| I don't have a problem with Wendy Murphy's blunt language. I don't know if I agree with her analysis but her tone can't be a serious problem for those who have taken up the struggle to end rape. She was sharing a letter she wrote to the Boston Globe and her words should be read in that context. Her use of the term "rape privilege" was a critique. It's not news that groups who secure government funding often remain silent about things that matter. Nobody was targeted.
As a long time member of this listserv I hope it remains a place for professional development as desired by LB Klein as well as a place for the lively exchange of ideas and opinions. I'd like to see a response to Wendy Murphy's challenges rather than a retreat from the debate.
Gillian On Jun 12, 2014, at 4:57 PM, Wendy wrote: That's what George Will said - not me - and it's what advocates said in their petition to have him fired.
What don't you understand about SaVE?
It requires schools to define violence against women using very onerous criminal law standards instead of civil rights standards. (nonconsent and force instead of "unwelcomeness").
It allows "final determinations" to be made years after a victim's complaint is made -
It allows a burden of proof more onerous than preponderance to be imposed - which inherently devalues women by declaring their word less weighty than all other classes of people on campus.
It eliminates the requirement of "equitable" treatment of violence against women.
All these weaker standards apply ONLY to civil rights violence against women. Civil rights violence against all other protected class categories will still be redressed under more protective and less burdensome standards.
These lists - like parents and students - have a right and need to know.
Wendy
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 12, 2014, at 7:12 PM, "Klein, Lauren (LB)" <> wrote:
Hi Wendy (and SAPC listserv colleagues),
I understand that you are not in favor of Campus SaVE. You absolutely have a right to express your opinion and make arguments based on your analysis as an attorney. I'm not sure I understand your argument in this letter, but I respect your right to express
it.
However, the tone you are using and your use of language such as "rape is a privilege" seems out of place on a listserv dedicated to sexual assault prevention and response professionals on college campuses. Calling organizations that support survivors
"useless" or that our opinions are rooted in "quid pro quo for piddly government grant dollars" is offensive to me. Calling for several members of this listserv to be fired seems to also cross a line. While I do not share some of the opinions you have expressed
on this listserv, I have not attacked you in this way and do not intend to. If this is how you would like to express your disagreement, perhaps another medium would be a better fit, or perhaps this medium is no longer one that is serving its intended purpose
consistent with the values of our profession.
I come to this listserv for professional guidance and take no umbrage at differences of opinion. I do not subscribe to this listserv to read abusive language or to receive alienating communication, especially in a setting to which I turn for solidarity
and professional dialogue. I know that many of us are grappling with students or colleagues who have been triggered by George Will's piece or are struggling with continued denigration of our movement. I am troubled to find this a space that continues to make
us feel marginalized while we work to end sexual violence. It seems that we are receiving communications on this listerv that are not about dialogue but about monologue or exerting power. That seems antithetical to the purpose of our movement and our work.
I hesitate to send this, but I feel if we as a professional field are not only pushing a heavy rock uphill in our work lives but are disempowered in our own space, we need to express that is not okay. I am grateful for my
colleagues who are working on or closely with campuses as we work to support survivors and end sexual violence. I know I am not alone in my concerns and that folks sometimes do not want to send emails on this list because
they do not want to be targeted. That is troubling, and I know I am thinking about the potential of alternative spaces. I am hopeful that we can think critically about the purpose of this space and the value of safer spaces.
I'm happy to discuss this with anyone further off-list.
My best,
LB
Lauren (LB) Klein, MSW, LMSW |
Assistant Director for the Respect Program
Office of Health Promotion | Emory University Division of Campus
Life
Phone: 404-727-1514| Fax: 404-712-1519 |
The Respect Program engages
the Emory community to prevent & respond to sexual assault & relationship violence as part of the Office of Health Promotion which promotes flourishing and capacity building for a healthy Emory.
Confidentiality Statement: The information
in this electronic mail is sensitive, protected information intended only for the addressee(s). Please remember that the security of email cannot be guaranteed. Any other person, including anyone who believes they might have received this due to an addressing
error, is requested to notify the sender immediately by return electronic mail, and to delete this without further reading or retention.
From: []
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2014 2:11 PM
To: ; ; ; ; ;
Subject: Re: [WRAC-L] George Will piece on rape and "privileges" on college campuses
Dear colleagues;
In response to today's Boston Globe piece by Joan Vennochi regarding advocacy groups calling for George Will to be fired because he wrote a recent piece about rape as a privilege - I sent in the following:
Dear Editor;
Joan Vennochi is right that anti-rape advocates should not be calling on George Will to be fired, but she's right for the wrong reason.
George Will should not be fired because he is CORRECT that rape is a privilege on college campuses.
Rape is a privilege whenever law creates structured inequality based on gender - which has been the status quo in higher education for decades and was recently made worse by the enactment of an amendment to the federal Clery Act, known popularly as the Campus
SaVE Act. SaVE allows schools to treat violence against women under worse legal standards compared to violence against all other protected class categories such as race, national origin and religion.
Firing George Will for telling the truth won't change anything, though firing the heads of all the women's and victims groups that supported SaVE could make a real difference so long as they are replaced with people who won't compromise women's safety and equality
by remaining silent about an offensive new federal law as a quid pro quo for piddly government grant dollars that enable them to run useless organizations.
Rather than punishing George Will for telling the truth, advocates should explain WHY what he said IS the truth - and why - if SaVE hadn't been enacted, it wouldn't be.
Wendy Murphy
New England Law|Boston
617-422-7410
This e-mail message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of
the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged
information. If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution
or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly
prohibited.
If you have received this message in error, please contact
the sender by reply e-mail message and destroy all copies of the
original message (including attachments).
|
