I think this phenomenon is fueled by othering the perpetrators. Jack can’t be a racist, he’s generally a nice guy, as if all racists are drooling monsters.

The reality is that we all have prejudices, often subconsciously, to some degree. We all do things that make others uncomfortable, sometimes. We’re all a little bit racist and sexist. What separates the good people is that they are willing to admit it and work to be better, instead of denying a problem exists.

It’s almost Socratic. Knowing that we all can be harmful is the first step to becoming a person that doesn’t harm others. Unfortunately, black/white thinking makes it hard for people to admit they hurt someone, because only a monster would do that.

Now as far as justice for the victim and remedy for the accused, I find social shaming a good tool. Make the person who committed the sexual assault sit outside the domain in which it happened or somewhere in the public eye. Put a big sign on the person and let them stand there being socially isolated. That’s powerful stuff.

This is why the Block list program is generating so much backlash. You’re naming the perpetrators and taking them out of your social domain. I think doing this in other social domains is worth a shot. Each community gets to have their own list and if the person is especially grievous then pretty soon they won’t be welcome anywhere.

@dezn_98: you are really on to something important here, and I would very much like to give your thoughts a signal boost. With only minor edits, your comment would make a great post for several online publications to which I regularly contribute. If you are interested, please contact me at irisvpluym at gmail d0+ c0m.

You can lead a horse to water….

No. If somebody harasses another attendee at a conference, they’re out and they stay out.

We’re not talking about children here. We’re not talking about mommies getting annoyed. We’re talking about adults, some of whom are committing serious crimes. The chance they will commit the same crime when they’re allowed to return is too great a risk to the potential victims to allow. If they absolutely must attend a con, they can attend the FtB con, where there’s no danger of touching anyone inappropriately. Otherwise innocent people are all too likely to be the ones to pay for that attempt at tolerance.

When I was a child, a neighbor had an excellent policy for our visits. If we misbehaved, we were sent home immediately. But we could always come back the next day and try again.

If a harasser were ejected from a conference immediately and allowed to come to the next one … excellent solution. If they just don’t learn, and are ejected from the nean. xt one… give them a longer time in “time out”.

And some are clueless and refuse to change – they need a permanent b

I usually use “they” when discussing hypothetical people, but in this case I determined that it would be confusing and unclear because I was also using “they” for plural victims in the same sentences. This is not a post in which I wanted to be unclear.

But thanks for the unsolicited writing advice. 🙂

The first trend I see is some people seeming to prioritize the accusers rather than the victims. In these cases, we see things like “we don’t really know what happened” or “lets not rush to judgment” or “show me proof.” Now while these things perfectly rational positions on many issues, on social justice issues these positions are under the guise of rationality but usually used as things that maintain the status quo of victimization. Social justice issues, because of societal inequalities need to be handled differently – for many reasons.

Now what I see is that most of the time the most vocal, and the most aggressive people that take these position on social justice issues are the ones that have the privileged status in the first place. In regards to sexual harassment and rape accusations, the ones with the privilege are men, and this the ones that espouse these position the most.. are men.

These trends are eerily similar to what white pole do when something racism happens and the victim of the racism speaks out about his experience. You see white people want to talk about racism in a very odd way. They like to pay lip service to it being bad, but they also pretty much always align themselves with the accused rather than the victim. Many times white people use themselves as an analogy to how this or that is not racist.. and many times I have to tell them that this does not vindicate the accused, it just makes you just as racist as them. What whites tend to do with racism, is they look at it in a way that tries to protect themselves. Which is why race conversation with whites usually involve them trying to prove they are not racist, or saying they do not wish to believe the victims of racism because they feel… if accused themselves of racism (and they know they are not racist) they would have not ‘allies’ to believe them that the accusations are “false,” therefore they try to give the benefit of the doubt to most other whites accused of racism.

I mean c’mon… it is obvious why… because who wants to be in the position of being labeled a racist! HOW HORRIBLE IT IS TO BE ACCUSED OF RACISM! This sort of reasoning makes them typically end up defending racism, or functioning in a way that works to silence the victim because they ask for “hard proof” before they “jump the gun and do the worst thing imaginable and accuse someone of racism who is not racist! Dear lord! The irony is rich.. and this sht happens everywhere.

People are more likely to protect their interests, right or wrong, more than they would protect the interests of someone from an outside group.

With rape and sexual harassment accusations.. the pattern is the same. Accept this time the privileged ones… the so called “allies of feminism” are very very quick to toss a wrench in the works and say things like “We need to find out what really happened” or “I am not going to label the accused anything…’ Men do this for the same reasons white people continually betray minorities when they speak out about racism.

The truth is that many men are afraid they will be accused of rape or sexual harassment and since they know “they would never harass a women ever ever” then the reaction of everyone scares the sht out of them… because where is the sympathetic audience of the accused? If they were ever accused, and they know why did not do it… who would listen? This is why men in general tend to be the ones who do not “jump the gun” in “aiding” the victim tell their story because they are frankly scared of “false accusations of sexual harassment” just like whites are scared shtless about “false accusations of racism”… therefor they tend to ally themselves with “giving the benefit of the doubt” to the accused because that is where they interests lie. They may sympathize with the victim, mostly women, but because they are this allegiance can harm their privileged status… they “play the middle road” and be “rational” to try and be balanced and give the accused their say.

See men, in general, are not scared of being sexually harassed, they are scared of being accused of being a harasser… just like whites are not scared of being the victim of racism, they are scared of being labeled racist. As such, when sht hits the fan… sadly, most privileged, even allies, will not provide as much support that is needed for the victim, but their status is more connected to the accused. Instead, they “play the middle road”… but this road usually works to silence victims and enable harassers.

Giving the benefit of the doubt to the victim is what is necessary when talking about social justice issues… because society as a whole does not do this, and it routinely works to fck over victims of all kinds of discrimination. As such, victims need support that they never get from society as a whole. This lack of support is what enables the continuation of discrimination. When any kind of issue involves a social justice aspect where one groups is systematically disenfranchised, we have all the reason in the world to give the benefit of the doubt and support the victim instead of “playing it safe” and extending and olive branch to the accused because the accused happens to be a part of the privileged group we may be a part of. This olive branch may seem like a rational thing to do to those who are widely misinformed about social issues, but in the larger scheme of things, it is what works as a mechanism of silence. What is really needed, is to build a framework of support for victims of sexism, in this case sexual assault victims, because the structure of society right now works against them, and in order to enable them to fight against such a system, they need people to listen to how they have been victimized – because all to often no one listens to people who are victims of societal abuse.

Women do not talk about sexual harassment or rape because few believe them, many make excuses for the incident, many place responsibility on the victims not the accused, and many wish to trivialize injustices. It is the same for minorities and racism… we don’t talk about race because no one believes us when we say that is racist, many make excuses for racism, and many trivialize out plight.

The way society function to maintain the status quo of injustice is revolves around these almost universal trends. We need to start recognizing and calling out such trends so we will not be fooled by them.

You know, as a man, when I read this story… one of my many reactions is “what if why is lying” and “what if it was me being accused.” Not just sympathy for the accused, but that irrational fear that comes with being a part of the privileged group. That sort of odd reaction disgusts me, and it is what I saw in many other men as well… and I am tired of seeing it. There is a division in gender on this subject and it is a trend that needs to be looked at, because that division is a symptom of a deep societal issue.

It you look at the women who post about this subject, and how the men post about this… the contrast is self evident, and the trend is there. This sort of division exists, and it exists in all cases where there is a privileged group and a group that is the victim of social injustices. I think we need to recognize this trend as well, and I wanted to point this out to everyone. What this is about, should be about, and what it has to be about… is about letting the victims have a voice. If anyone functions in a way that stifles that voice, they are doing something very wrong, and they are allying themselves with a privileged and unjust system rather than the ones seeking justice.