wear and how you behave (umm…how about being personally responsible and not raping someone?)
These are just some of the common complaints you hear from people in regards to laws, governance, and “responsible” behavior. Anyone can see how sensible these statements are, theoretically. Yet one wonders why indeed do we have laws or talk about imposing such laws and regulations? If everyone was as awesome as you, who feels so injured to have something imposed on you when you already know you should do it, what’s the point of government sticking its nose in your business? Why is society dictating my behavior when I already know better? You know your business and conduct yourself responsibly. Right?
For now I am going to pretend that nobody is willfully ignorant (which is also pretty utopian). The problem of course is, that personal responsibility is kind of like the nature of God. Everyone has a different definition of what it means. If every citizen in the country had the same definition of personal responsibility things might be alright. Although this in itself would be hard for a big country, in which everybody lives in different regions and by definition the regional disparity requires different needs. It only takes a handful of farmers to feed a lot of people, yet those farmers are just as important as the whole lot of people they feed. So the first step would be for all people to accept within a country at the very least that people in all parts of the country have value and we may have to contribute some of our income to them. This might include roads, education, and protection. Protection itself can come in the form of a police department, fire department, or military. One could argue that if everyone was personally responsible the need for a police department kind of goes away.
A personally responsible society however also recognizes their place in the world and in nature, and so realizes that the decisions they make might adversely impact other countries and wants to make sure that it is nice to other countries. They recognize the value of preserving wildlife and rare species and is responsible about what it hunts and where it builds. They recognize the true cost, not only in monetary units of drilling, mining, extracting. This type of responsibility also costs some money because sometimes we might have to do things a little more expensively to preserve ecosystems or protect the environment. This personally responsible society doesn’t mind.
And accidents do happen. There are infectious diseases, natural disasters, etc. Society pays for things in which nobody is to blame. It is the personally responsible thing to accept that and contribute to help mitigate damage and help rebuild and repair.
Most of the people in this personally responsible society don’t feel too much stress, because the very rich realize that they don’t really need all that money and are quite happy to use their massive wealth to help out the person who doesn’t make too much of his own. As a successful head of corporation he is extremely happy to contribute more to society because he has a lot of excess.
What a great place to live, but of course it doesn’t exist.
So perhaps the first question we might ask, “Is everybody capable of this broad set of requirements for personal responsibility? Of course the answer is no. Nurture plays a big role in this. We have belief systems, disparity in education, disparity in resources. Even if nurture could everywhere be equal, we still have genetic differences. Some people have physical and mental disorders. Trauma happens in people’s lives that impact their ability to function at a high capacity. Even when it’s an accidental event, and not something like murder or rape. The free market ends some businesses, causing people to lose jobs. Theoretically new jobs are created, but those might be in some other location. Another country even. Also as time goes on we make new discoveries in science and technology. The industrial revolution has brought about climate change, but it seems unlikely that we started building all these factories knowing the harm it would do in the future. As we become aware of things, new areas of responsibility become apparent. So there is going to be a natural evolution towards winners and losers, new problems to deal with as old ones become understood and more cost efficient, and the personally responsible thing to do would be work together to continue fighting that imbalance. It requires vigilance.
The next question we need to ask is “What can be done to make people more personally responsible?” There is no quick fix, and there is no one answer. Education can make us better aware of problems that impact society. Of course knowledge and wisdom are very different. In Plato’s famous treatise on love he talked about agape and love of humanity; a brotherly love for all mankind. We need more of this kind of love, but people fear (and perhaps with good reason) that it comes at the cost of a loss of individualism. I’m not certain that is completely true, but it might be. But this love must extend to more than just to our fellow human, but to life itself. The planet. Our home. We must also be humble and lose our conceit. It may have served us well in our evolutionary past, but now survival is not so difficult when we are working together.
Love for the humanity and the planet, however begins at the individual level. It begins by showing compassion and love to those in our lives and those we meet. Helping those who need help and also thinking about how best to help them. Being personally responsible is a journey within our own lives and does not happen overnight. It is journey that doesn’t end when you’re 30 or 40 or 50, but continues your entire life. And it is everyone’s job to be personally responsible but always keeping in mind that some people simply don’t have the ability to contribute as much as you, often through no fault of their own, and when you help raise them up and show sincere concern for their well-being they are likely to reciprocate that generosity. Finally we must value happiness over wealth.
And even after all that…it’s a struggle. The great thing is though if we do a better job of keeping these virtues in our heart we will never struggle alone.
Cloak Unfurled 