Ever since sexual assault allegations surfaced against Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, Wikileaks supporters, many who consider themselves "progressive," "liberal," pro-women's rights," "anti-rape," etc. have rallied behind Assange. Many supporters claim Assange was being set-up by his enemies. Feminist Naomi Wolf blatantly discredited the alleged victims' stories while documentary filmmaker Michael Moore called the allegations "hooey." Even MSNBC host Keith Olbermann laughed off the allegations. Blogger Sady Doyle called these progressive heroes out on their ignorance. Moore eventually responded. Wolf still can't separate the facts from her own ideology. Olbermann on the other hand barely apologized. Had it not been Doyle, Jaclyn Friedman, Salon.com's Kate Harding, and countless activists at the Twitter hashtag #MooreandMe, raising awareness about the realities of rape survivors would go unnoticed.
Jessica Valenti was another woman who played role in highlighting the myths and realities surrounding Assange's rape allegations. Valenti is the author of three books: Full Frontal Feminism: A Young Woman's Guide to Why Feminism Matters, He's a Stud, She's a Slut...and 49 Other Double Standards Every Woman Should Know, co-editor of Yes Means Yes: Visions of Female Sexual Power & A World Without Rape and The Purity Myth: How America's Obsession with Virginity is Hurting Young Women and is considered by Salon.com as "the poster girl for third-wave feminism."
I caught up with Valenti and we discussed briefly how and why progressives should support Wikileaks and a fair investigation/trial for the alleged victims as well as Assange.
A lot has been said about the sexual assault charges against Julian Assange. Why are many progressives rallying to the defense of Julian Assange as opposed to the alleged victims?
I think as a culture we tend to think of rapists as obvious bad guys - like a scary man jumping out of the bushes. When it comes to those on the Left, the same is true - people don't want to believe that one of their progressive heroes could ever do something so terrible. But someone can be a great guy when it comes to politics and still be a rapist. It's not a zero sum game. As for the alleged victims; victim-blaming has always been around and I don't think that progressives are immune to it.
What have been the worst examples so far where the alleged victims have been discredited by Assange supporters, the media, progressives, etc.?
I don't think I can bring myself to list the worst! But obviously there's a lot of lying about the women going on - something that's par for the course in rape cases.
What's also bothered me is the continued misrepresentation of the allegations against Assange (oh, it was just a broken condom!) and the rape laws in Sweden.
I've heard from some progressive-minded Assange supporters that the timing of Assange's rape charges make this case suspect. Why is that faulty logic and why is that not an excuse for Assange's alleged behavior?
There's no doubt that the timing of the charges is politically motivated - but that doesn't have anything to do with the veracity of the women's claims. The women brought their charges forward in August; they have nothing to do with when Sweden decided to act on them.
Is it conceivable that the government is using sexual violence charges as well as the alleged victims as a cover-up to go after someone Assange? I personally find that hard to believe because I've learned that false sexual assault charges against the accused are rare. Even rarer are those who lie and stick to their stories. Your response?
I think if someone wanted to create a cover-up, rape charges would be the dumbest way to go! They're notoriously hard to prosecute. If someone wanted to frame Assange, there are much easier ways to do it.
Assange supporters like Naomi Wolf, Michael Moore, and Keith Olbermann have been heavily criticized for their support of Assange and their dismissal of the alleged rape victims. One person who seems to be flying under the radar is Naomi Klein. Recently, Klein tweeted that "Rape is being used in the #Assange prosecution in the same way that women's freedom was used to invade Afghanistan. Wake up! #wikilieaks" How serious is this claim? How does it hurt the alleged victims case and how does that comment compromise sexual assault awareness?
I don't think Klein's tweet was wrong, or that it called into question the women's claims. Yes, women's freedom was used to invade Afghanistan - but that didn't mean that women's freedom wasn't a real issue, it was!
Last question: The sexual assault charges against Julian Assange may be a teachable moment in promoting rape awareness. What are the most important things people should take from this case in relation to sexual assault awareness and what many alleged victims face?
I think this case goes to show how far we have to go, culturally and legislatively, in battling rape culture. The victim-blaming, the smearing and the dismissiveness really shine a light on how backwards our thinking on rape is.
Jessica Valenti (via Google Pics)
Follow Christian Avard on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ChristianAvard
I think it's important to remember that rapists are not just strangers. 80% of rape survivors knew their assailants, and because the misconception that rape is just what you see on the "special victims" murder porn shows is why it is so hard to get convictions for most actual rapes. People think that "rape" is a terrible thing, and don't "blame the victim" but invariably don't consider the particular case in front of them to be "rape-rape" and/or think that the particular survivor in front of them was "of course not to blame, but should have... [screamed/fought/screamed more loudly/ fought harder/ reported sooner/ carried a gun/ shot the guy/ known martial arts] or shouldn't have... [dressed that way/ gone into the room with her assailant/ consumed alcohol/ been walking alone in that neighborhood at night/ opened the door]" or similar.
Among other things, I am sick and tired of people claiming that their Progressive cred makes it okay for them to dismiss rape allegations, malign anyone who has the courage to level rape charges, dismiss acquaintance rape in general as not "real" rape, etc. Progressives are not automatically guiltless as far as promulgation of rapeculture is concerned. Just look at the Knepper--I mean "Huffington--" Post.
However, it is dishonest to pretend that the two major parties' records on women's issues are identical.
That when someone is accused of a crime, an investigation is warranted, and that under most civilized judicial systems, the accused is innocent until proven guilty.
Of course that might put several untold numbers of pundefecators - whose jobs it is to generate heat rather than light - out of business.
Look, if I can't have sex it's not my revolution, but Naomi Wolf's columns were inexcusable. A woman can claim the right to say yes without having to give up the right to say no!
What lying about the women is there?
And,
I think people have a problem w/ a broken rubber & 'sex while sleeping' being a transgression on a 1-night drunken stand. Perhaps this is why the alleged victims aren't being taken seriously, along with the timing & the one woman's CIA connection.
That said, the fact that Assange is a 'hero' doesn't mean that he can not at the same time be a criminal. Happens all the time, and, the 'greater' the man, the more crime he gets away with.
I think "people" don't think about what survivors go through in a rape trial, so "people" interpret any result other than conviction (delayed accusation due to fear, self-doubt, not wanting to make a fuss, not wanting to accuse someone she knows, police refusal to investigate, or if the accuser, discouraged by all of this, gives up on ever getting justice) as proof that there's an epidemic of women leveling false rape allegations for the hell of it.
I think that "people" don't blame "the victim" but invariably think that the survivor in front of them was dressed provocatively, or drunk, or incautious. I think that "people" would rather believe that than think "that could happen to me."
I think that "people" are against rape in the abstract, but sex with someone passed-out drunk isn't "rape-rape" and even if he drugged her it's not as big a deal as "rape-rape."
I also think that "people" who believe that the CIA deals with serious threats by sending agents back in time to level impossible-to-prosecute charges, in a country that has nothing invested in the leaked information, rather than quietly arranging a fatal accident are stupid.