• Search for:

• Categories

  • Announcement
  • child sexul assault
  • Diversity
  • Guest Post
  • Human Trafficking
  • Humorless Feminist
  • Legal Servivces
  • Motivating Moments
  • News
  • Powerful Women
  • Prevention
  • Privacy
  • Public Policy
  • Resource
  • sexual assault laws
  • sexual harrassment
  • Stalking
  • Uncategorized
  • Vlog

• Recent Comments

  • M Gonzales on Law Professor Will Ask U.S. Supreme Court To Reverse Decision That A Woman Can Be Fired For Being Stalked
  • Irma Rapier on Title IX & a Silsbee Cheerleader
  • Kristin on Title IX & a Silsbee Cheerleader
  • David Ewing on Title IX & a Silsbee Cheerleader
  • Corey on Your Face on Facebook, Google

• Admin

  • Register
  • Log in
  • Entries RSS
  • Comments RSS
  • WordPress.org

• Archives

  • ▼2012 (2)
    • ▶January (2)
  • ▶2011 (36)
    • ▶November (2)
    • ▶October (3)
    • ▶September (4)
    • ▶July (4)
    • ▶June (5)
    • ▶May (4)
    • ▶April (7)
    • ▶March (2)
    • ▶February (2)
    • ▶January (3)
  • ▶2010 (35)
    • ▶December (3)
    • ▶November (4)
    • ▶October (4)
    • ▶September (7)
    • ▶August (4)
    • ▶July (1)
    • ▶May (3)
    • ▶April (4)
    • ▶March (1)
    • ▶February (1)
    • ▶January (3)
  • ▶2009 (45)
    • ▶December (2)
    • ▶November (3)
    • ▶October (3)
    • ▶September (1)
    • ▶August (1)
    • ▶July (3)
    • ▶June (5)
    • ▶May (5)
    • ▶April (10)
    • ▶March (5)
    • ▶February (6)
    • ▶January (1)
  • ▶2008 (15)
    • ▶December (2)
    • ▶November (2)
    • ▶October (4)
    • ▶September (4)
    • ▶June (1)
    • ▶March (2)
  • ▶2007 (2)
    • ▶October (1)
    • ▶September (1)

During Stalking Awareness Month, Supreme Court will Decide whether Stalking Victims are Protected against Employment Discrimination

Washington, D.C. – On January 13, 2012, the Supreme Court will decide whether to hear the case of Martin v. Howard University. The National Organization for Women (NOW) Foundation and civil rights attorney Dawn V. Martin, want the high Court to hold that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects a woman from being stalked in her workplace and from being terminated for reporting it. NOW Foundation has filed an Amicus (friend of the Court) Brief in support of Ms. Martin. This case is particularly timely in light of recent attention to the failure of universities to respond to resports of sexual attacks on campuses and because January is Stalking Awareness Month. Howard, specifically, still fails to take complaints of sexual harassment seriously. See Bello. v. Howard University, 1:11-cv-02106-CKK; http://www.wusa9.com/news/article/177504/158/Lawsuit-Howard-University-Negligent-In-Sexual-Assault-Harassment-Case. Howard opposes the participation of NOW Foundation in the case.

78% of stalking victims are women. 54% of female murder victims reported their stalkers to the police before being killed by them. In a 2009 documentary about the case, Kim Gandy, then, the President of NOW, said: “We’ve had situations like this, where women, stalked in the workplace, were fired, or let go, because they were stalked.” Ms. Martin said, “No woman should have to choose between her job and her safety.”

Law Professor Dawn Martin was stalked on the campus of Read more

Emiliano is a Primary Prevention Specialist with TAASA
As kids, we said that “sticks and stones may break our bones, but words will never hurt us.” As adults, we know better. Words can shake us to our very core. One word in particular – SLUT – has shaken people across our country into action.

Since January 2011, SlutWalks have been organized internationally, each one garnering both praise and criticism, forcing men and women alike to engage in a difficult dialogue in order to confront the rape-culture that has permeated our communities. Regardless of people’s views of the use of the word “slut,” most can agree that SlutWalks have been effective in bringing attention to the issue of sexual violence. The organizers of each walk have been able to mobilize hundreds and, in some cases, thousands to take to the streets to demand an end to victim-blaming.

Similar to many of the other walks, SlutWalk Austin began as a buzz in social networks and culminated with a diverse group of people joining together to let their voices be heard, their presence be felt, and their demands be known. On Saturday, June 11, 2011 SlutWalk Austin got off to a shaky start with a few technical difficulties, but the message of each speaker remained clear – a woman’s clothing does NOT determine her worth and does NOT justify an attack. Victim-blaming will not be tolerated in the state of Texas, and in order to bring this message to others, the hundreds of participants from around Central Texas who had gathered marched down Congress with their signs and protest clothing, reclaiming their bodies and their streets.

SlutWalk Austin, like those before it, continues to peak interest and spark both conversation and action. A SlutWalk is scheduled for next month in Houston and more are being organized globally in small and large communities alike. Do you want to help put an end to victim-blaming? Think about joining this movement and organizing a SlutWalk in your community.
Check out video footage from the Slut Walk event in Austin:

http://www.youtube.com/embed/p0eWDtkG-i4

Texas Senate Bill 9 known as the sanctuary city bill gives police officers broader powers to ask people they detain about citizenship status. The bill passed the Texas Senate June 15th and is slated for a vote in the House this week.

Many years ago when I was working at a DV shelter, for a period of two weeks monolingual Spanish victims were reporting abuse because their husbands had been robbed of their paychecks. “Yea”, I thought, ”right”, until I took some clients to a medical clinic where the social worker reported a large number of monolingual Spanish male victims with defensive wounds. The story ends with a successful coalition of Law Enforcement, IRS, Banking Institutions, Social Services and the Mexican Consulate, each with a different perspective on how to solve the problem and a common value – community organizations are here to serve and protect everyone in the community so a vibrantly rich community
can thrive in safety.

I learned three important lessons:
1. Perpetrators have one status – perpetrators. As perpetrators they need to be prosecuted under the law.
2. Victims have one status – victims. As victims they have the legal right to services.
3. When a community operates “in the shadows” and is afraid to speak up, perpetrators will perpetrate on that community with impunity.

SB 9, though well intentioned, inadvertently results in a disconnection between safety and well- being for immigrant communities. Disenfranchising communities begs the question of who is defining safety and who has the right to safe. As advocates we support survivors unequivocally, link them to services (their right under law) and help them to obtain safety. It is imperative we consider the impact SB 9 and similar laws have on the work we do and the victims we serve.

In recent months, SlutWalks held in various locations have garnered national attention. Recently called the “most successful feminist action of the past 20 years”, they started in early April 2011 and are still happening all across the country. As a result, your agency may see an increase in calls and media activity. In response to that, we have prepared the attached talking points to help you and your staff not only know a bit more about the event, but also have a consistent message to share in support of both survivors and sexual assault activists.
History
On January 4, 2011 a member of Toronto’s law enforcement commented on a sexual assault incident with the following quote “women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimized”.
In response to the comment, enraged community members organized an event titled “slut walk” to highlight the term that both enraged and inspired them to join together with a message that victims are never to blame for their sexual assault.
Currently
TAASA works on behalf of sexual assault victims in many capacities. The blatant comment by the officer is a stark reminder of the societal views most often associated with victims of sexual assault . Confronting victim blaming statements is a vital component of TAASA’s mission.
SLUT Walk has taken the world by storm. Since the initial walk in Toronto other walks have occurred across the globe including here in Texas.
Consequences and Benefits
The term “slut” carries with it many negative connotations and may incite judgment and/or anger from an unassuming community member. Connecting the message to its original intent may proactively neutralize reactions.
SLUT Walk can be used as an opportunity to engage the public, create new local partnerships and create awareness about rape myths ubiquitous in our communities. The enthusiasm behind the movement has successfully activated communities around the world to unite in support of sexual assault victims while challenging the negative stereotypes that hinder justice for victims of sexual assault here in Texas and around the world.
SLUT walks are working to draw attention to societal norms about women and about sexuality that create an environment where sexual violence is more likely to occur. By bringing awareness to these norms and starting community conversations around them, we can all work to change these same norms and ultimately prevent violence from happening in the first place.

Here is an excellent blog post that offers new details on the case of Hillaire (pronounced Hillary),  a cheerleader in Silsbee, Texas, who was kicked off the squad after refusing to cheer “two, four, six, eight, ten, come on Rakheem, put it in” for her rapist: http://msmagazine.com/blog/blog/2011/05/27/a-cheerleaders-rape-in-a-small-texas-town/

A petition was also established to:

Tell Silsbee officials that this is no way to treat rape victims, and insist that they publicly issue an apology to H.S. immediately. Furthermore, tell them to instate a policy outlining appropriate treatment of sexual assault survivors, which does not put the onus on the victim to ensure smooth interactions at the school, and to instate prevention programs that have been suggested by H.S.’s father.

Update: H.S.’s family lost a First Amendment lawsuit, with the court deciding that cheerleaders are only a “mouthpiece” for their schools, with no right to refuse their to cheer their rapists. The court further declared the lawsuit “frivolous” and has ordered the family to pay more than $35,000 in legal fees. For the school to take money from a rape victim over their clear misconduct — even if it’s not for free speech reasons — is beyond the pale. Demand that Silsbee refuse to take money from the victim’s family.

If you haven’t done so already, please sign the petition today!

Additionally, if you’d like to contribute financially, a State Bar IOLTA Trust Account at Bank of Texas has been established to receive donations for Hillaire and her parents for court assessed costs, her legal fees and expenses.

Contributions can be sent to:

Watts Associates
IOLTA  Routing Number 111014325
Account No. 2902216304.

While the recent headlines detailing both a hotel maid’s account and past allegations of sexual assault by IMF Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn came as a shock to some, for those who work with victims of sexual assault – and victims of workplace sexual violence in particular – these facts are nothing new.  Sexual violence in the workplace is an all too common occurrence. It happens with alarming regularity across our country and is perpetrated by employers, supervisors, co-workers and third parties, such as hotel guests and other business clientele.  Many victims are met with skepticism, blatant indifference, or with a myriad of victim-blaming excuses or accusations.  Abuse of power in the workplace can manifest itself through cheating shareholders, harassing subordinates, and yes, sometimes by sexually violating someone with less power. In fact, tragically, far too often women who clean hotel rooms fall victim to sexual violence in the very rooms that they are paid to clean, just like the woman, an immigrant from Africa, who has reported Strauss-Kahn for sexual assault. Immigrant women are especially vulnerable to such abuses of power, whether working in hotels, agriculture, factories, homes or offices. Because they are immigrants and may have limited English language proficiency, fear of law enforcement, and are often isolated, few of these victims ever report the crimes that they suffer to law enforcement.

If we want to end sexual violence we must assure that weak or nonexistent sanctions are not the norm.  Law enforcement officials must be willing to believe victims when they make a report.  We commend the New York City Police Department’s swift and diligent response in this case.  Sadly, the NYPD’s response is all too often not the typical response of a law enforcement agency.  Victims of sexual violence must have information about and access to existing civil and criminal legal remedies so that they may have the opportunity to seek justice for what they have suffered.

We must also hold the media accountable for their reliance on innuendo and salacious details in lieu of objective journalism.  Finally, we must confront the thinly-veiled smear campaigns of reported victims at the same time we rush to the defense of the accused.

Constant speculation about the motives of those who report these devastating crimes is damaging to the victims in those cases, to anyone who ever finds themselves in a similar position, and to our social understanding of and response to sexual violence as a whole. It is no wonder that the reporting rate for sexual assault is so dismally low.

Unfortunately, Dominique Strauss-Kahn’s recent arrest has brought out the typical responses we’ve come to expect when a wealthy or high-profile man is accused of such a crime. We hear things like, “Why would a successful, powerful, and rich man NEED to rape anyone? He could have almost any woman he chose, or at the very least he could pay for the services of someone.” This logic seems to conveniently and consistently miss the point:  Sexual violence is about dominance and abuse of power.

Why is it easier to believe in the intrinsic dishonesty, vindictiveness, and opportunistic nature of alleged rape victims than to believe in a sense of entitlement, and lack of respect and judgment among alleged rapists?  In the Strauss-Kahn scenario some are even willing to accept an elaborate conspiracy theory (that this was a set-up by supporters of French President Sarkozy) rather than embrace the possibility that a self-professed womanizer with a documented history of sexual coercion, exploitation and – according to recent reports – prior sexual assaults could possibly attack a woman with very little power or status.

Mr. Dominique Strauss-Kahn deserves the presumption of innocence afforded to all alleged criminals in this country. We long for the day, however, when we show equal restraint before labeling alleged victims as liars and swindlers.  So yes, we are willing to suspend judgment on Dominique Strauss-Kahn’s guilt or innocence. By the same token, we are willing to look at the mounting number of accounts from women who speak of their own exploitation or abuse by Strauss-Kahn over the years. We hope the truth prevails and the public can stop being influenced by the far too common knee jerk reaction that disbelieves victims before the case proceeds.

Signatories:

CounterQuo
The National Alliance to End Sexual Violence
Legal Momentum
Victim Rights Law Center
National Sexual Violence Resource Center
The Voices and Faces Project
End Violence Against Women International
Rape Victim Advocates
Oregon Sexual Assault Task Force
Catharsis Productions
Hollywood NOW
Women in Media and News
Women, Action & the Media
Women’s Media Center
Leslie Thomas, ART WORKS Projects
Anne Munch Consulting
The Feminist Wire
Monica Ramirez
Mia Goldman
Chaitra Shenoy
Gillian Chadwick
Erin Scheick
Roseline Guest

For more information, please contact: Terri Poore, National Alliance to End Sexual Violence.

In fact there’s a lot that makes me angry enough to scream, throw the closest object I can get my hands on or want to punch a hole in the nearest wall.  But I’ve learned the last one hurts longer than the satisfying release of emotion it brings, so after enough pain (physical and emotional)  and cleaning up the messes (of all sorts) afterwards, I found I could use some of that same energy to write whatever and however I want. (I save that for a journal mostly, not the blog.) Physical and emotional release and no crap to clean up.  Eureka!

And that works most of the time.  But when I read about some of the stupid cards (and more than a few fit that classification) available on the Etsy website, my first reaction was to literally shout obscenities. (I was alone thankfully and didn’t have to monitor my mouth at work.)

You may have heard about them.  If not, wonderful. At this point, I’ll just say that one is titled, “Congratulations. You got bad touched!”  The person selling the card chooses to be identified as “youstupidbitch” (not a bad choice I think) and includes this pitch to grab buyers: “Get creeped on, go through a heavy pat down at the airport, go through a colonoscopy and embarrassed? Know someone that has? Then this card could be for them.”

Not a word about sexual assault.  But the graphic is a drawing of a naked woman huddled in a shower.  Maybe it’s just survivors and those who work in the sexual assault field who would see the graphic and think “sexual assault.”  Don’t know.

After my initial reaction I thought, “We (TAASA) need to draw attention to this stuff. It’s just wrong, hurtful, disgusting, on and on.   We can put it on Facebook.  Get people to mount a campaign to stop it from being sold.”  I’d seen others taking action on the issue.

Then came the question I often ask after my initial gut reaction to something I find offensive or outright hurtful.  Is drawing more attention to (fill in the blank with latest issue) the best action here?  Or will that serve to increase attention and sales? Is this an issue or policy or trend where we advocate for change?   Not simple questions to answer.

Of course getting more information helps make the decision, but usually isn’t my first response.  Thank you to Narissa Johnson for a tweet leading to more questions about the whole card drama.

• “Youstupidbitch” began offering cards for sale on the Etsy site Oct. 26, 2010.
• There are 32 different cards offered. A total of 31 sales have been made.
• The “You got bad touched” card has been viewed 35,524 times (over 6,000 more views than the next most viewed card.)
• Four, that’s 4, “You got bad touched” cards have been sold.

You can draw your own conclusions from those bits of info.  I thought “Wow, only four cards sold.” Thankfully, I am surprised. I wonder about the total of views. Maybe most of them were sexual assault advocates/activists checking out the offensive cards. I do know if I were the seller, I probably wouldn’t put any more effort into similar cards.

If you decide that taking action to remove the card from the Etsy site is the best choice, you can sign a petition at Change.org.  If you decide to contact the seller (who says s/he has received several thousand angry emails about the card), you can add to the list, though it looks like appeals other than anger may have a more beneficial effect.

Personally, I’m choosing to not take action—other than raising questions to you.  I welcome your responses and decisions.

The uproar over the current airport screening measures is being heard loud and clear. TAASA has received more inquiries on this issue than any other in recent memory.  TAASA wants to be cognizant of our collective security issues as well as offer a reasoned response to the legitimate concerns and fears of travelers across our state and country.

Our concerns are four-fold:

We are troubled by the potential for sexual assault survivors to be triggered by the imaging screening or pat down they experience.

We are also uneasy about the general public being subjected to such invasive and unnerving procedures that  have obviously made some passengers feel more violated than inconvenienced but safer.  

We are also worried that there may be some serious gaps in adequate training for TSA agents on how to best screen passengers who may have sensitive physical or emotional issues that need to be factored into the normal indignities of losing control and privacy over one’s own body.

Finally, we find it distressing that TSA’s own hiring practices do not necessarily preclude a sex offender with a conviction longer than 7 years ago from hire as a screener.

Let me be clear: my intent is not to demonize the TSA screeners.  They have a job to do, and I am certain the vast majority of them are doing this job to the very best of their ability.  They are following a directive, and one can be pretty sure this is not the best part of their workday either. I do not believe however that this procedure is well-thought out, as the unintended consequences illustrate. 

On the surface it seems the argument has been presented as one of collective security versus individual privacy. I would contend otherwise.   Is this screening reactive or effective?  Are these screening procedures the best methods for identifying potential terrorists? If you can refuse the imaging screening and opt for a pat down, what stops potential terrorists from simply inserting the explosive into their body cavity, like drug mules have been known to do, to avoid detection?   Will screening procedures ramp up to include full body-cavity searches if we discover terrorists using this method of transport? How far will we be willing to go?

Dogs trained to sniff out explosives are being used effectively in war zones.  Why are we not using these canines at airport security lines?  Have we explored all potential screening methods available to us? Were these methods chosen because they are the very best options available, or were they chosen in part because of simplicity or cost? I do not claim to have the simple answers to these very complex issues, but I do feel certain that we need to gauge the impact of these actions on the citizenry.

I implore the federal  government to find tangible ways to further minimize travelers from feeling victimized, while using all deliberate speed to implement less invasive methods of screening.  There are folks trained in victim issues all across this country ready and willing to help security professionals strike this delicate balance.

The Texas PINK OUT kicked off to a rousing start yesterday!  Check out how the Dallas Area Rape Crisis Center participated in this statewide (and beyond) effort to affirm that “People Are People” and discourage homophobia and gender stereotyping.
(Oh, yes…if you don’t blink, you’ll see some TAASA staff doing the PINK OUT.)

 I’d love to see (if you’ve got some photos) and hear (videos, maybe?) how you and/or your organization are participating in the Texas PINK OUT. (Send them to me at lhunter@taasa.org). Do you think the effort will make a positive difference?  Or perhaps you see it as “okay, gets some attention, but won’t really change much”? 

After I hear from you, I think I’ll have to say a bit about how it’s made me think more than I maybe wanted to!

“Behave,” a special episode of Law and Order:  Special Victim’s Unit will air tonight at 8 p.m.  CST on NBC.  Written by executive producer, Neal Baer, the episode spotlights the backlog of untested evidence collection kits and how that backlog affects survivors and allows perpetrators to escape any accountability for their crimes.

In her Sept. 24 SVU Production blog Mariska Hargitay says,

One of the most rewarding aspects of working on SVU is the show’s ability to shine a light on the problem of sexual violence. This next episode is one of the most meaningful I have ever done, and it stands as a powerful example of the way we aim to raise awareness about these difficult issues.

Rape crisis hotlines may expect an increase in calls during and following the episode which includes information about the Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network (RAINN).

When Mariska Hargitay began her role as Detective Olivia Benson on SVU over 10 years ago, she wasn’t prepared for the kinds of “fan” letters she received from victims telling her of sexual assaults they’d suffered, some many years before.  For many of the survivors, Mariska was the first person they’d told about the assault. She was deeply touched by their stories—and motivated to use her visibility and influence to do something about what she saw as a “silenced epidemic.”

I felt a great responsibility to these brave men and women and wanted them to know that they had been heard and that they could have hope. I studied the subject, trained to become a crisis counselor, and used my visibility as an actress to become an advocate.

So, in 2004 Mariska founded the Joyful Heart Foundation, an organization dedicated to helping survivors heal and reclaim their lives.  Since that time, Mariska’s (and the foundation’s) work to bring a voice to the “silenced epidemic” of sexual violence has expanded significantly.

In May she joined survivors, activists, experts and legislators who testified on the rape kit backlog before the U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security. Testimony urged legislators to enact victim-centered reforms and prevent future backlogs.   Mariska specifically stressed that survivors must be at the center of the dialogue and reforms.

These kits represent human beings who have suffered greatly. Testing their rape kits sends victims the fundamental and crucial message that they and their cases matter. Not testing them sends the opposite message.

On Wednesday, the Joyful Heart Foundation will launch a new web project designed to serve as a comprehensive resource on the evidence collection kit backlog:  www.endthebacklog.org.

You can also find excellent resources at http://www.nsvrc.org/projects/eliminating-rape-kit-backlog.

Watch the episode with me tonight.  Then share your responses here or on TAASA’s Facebook page.

Next Page →