One needs to view the stunning denouement
of the Dominique Strauss-Kahn matter through the lens by which we draw conclusions in today's raw, blunt, and pre-determinative social (and media) context.
Specifically...
Our brains have been programmed.
Our neural networks locked and loaded.
The minute we hear a narrative that involves the rich and entitled, versus the poor and disenfranchised, the characters are fully drawn, the conclusory structures erected, the judgments calcified.
On one hand, you've got DSK's history of sexual hopscotching, and our inherent distrust of those in positions of power (especially when they work for a global NGO as luxe and mysterious as the IMF.)
On the other, we've got the virtuous, hard-working immigrant who's the putative victim of a sexual attack. It's a tabloid delight, it's an occasion for grandiose pontificating about feminism in France, about double standards, about infidelity, about French-American relations, everything that feeds the insatiable media maw.
In this case, it appears that the story was concocted. While sexual relations did indeed occur, the hotel maid is an unreliable witness, and there are all sorts of revelations that are tumbling out. Revelations about her conversations with a man in jail who was in possession of 400 pounds of marijuana (doesn't that rise to the level of an entrepreneur?), bank deposits, multiple cell phones, an inaccurate visa application. You've got the seamy picture.
I'm sure there will be all manner of investigation and hand-wringing about the way DSK was whisked off the plane like unidentified baggage, as well the entire circus atmosphere which amounted to a presumption of guilt, and the rush to judgment by Cyrus Vance, Manhattan's new District Attorney who has morphed from son of a distinguished American to global embarrassment in just a few news cycles.
But to me the most compelling and cautionary aspect of this debacle has been the way it demonstrates how deep and abiding our belief systems -- and hence our prejudices -- are. Our readiness to believe the worst about the wealthy and influential Dominique Strauss-Kahn is no different than our parallel instinct to believe the worst about anyone who too easily inhabits our pre-constructed cabinet of clichés: The misbehaving athlete, the industrious Chinese, the lazy, unemployed black youth, the narcissistic blogger. (Actually, the latter is largely accurate.) We live in a snap and app culture of the instant, so if anything our time for consideration -- let alone pondering -- is diminishing rapidly.
It's unlikely that this will change. Implicit associations run deep, there's a whole discipline within behavioral psychology that studies (and measures) the depth and immediacy of the automatic associations we make.
Given the way we're wired for quickness, it requires an extra effort to overcome that urge. But that extra effort is nowhere in sight, which is a big social problem. (Instead of the government running campaigns to introduce a new food pyramid -- which is actually a plate, not a geometric structure -- why not have them encourage us to actually think about stuff?) Because whether the unexpected is that a rich and sexually voracious guy may not be a rapist, or whether it's one of Nassim Nicholas Taleb's "black swans," we are unprepared for the things that matter most -- those that fall outside our existing patterns that dictate our reactions.
We all have tabloid brains today, and while that flood of dopamine is highly entertaining, it doesn't allow for contemplation of the unexpected. Which is exactly what we should be thinking about.
Follow Adam Hanft on Twitter: www.twitter.com/hanft
Just because that chick had a hard life and knows some dubious people doesn't mean she wasn't attacked,it just means the D.A. is scared to lose now.Not the first time a victim is getting demonized and her flaws are leaked to the press.
Her past doesn't change the bruising or the DNA, don't you think?
"Evidence" dude....think about it.It goes a long way in court.
But for that matter, look at Casey Anthony. Not rich. Not powerful. Probably not right. But acquitted of the most heinous charges against her. Yet the constant drumbeat from (and I use this term loosely) "people" like Nancy Grace who harp on the negatives night after night after night and... guess what? Most of my friends on Facebook were horrified that this woman "got off." That she "got away with murder."
Well... maybe she did. But there clearly wasn't enough evidence for 12 jurors to believe she did beyond a reasonable doubt. So... what of that?
I think it's ANY public "personality" - whether built up themselves or by others - we LOVE to see our stars rise then knock the ladder out from under them and cackle when they fall. And the powers that be are laughing AT us, because we're so damn distracted with the soap operas on the media that we're largely missing the looting and fleecing of American by those who have all the money and power.
Maybe you were referring to that?
http://counterpunch.com/cockburn07012011.html
Just because the alleged victim knows somebody who's in jail and lied on her immigration form doesn't mean she wasn't assaulted be DSK.
Those who are complaining about DSK being judged too early without knowing all the facts are now pouncing on the victim in this case for matters that have nothing to do with the evidence supporting her accusation against DSK. The known evidence is still very much in her favor. The prosecutor is easy off ONLY because of some mildly unpleasant things in the victims past, things which have absolutely no bearing on the case.
It's only been discovered that she lied on her immigration application and that she happens to know someone who's in jail. There's no evidence she's ever lied about being raped, now or in the past. If there were such evidence, then her accusation her should naturally be called into question, but again, it this seems to be a complete fabrication that's caught fire among the pro-DSK, who are all too eager to believe this slander.
We know for a fact that she had a torn shoulder ligament, bruised vagina, and other evidence of an assault during her encounter with DSK. Did she inflict this damage on herself just to get him in trouble?