Pointing Fingers

Healthy Masculinity in Toxic Shock

In the wake of the sexual abuse revelations in Hollywood, Silicon Valley, Washington DC and pretty much everywhere else, there seems to be a seismic shift going on.

The writing was already on the wall when Uber unceremoniously dumped Travis Kalanick to mitigate alarm over the increasing damage his tech bro misogyny was doing to the brand ever since Susan Fowler published her explosive reflection on her year at the ride sharing behemoth. The floodgates opened when neither Harvey Weinstein’s money nor lawyers were able to contain the rage.

A #MeToo campaign launched ten years ago by Tarana Burke caught fire on Twitter has had a powerful impact by illuminating the scope of the problem in a way that dry — yet devastating — statistics have not. There is a powerful wave of increasingly loud and determined women and their allies demanding — and getting — accountability in ways that we haven’t seen before and that were unimaginable not that long ago. And like any cultural shift, those who benefited from the status quo are fighting tooth and nail to discredit the accusers.

In our cathartic desire to remedy the situation and make perpetrators accountable, we also have to ensure we don’t allow a mob mentality rush to judgement on flimsy evidence, or let an occasional false accusation, to be used as ammunition to derail this moment. Just as we can’t expect exisiting conversations about race, appropriation and privilege to magically disappear nor allow them to fracture this galvanizing movement. It’s all but guaranteed that those with the most to lose are already weaponizing these anomalies. Or engineering deliberate attempts to stick a spoke in the wheel of this momentum by exploiting the fissures.

Aside from the plethora of articles in right wing media seeking to blame the phenomenon on liberals, warning that this kind of social warrior environment is the very thing that got Donald Trump elected, even mainstream media outlets are publishing articles suggesting men are looking back at their past behavior, wondering if they did something inappropriate and waiting for the shoe to drop.

Some of my male friends — mainly straight — who aren’t abusers, and haven’t sexually assaulted or predated on others, still find themselves either confused about what is and isn’t appropriate anymore, or give voice to that confusion by minimizing what is happening right now by making light of it. Similar sentiments we saw when Mary Kay Letourneau’s sexual relationship with her 12 year old student was viewed as a lucky triumph rather than statutory rape. (No doubt, the same men who would have reacted very differently had it been their 12 year old son coming home to announce he had been doing more than just banter with the coach in the locker room showers.)

The current President got away with his predatory behavior — including sexual assault allegations by various women and a rape claim by his ex-wife (even though she later walked it back) — by attributing it to “locker room” banter.

Locker room banter is really just another term for objectification of women, which is supposedly rendered harmless by it not happening in her presence. One of the less examined but equally cringe-worthy facets to the “Grab ’em by the pussy” tape was the degree to which Trump’s braggadocio was aimed at impressing Billy Bush rather than directed at actor Arianne Zucker. All she got was sweaty palms and Tic Tac breath along with exclusion from an inside joke that was evidently more pathetic than funny.

“I’d love to tap that bitch” is only tangentially relevant to the woman to whom the sentiment is being directed, but is far more about the speaker attempting to preen. Showing off his heterosexuality, virility and prowess among his peers in order to win their admiration and respect or simply assert his manhood.

The same applies to the catcall whistler on a construction site. That whistle has far more to do with impressing the guys next to him with his red-blooded heterosexuality than admiration for the unfortunate woman’s ass.

Gay men are equally guilty of objectifying other men in the same way for similar reasons. Although there are different venues that cater to insatiable male libidos. Even in a bathhouse setting, where men have gone deliberately with a single minded objective to enjoy relatively anonymous sex — and are walking around in just a towel surrounded by other men seeking the same — there is still an etiquette that is expected, and lines that can be crossed. Even in that situation, a man’s mere presence there is not an invitation for another man to grab and take whatever he wants without a respectful negotiation first.

I have also on occasion found myself in a position where a man thinks it okay to just jack off in front of me, despite every subtle or not-so-subtle cue I have given to warn him away from me (including sharp swats to the overly aggressive or tone deaf), but have dismissed such behavior away because invariably it has taken place at a bathhouse where there’s a certain expectation or likelihood of men ignoring or misreading cues.

It’s less acceptable, but no less prevalent, in a gay bar, where some men think it okay to grab another man’s ass, or grope his crotch, just because they happen to be in a gay bar.

While the dynamics in a bathhouse, sex club or even gay bar are still important in understanding sex, power and consent, they are markedly different from what we’ve learnt about most of the men that have been exposed for their conduct over the last few months.

I know that among most of my straight friends (since I was there with them), locker room banter was just about the only sex education we received. (There was even less education or role modeling for gay men back then, and unfortunately, this is often the case still today, but that too is a different conversation for another time.)

If examined from that perspective, sexual interaction with women was never understood in terms of what a woman wanted, but rather in terms of how far a guy could get, or how much he could get away with, before she was uncomfortable enough to put on the brakes.

What we are witnessing today is the final straw that women were hit with by the election of Donald Trump. The idea that a man could be caught bragging about his serial predatory behavior on video tape, treat his female opponent with the vilest, misogynistic disregard and still become President, was a bridge too far. What should have happened to Donald Trump is what has happened to Harvey Weinstein.

In order for this reckoning to have longevity, and truly transform the culture that enables unadulterated male privilege, we have to look honestly at where the mindset begins, and acknowledge that what we have dismissed as mere locker room banter is not nearly as harmless as we like to imagine. Just like the frat bro culture emanating from America’s colleges, it’s where the seeds of male privilege and entitlement are sown. The lessons we teach our sons are replicated in the same locker rooms among their peers.

The idea that men with power feel justified in taking whatever they want speaks to a level of entitlement that begins by supposedly harmless locker room banter that objectifies women to begin with.

Even the men condemning Alabama senate candidate, Roy Moore, in the wake of sexual abuse allegations against a minor are steeped in a misogynistic bent that props men up as saviors and protectors of their womenfolk. A violation of their property. How often are men told to imagine these acts against their wives or sisters in order to drive home the point because violence and degradation against the bodies of autonomous individual women isn’t abhorrent enough? Unsurprisingly, Donald Trump threw his support behind Roy Moore, opting to view his multiple accusers as liars as he did his own.

Comedian Louis CK, one of the latest to cop to the accusations against him, apologized, stating he took advantage of women because he didn’t realize how damaging it was because he had “asked” first and didn’t think about the predicament he was putting them in because “my position allowed me not to think about it.”

But the real question is why have we allowed his position to enable that degree of entitlement? To what extent do we glorify the cult of celebrity that a man sincerely and genuinely feels it okay for him to yank out his penis and masturbate without regard for the predicament of the women to whom he is exposing himself to, and just as importantly, without fear of repercussions from the community to which he belongs.

Kevin Spacey’s ill-timed coming out in the wake of sexual assault allegations against him by actor Anthony Rapp when the latter was fourteen, (followed by a string of additional accusations) speaks as much to the repressed sexuality that results in being closeted to begin with, as it does the dynamics of entitlement and privilege.

For gay men, the closet itself is a variation — if not unfortunate result — of locker room banter dynamics, where asserting one’s heterosexuality is confused with displaying masculinity.

The President’s son, Eric Trump, revealed the disconnect when he suggested “sometimes when guys are together they get carried away, and sometimes that’s what happens when alpha personalities are in the same presence.” Caricaturing the locker room like his father did, and attributing the bragging of sexual prowess to alpha male jockeying rather than recognizing it for what it is — a mask for insecurity and inadequacy.

The term Toxic Masculinity is being used to describe what we are witnessing at the moment, which is unfortunate, because exerting power over women to subjugate, harm, disempower or reduce them to objects is not a form of masculinity at all, but rather a case of Toxic Insecurity.

The extent to which assigning this particular label to the problem ignores the same power dynamics among lesbians who prey on or abuse younger women that have nothing to do with masculinity or femininity. But have everything to do with conduct and power. Even if the preponderance of evidence right now points overwhelmingly to heterosexual men as culprits.

Plenty of us, straight and gay alike, grew up being sexually educated and bantering in locker rooms and yet are perfectly capable of appreciating and respecting women as equal. Yet we still have to rethink the notion of locker room banter as a harmless boys will be boys socialization, and rather explore the darker lessons it teaches our sons and the degree to which we ourselves accept objectification of women as a meaningful or accurate measure of our masculinity.

We are witnessing the stress testing of patriarchy. Outdated gender binarism, with a narrow understanding of masculinity and femininity are also part of the problem. Many gay men who were bullied or witnessed bullying from the closet leveraged hypermasculinity as a survival mechanism to keep it at bay or to hide. All too often, unfortunately, adopting and exhibiting the same sexism and misogyny derived from a locker room education.

We have an obligation to address the root causes of the endemic sexual harassment, abuse and violence we are witnessing today if we are to change it.

It’s high time to teach our sons and daughters from an early age that all people, regardless of gender or identity, deserve their respect and that means being wise to what lessons they’re learning in locker rooms or are being subject to by, and among, their peers. To teach our children that language and behavior that degrades and humiliates others is abhorrent and unacceptable. So that calling out perpetrators is not an act of bravery, but a responsibility, for which they will be rewarded and supported and believed.

It’s important to differentiate natural masculinity from toxic insecurity and not confuse the two. Embodying stereotypically feminine traits, such as vulnerability and empathy, as reflective of a healthy masculinity that informs a man’s conduct, as opposed to ill-conceived conquest metrics that reward false bravado borne of insecurity and inadequacy, and are misattributed to masculinity. Distinguishing the propensity to protect women as if they are owned property from standing up for and defending women because they warrant and deserve respect as equals.

At the same time, as much as it is critical for men to do a lot more listening than anything else at this juncture, they still have every right to feel okay about expressing inherent traits of physical strength and primal male sexuality without being demonized for it. Or demasculinized, and made to feel their mere existence represents a threat. Otherwise it is unrealistic to expect anything other than resentfulness and defensiveness, neither of which are particularly helpful.

To the extent locker rooms remain among the primary venues that introduce children to both the vocabulary and concepts of sex and intimacy, along with consent and permission, now is the time to take more responsibility for shaping the conversations happening there.

Sure, locker rooms will continue to exist and men are socialized instinctively to preen, strut, exaggerate and show off to establish pecking orders. But that doesn’t mean we can’t change the indicators. So even the old fashioned notch-on-the-belt or mark-on-the-tie typically used to brag about conquests is understood as less impressive and more immature if only viewed as a game of numbers. Rather lauding, valuing and even aspiring to an ability to conduct, or simply appreciate, a mutually rewarding and consensual intimacy. So the response to a one night stand, achieved by failing to stop after being told no, is derision and scorn (or a punch in the face) rather than a congratulatory slap on the back.

It is in their interests — and those of communities as a whole — to better equip our kids to grow into secure, confident adults who understand their value isn’t derived from devaluing or subjugating someone else. So that locker room banter is no longer viewed as an excuse for misogyny or worse, but rather as one of the best places for eradicating it.

This essay is part of an ongoing online conversation between Tanya Domi and Clinton Fein on The Art of Engagement.

No Buyer's Remorse. They Voted for Trump

1. I voted for Trump because I hate the fact that I two people who love each other can marry each other. And who better to emblematize the sanctity of marriage than a pussy grabbing adulterer currently on his third marriage?
2. I voted for Trump because I believe oil companies deserve multi-million dollar subsidies but the government providing a helping hand to those who have fallen on hard times, or who aren’t privileged, is unfair and revolting to me.
   
   
3. I voted for Trump because I believe his administration will do a better job of spending my money on things like affordable healthcare or another golfing trip to Mar-A-Lago than I would funding my opiate addiction or paying for health insurance.
   
   
4. I voted for Trump because censorship is fine if you dare to criticize the President or try and build a mosque, but the Second Amendment is absolute and has no nuance whatsoever.
   
   
5. I voted for Trump because although I’m responsible enough to own a gun, I don’t see why felons, murderers, thieves and people with mental illness shouldn’t also be able to buy enough weaponry to open up an armory, and am grateful to be led by a nouveau riche Manhattan arriviste who knows his guns and won't come after them like Obama did.
   
   
6. I voted for Trump because I believe that people who know enough about science to make the mobile device, wireless and Internet, that I use to amplify my conspiracy theories on blogs and podcasts, know nothing about climate science, polar ice caps and carbon footprints or anything that might require me having to sacrifice driving the biggest, gas-guzzling vehicle possible.
   
   
7. I voted for Trump because I’m so concerned about the lives of fetuses I’m willing to compare them to children, so long as they (and their entitled mothers) don’t expect handouts once they’re actually born. And so we can continue to call ourselves pro-life while killing as many death row inmates as quickly as possible, before DNA or other science is able to exonerate them.
   
   
8. I voted for Trump because I don’t think illegal aliens should be able to work hard and pay taxes, nor be entitled to strong families, even though we call ourselves the Family Values party. And so we can break up their families to prevent them from eventually outvoting us, and thinking they can compensate for it with unfertile pockets of lands and casino rights as if we’re Native Americans.
   
   
9. I voted for Trump because I believe that businesses should be allowed to make profits for themselves by enjoying tax-free infrastructure Americans paid for with hard-earned tax dollars, shirking the slightest bit of regulation and oversight, and at the expense of dumping toxins into our rivers and polluting our skies. That’s why God made rubber wet suits and gas masks.
   
   
10. I voted for Trump because I believe conservative judges need to sit on the Supreme Court no matter what nefarious rules we break to ensure it and despite the Constitutional imperative of a President to nominate and seat a justice. And enable activist senators to ignore the will of the voters, in the name of curtailing activist judges.
    
    
11. I voted for Trump because I think that it’s better to ignore our own trope of “let the market decide” and instead, dissuade and unfairly penalize already-profitable, environmentally-friendly renewable energy companies so we can continue to rely on planet-destroying fossil fuels by simply slapping “clean” labels onto them. And by drilling offshore, in the Arctic and anywhere else we might suffer more oil spills, so we don’t offend BP, Exxon-Mobil and other old school energy companies. Or expect them to fend for themselves with their subsidized, multi-billion dollar profits and who need our protection more than “welfare moms” working two jobs.
    
    
12. I voted for Trump because I was so offended by the idea of Hillary Clinton’s email server compromising classified intelligence, I thought we would be better off ignoring warnings, and opting for an unvetted friend of Vladimir Putin as National Security Adviser and who lied about working as a foreign agent to secure top level security clearance. Only to be fired. And then blamed on Obama.
    
    
13. I voted Trump because he’s so busy signing meaningless, legally indefensible Executive Orders and playing golf at Mar-A-Lago every weekend, it helps me forget how incensed and outraged I was when President Obama did it on occasion, which also helps me turn a blind eye to treason, malfeasance, nepotism and incompetence, so long as I can keep chanting USA, USA loudly enough.

14. I voted for Trump because I want a President who hides his tax returns so that we can feel secure that our interests are paramount to his business interests, and we don’t let nepotism get in the way of conflicts of interest, derspite glaring evidence to the contrary.
    
    
15. I voted for Trump so that we could gleefully gut the State Department by 37% whilst still screaming, albeit very occasionally now, Benghazi with the appropriate amount of self-righteous indignation.

*No pregnant rape victims who were denied abortions were killed by mentally ill gunmen in the drafting of this list. (Married women, who can’t be raped anyway, weren’t included in the count.)

Terror Treason Trash & Toxicity. It's Truly Trump Time

The only thing Donald Trump’s ascendency has taught us is that a parent can leave a child enough money to hoodwink the ignorant and disaffected into transforming a narcissistic village idiot into an actual presidential nominee. There are the contributory factors without which this would never have reached the horror we now face. The media, obsequious and shallow, masquerading balance with thinly veiled subjectivity and bias, whilst generating billions of free publicity for a media whore who has already spent a vast sum of his own inheritance on self-promotion. And a rudderless, politically tone-deaf Republican Party that hitched its Aryan white fortunes to invariably unwinnable culture wars and an increasingly insignificant base that wraps everything from guns to abortion and racism to xenophobia in Jesus and jingoism, regardless of the constitutional hypocrisy.

The Self Immolation of Bernie Sanders

Anybody who knows me knows that I am antiwar. I was against the war in Afghanistan from September15, 2001, before it even started. I was obviously against the war on Iraq, who did nothing to warrant it. I have worried repeatedly about Hillary Clinton's propensity to be hawkish and who is more willing than I am to use military over diplomacy when occasion calls for it.

And regardless of Clinton's role in Libya, President Obama and the Europeans own the overthrow of Gadhafi and the disastrously unplanned aftermath. Unless you're politically motivated, how can Hillary now be  exclusively responsible for a war for which Obama and the US were accused of leading from behind?

And more importantly, holding Wall Street billionaires and banks accountable is as compelling a prospect as free college education, but what has Senator Sanders done, proposed, challenged, championed or planned to deal with the refugee crises and simmering tensions in the Middle East?

Because like it it not, the one thing you can rest assured about is that Hillary Clinton has given it thought and is familiar with the nuances.

So to compare Donald Trump to Hillary Clinton in foreign policy is the equivalent of seriously weighing the merits of Terri Schiavo in a vegetative state against Muhammed Ali in a boxing match.

Being antiwar is easy. And while it's great that Bernie was against the war in Iraq, and is willing to speak out against Israeli settlements, they do not alone equip one with foreign policy credentials any more than judging a beauty pageant in Russia does.

That Bernie Sanders is desperate enough that he's willing to equate the demented ramblings of a xenophobic, Islamophobic racist rapist with the serious foreign policy chops that come with being Secretary of State is the single most alarming thing I've heard from his mouth, and finally flipped my thinking such that today I didn't cast my vote solely for Hillary Clinton, but just as much against Bernie Sanders.

Homan Square Protests in Chicago in Wake of Ackerman Reporting

 Guardian journalist Spencer Ackerman's frightening revelations about Chicago's Homan Square, a secret, off-the-books interrogation facility, or equivalent of a domestic CIA black site, and the police brutality, torture and death, has opened up a festering secret.

Today, Saturday February 28, in 11 degree temperatures, a formal protest against Chicago Police and the torture, Guantanamo connection at Chicago's "Abu Ghriab" Homan Square was capture on live stream by Rebelutionary_Z STL LIVE, an independent journalist working with www.thefreethoughtproject.com and whose details are at the end of these screen grabs.

All these images below are attributable to him. 

As he pointed out in his narrative, the march that followed the protest (and is still going on as far as I know) had protestors holding up their hands chanting "Don't Shoot" in solidarity with the "BlackLivesMatter" movement. Understandably, as the lack of accountability with Chicago PD is a thread of the same tainted fabric of systemic violence and injustice that has come to define law enforcement in the United States. 

When we pretend torture doesn't happen and fail to prosecute, and when we militarize our local police departments, the blurring of blue lines is inevitable.

Ironically, Liberty Bank, appears to be housed in Homan Square.

This #HomanSquare story and Chicago's link to Gitmo is not going away. Stay tuned.

Our Evolving Response to Torture

The reaction to today's release of the Torture Report has certainly changed since the Abu Ghraib images blew the lid off America's torture tactics, despite the fact that Major General Antonio Taguba had written a damning report that sat gathering dust on Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld's desk.

My exhibition was about to open in San Francisco, and I had decided to test out Zazzle, who was boasting a proprietary archival ink and process that I had tested, liked and used for an exhibition a month prior at Axis Gallery in Manhattan.

Zazzle, at the time, didn't approve visual discussions about torture, (even without their name anywhere) and certainly not imagery, which it claimed was against its Terms of Service and might offend Christians. Enough to physically destroy two large prints the night before the opening. (Except for images of Jesus on a cross. Maybe if the Iraqis had virgin mothers the outcome would have been different). Zazzle also threatened to sue for defamation if I publicly chastised them.

Here's what Annoy.com said back then:

Fein learned of the last minute decision after a company representative informed him that two of his images had been deemed inappropriate, and Zazzle did not want to be associated with the images. The abrupt decision by the printing company altered the presentation of the exhibition and damaged the integrity of editions already released by the company.

The one image, recently reviewed at Chelsea’s Axis Gallery by New York Times’ Ken Johnson, who described it as “an American flag with the stars and stripes made from the text of the official Abu Ghraib report is accompanied by fifty representations of the iconic image of a hooded man teetering on a box with wires trailing from his arms comprising the stars.

The second image depicting President Bush on a crucifix entitled “Who Would Jesus Torture?” was also withheld by the printing company.

Company spokesperson, Matt Wilsey, claimed the image might “offend Christians,” and threatened to sue Fein for defamation after Fein warned he would publicly criticize the company’s actions.

Clinton Fein is a prominent First Amendment advocate successfully fought former Attorney General, Janet Reno, in a challenge to the Communications Decency Act (CDA) that was heard before the United States Supreme Court.

Needless to say, Zazzle was about to learn what negative publicity looked like. Some examples:

Zazzle agreed that the Abu Ghraib picture had been published many times elsewhere. However, they still believed that it represented human torture. Zazzle management insisted that the prints violated the site’s user agreement on the grounds of being both offensive to religious believers and excessively violent.

While the user agreement is usually specific to those who publish images on the Zazzle website, Matt Wilsey, director, Business Development, Zazzle, said the agreement also applies to cases such as Fein’s where the customer is using Zazzle exclusively as a private printing service.

Wilsey said the company had refused to print other controversial images, including those of Jews in German concentration camps and the Japanese Americans in US internment camps. He added that being associated with pictures such as Fein’s was at odds with the image the company wanted to project and that it was not obligated to print the pictures.

Molouk Y. Ba-Isa, Arab News

In South Africa,Kresta Tyler Johnson from Art Throb tackled it thusly:

In an attempt to disassociate themselves from these images, Zazzle declared them inappropriate and failed to print them for the artist. Little did they know who they were defying when they chose this course of action.

Noted for successfully challenging former Attorney General Janet Reno in a case that went to the US Supreme Court, Fein was not deterred. Instead of avoiding publicity, Fein ensured that is exactly what Zazzle got - particularly negative.

The artist brought into question the ethical nature of Zazzle's actions and the problems that arise when printers exercise editorial control. As Fein said, 'It's unfortunate that a printing service felt it was more important to apply a bizarre, inconsistently applied standard to an image that nobody ever would have associated with them anyway.'

And of course, in my home town of San Francisco, it was to San Francisco Chronicle art critic, Kenneth Baker, to whom Zazzle admitted printing and then destroying the images.

The Palo Alto printing company Zazzle scrapped two pieces respectively titled "Like Apple F -- ing Pie" and "Who Would Jesus Torture?" "Like ... Pie" makes a U.S. flag from lines of the Taguba report in red on white and a blue field with white "stars" clearly recognizable as the Abu Ghraib torture victim photographed standing atop a tin container, hooded, with arms outstretched and wired.

"This is one of the most widely published images of the day," Fein told The Chronicle by phone. "For that to be the reason [Zazzle] refused to release it is beyond me." The second contested image shows George W. Bush on the cross, sporting a missile erection, beneath the words "Who Would Jesus Torture?"

"They said they didn't want their name associated with my images," Fein said of Zazzle. "And I said the only way that would happen is if they refused to print it. They said, 'Is that a threat?' and I said, 'No, it's an unequivocal promise.' " Matt Wilsey, speaking for Zazzle, told The Chronicle by phone, "We're an e-commerce site where we don't see the images until they're printed. Clinton had uploaded some images to our site and after we printed them, we notified him that two of them violated our guidelines, and we issued a credit and destroyed them."

Even Los Angeles Times thought the behavior of a printer destroying art works was news worthy at the time. But with the exception of Arab News, where ironically the content could not even be shown, there seemed to be an understanding inherent in the media coverage that seemed to give Zazzle more sympathy than they deserved. 

Matt Wilsey, director of business development at Zazzle, said company guidelines ban images of excessive violence as well as derogatory references to religion. Fein's flag image "contains the image of torture," while the other image is "offensive to Christians," he said.

I checked in with Zazzle today. The company is still around, bragging about affiliations with everyone from Google to Disney. And while I don't know if they would print my images depicting torture today -- either my piece containing the Taguba Report detailing the torture and abuse at Abu Ghraib, or my Who Would Jesus Torture? image which they thought would offend Christians -- the one torture image you can still buy on Zazzle's site is an image of a man brutally nailed to a piece of wood. 

That remains the one torture image we seem to be able to live with that doesn't offend sensibilitites.

Rape Culture Awareness And Bill Cosby Allegations Raise Uncomfortable Questions

This piece was originally written for The New Civil Rights Movement.

On November 17, 2014, Whoopi Goldberg expressed doubts about the allegations made by Barbara Bowman, the woman who accused Bill Cosby of raping her when she was seventeen. She is the fifth of now seventeen women to publicly accuse the 77-year-old of sexual assault.

“Perhaps the police might have believed it. Or the hospital. Don’t you do a kit when you say someone has raped you?” Goldberg asked.

This is not about gender, it's about power. Men who are raped experience the same shame and carry the same burdens. Perhaps, in some cases, even more, given the society's gender expectations that have been shattered by the violation, along with the personal, physical assault.

Taking one's rapist to task is not simply a matter of telling the truth in the hopes one's accusations will be taken seriously (validated only by the findings of a rape kit and a corroborating statement to law enforcement). Asserting one's power in this context, requires a deep, inner strength to face the consequences of the rape long after the incident itself.

In an open letter to Whoopi Goldberg on phillymag.com, Lis Spikol takes her to task on her reluctance to believe Bowman for not reporting Cosby at the time of the assault.

“Why don’t we tell, Whoopi? Because our skin burns with shame. I thought my body would never get clean, not only from him but from my own stupidity and weakness. The minute after it ended I felt like I was being torn into pieces, like I was on fire, and I just wanted to shower. I felt crazy, confused, angry, beaten, lost, like I had a zipper running from throat to naval. I felt more alone than I’ve ever felt before or since. I felt like the severed pieces of my body were floating in darkness. I felt savaged. I felt terrified.”

Former supermodel Janice Dickinson has also been added to the growing list of women stepping out publicly to accuse comedian of sexual assault. In a graphically detailed interview with Entertainment Tonight, she relayed the incident she says happened in 1982.

“The last thing I remember was Bill Cosby in a patchwork robe, dropping his robe and getting on top of me. And I remember a lot of pain. The next morning I remember waking up with my pajamas off and there was semen in between my legs,” said Ms. Dickinson.

As to why she waited until now to say anything, Ms. Dickinson expressed an all too familiar response. “I was afraid of the consequences. I was afraid of being labelled a whore or a slut and trying to sleep my way to the top of a career that never took place,” she said, “I want to talk about this now and I want to really support the other women who have gone through this.”

Cecile Lipworth, Managing Director at V-Day empathized with Ms. Spikol. “Over the years that I've worked with so many women who have been raped/sexually assaulted, many have said almost exactly the same thing,” she told me. “The last line of this letter is the most powerful and is exactly the cost of violence against women that I know - so many women I have met merely survive the rest of their lives…they ‘haven’t completed any of my life’s coursework since that night.’”

In certain cultures, one's value as a human being is diminished by the act that's been leveled against the victim. It's why some victims are murdered under the disgusting guise of "honor killing" because they surely must have provoked the attack by simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Forever tarnished whores violating the sanctity and purity of entitled male expectation.

Families are shamed and shunned as well. Making a claim against a rapist or attacker subjects the victim to ridicule, humiliation and punishment – even from, if not especially by, the very police to whom the crime is being reported to the hospital administering an invasive, painful inspection with the contents of the rape kit, assuming there is one.

Patriarchic religions demand that women cover themselves from head to toe because the onus rests upon the women to deter the violent sexual behavior of men, rather than demand control from the men for whom women exist as mere objects.

The perils of ignoring rape allegations coupled with high profile accusations and exonerations complicate our response (or lack thereof) to sexual assault.

On November 19, 2014, a Rolling Stone magazine article, "A Rape on Campus: A Brutal Assault and Struggle for Justice at UVA," by Sabrina Rubin Erdely went viral. The jaw-dropping account of Jackie – a freshman at the University of Virginia – detailed her harrowing ordeal after she was brutally assaulted by seven men at a frat party. A gruesome tale that epitomizes the essence of rape culture. A female friend, in the immediate aftermath, questioned the wisdom of going to hospital given the cost to Jackie’s reputation. The ostracism that would inevitably follow the “girl who cried ‘rape’.” Jackie didn’t go to the hospital that night.

On November 22, 2014, in a mea culpa response to the Rolling Stone article, University of Virginia President Teresa A. Sullivan suspended all fraternity activity until January, admitting the organization’s failure to respond appropriately.

“The wrongs described in Rolling Stone are appalling and have caused all of us to reexamine our responsibility to this community. Rape is an abhorrent crime that has no place in the world, let alone on the campuses and grounds of our nation’s colleges and universities,” wrote Ms. Sullivan in an officially released statement. “We know, and have felt very powerfully this week, that we are better than we have been described, and that we have a responsibility to live our tradition of honor every day, and as importantly every night.”

Jackie’s ordeal shines a light on the power imbalance. To the extent that the rapists are students from the University of Virginia, her account is tantamount to betrayal of the institution. Sullying their reputation, dragging them down with her. Where appearances are valued above ethics and loyalty toward the brand, trumps the transgression of the individual. There’s a reason some students call the institution "UVrApe."

Ms. Sullivan may have suspended fraternity activities in belated embarrassment in the wake of Rolling Stone’s exposé, but in the culture of America’s alumni system, there’s only one person who will “never eat lunch in this town again,” and none of them are Jackie’s rapists.

Bill Cosby is a globally recognized and respected celebrity. And at the time of these assaults, much loved. The allegations are beginning to take their toll, however, as NBC and Netflix have both canceled Cosby projects, and TV Land has pulled Cosby Show reruns.

In an interview in Australia on Friday, Cosby finally responded to the allegations, stating: “"I know people are tired of me not saying anything, but a guy doesn't have to answer to innuendos. People should fact check. People shouldn't have to go through that and shouldn't answer to innuendos."

In a stunning display of cluelessness and contextual tone deafness, CNN anchor Don Lemon told one of the alleged victims, Joan Tarshis, who alleges Cosby raped her when she was 19, that “there are ways not to perform oral sex if you didn’t want to do it”. His remedy for warding off the assault – use her teeth. As is the pattern, Ms. Tarshis didn’t report the rape because she felt that no one would believe a teenager’s word against “Mr. America.”

Taking on Cosby would be difficult for anyone, let alone a young girl, who would not only be faced with the comparably endless resources at his disposal to discredit her, but her own self-doubt, fear compounding the injuries to both her body and psyche. And while reporting a rape will almost guarantee a challenge to the victim’s integrity, according to Ms. Rubin Erdely, studies indicate that false rape reports account for, at most, eight percent of reports. There’s not much of an upside to pretending to be raped.

In racially charged America, Bill Cosby’s behavior is especially disappointing. Not to mention how ironic his admonishments to young black men, to buck up and pull up their baggy pants, seem now.

Perhaps it is why Whoopi Goldberg is desperate to give Bill Cosby the benefit of any doubt. And while Goldberg has certainly experienced life as a black woman, her extraordinary success affords her a unique prism. And a position of privilege that perhaps informs her opinions, along with a platform from which to express them.

The election of America’s first black President has unleashed some of the worst racism we’ve seen in America in decades. With the Ku Klux Klan alive and well and inciting hate in Ferguson, it’s natural to want to defend a role model and beloved figure like Bill Cosby, and question the motives and doubts of anyone wanting to bring him down. But challenging the words of a victim of sexual assault, no matter how long after the incident, is part of another pattern, and reason why women feel conflicted about coming forward to begin with.

Whether we like it or not, the Bill Cosby saga is complicated by gender, race, privilege and celebrity. As was the violent gang rape at West Virginia University. Former President Bill Clinton faced sexual assault accusations, and there are some opining that there’s a double standard at play.

But at its heart, like rape itself, this is a story about power.

There’s no escaping that if a young Barbara Bowman was raped by Bill Cosby, the questioning of her motives, and reactions like those of Whoopi Goldberg do a disservice to women everywhere. Attitudes that underscore the very reason for which she’s being attacked and doubted today. That taking on one’s attacker is not only difficult, (and not only in extreme circumstances like Jackie’s) but sets one on a path that will lay bare one’s deepest fears, perpetuate one’s self-doubt and re-victimize one over and over again.

No matter how soon or far after the event itself, reporting it is a continuation of the assault. And that's a best case scenario.

Long after the physical pain has subsided and wounds have healed. If indeed, they ever do.

Midterm Election is a Mandate for the Dumbing Down of America

Feeling anxious that climate-change denialist Oklahoma Republican James Inhofe is likely to become the chairman of the senate environment and public works committee? The guy who wanted to launch McCarthyesque criminal investigations of climate change scientists and who compared the Environmental Protection Agency to the Gestapo? The man who authored the book “The Greatest Hoax: How the Global Warming Conspiracy Threatens Your Future”?

Does it worry you that the Gilbert School Board in Arizona voted to remove a page from the high school’s honors biology textbook, over "concerns" it may be in violation of an Arizona law requiring that all instructional materials promote “childbirth or adoption” instead of abortion? Or that the proposed solution -- is to tear out page 547 of Campbell Biology: Concepts & Connections, on which the offensive reference to morning after pills pollutes the childbirth and adoption over elective abortion propaganda? So what that it will result in the removal of the page teaching students about the Principles of Embryonic Development. It's collateral damage that surely beats any reference to pills that will turn biology students into promiscuous sluts.

It goes without saying that it's highly unlikely that the Gilbert School Board will introduce students to PrEP any time soon, the once-a-day pill that, if taken as directed, has a 99% efficacy in preventing the transmission of HIV. Perhaps the missing pages will result in kids simply abstaining from sex altogether. Perhaps they got their cue from Aids Healthcare Foundation, the world's largest AIDS services organization and Pornography Content Advisory that is using their multi-million largesse to deliberately misinform about PrEP's efficacy because they believe the publicity surrounding their controversial decision outweighs the goal of actually reducing HIV transmission. 

With censorship drives for students text books, climate change policy informed by God's six day marathon work session, and supposedly forward-thinking healthcare organizations spending donor contributions on deliberate misinformation campaigns, it seems like we are destined to become less informed and increasingly ignorant as we brace for the new season of the Kardashians 2016 elections.

Any fear or anxiety you may be feeling should be assuaged by the good folk down in Texas, on full display in the video below. America's future is in their hands. Rejoice.

 

Man Tortures & Kills Daughter's Rapist in India. What Would You Do?

As much as I despise torture, and as much as I frown upon vigilante justice, I find it difficult to outright condemn this man. The father who tortured and then killed his impregnated fourteen year-old daughter's rapist claims he didn't mean to kill him. 

“I burned his genitals once, he screamed. I did it again, he shuddered. When I did it the third time..he did not move. He was dead…I did not want to kill him,” the 36-year-old father has reportedly confessed. He tortured a 45-year-old medicine supplier after he found out that the supplied had allegedly raped his 14-year-old daughter and made her pregnant.

Rape in India is out of control, and the justice system seems to perpetuate rape more than prosecute it. Patriarchic cultural mores that punish victims further by branding them as "dishonored" -- sometimes to the point of justifying their murder as an "honor killing" in a demented interpretation that somehow the murder of their violated daughters or wives will restore honor to the family, are commonplace.

In fact it's the reason the father gave for not going to the police before dispensing "justice" himself. After the rapist warned his victim to shut up or risk dire consequences.

Perhaps it's because of the fact that this father couldn't take the pain and emotional toll the rape took on his daughter that I feel conflicted. That despite my own moral compass that condemns the torture and murder of the rapist being the wrong way to deal with it, I still somehow feel empathy for the father and most importantly his daughter. Appreciative that if vigilante justice was going to occur anyway, rather the rapist, (himself a father of four daughters), than his victim.

Obviously I still think torture and murder is wrong. I am against capital punishment, for heaven's sake. Yet this story still haunts me. Because rape culture is so pervasive, despite my better judgment and supposedly evolved mindset, I find it difficult to lament the punishment of its biggest perpetrators.

Bristol, Sarah and the Palin Klan. Keeping 'Merica Klassy...

It defies one's worst expectations.

Sure, Hunter Biden's discharge from the Navy for snorting cocaine is slightly embarassing for Joe. But no one expects the Second Family to be perfect. It's not as if the Veep himself was jacked up on cheap boxed wine involved in an all-out brawl, after watching Jill being dragged through the mud by her hair.

Thanks to a senile hawk in the senate by the name of John McCain, however, the unlikely scenario might have befallen the Second Family - had America been stupid enough to give McCain access to any red buttons, and his "all magazines" reading choice for a running mate - she whose views on foreign policy were defined by the views from her house. 

In reports released by the Anchorage Police Department, a clearly inebriated Bristol Palin recounts events of the drunken brawl involving her entire family that happened in Alaska. And what drunk mother doesn't drag her five year-old to crash parties with her mother and father in tow as well?

Yep, Mama Grizzly's poster child for abstinence is a sad reminder of how close this family came to classing up the capitol.

Addicting Info's Nathaniel Downes aptly summed it up:

The report lays out a rather simple scenario, one of alcohol fueled violence and impaired judgement on all parties. If it were not for the name attached to the brawl being Palin, nobody would even raise an eyebrow. But instead, this is a former Vice-Presidential candidate turned reality tv starlet, someone attempting to stretch her 15 minutes of fame as far as possible.

Read, breathe, and give grateful thanks to fate that this is the extent of Sarah Palin's relevance.