After the events of New Years Eve in Germany's city Cologne, where groups of men from North Africa sexually harassed and assaulted women and stole their cell phones and purses, an anonymous report by a German policeman insinuated that some of the culprits were from Syria. There was no proof for this – in fact now we know that only one 20-year old Syrian was involved, the rest are from Algeria and Morocco and apparently pretended to be from Syria. Nevertheless the right-wingers in Germany, at the forefront the Pegida-Movement, slammed refugees from Syria accusing them of raping German women.
To many Syrian refugees who were never involved in the shameful attacks in Cologne, this was a shock and deeply hurtful. To show that they did not condone such actions they initiated a Facebook event and called for a protest on January 16 under the motto: Syrian refugees say no to the assaults of Cologne.
Many Syrians have since commented and posted on this Facebook page and expressed disgust and shame about what happened in Cologne and apologised to the German population.
A German journalist now has responded to these posts, assuring the refugees that there is nothing for them to be ashamed of, nothing to apologise for and explains the reasoning behind his thoughts. In the end he urges the Syrian refugees to be strong and proud and not fall for the trap of the right-wingers who want to sow hate and division in German society.
Here is the letter that is worth a read:
_______________________
Hello,
I am a German. And a journalist. And I am deeply ashamed that so many of you get the feeling that you should be ashamed and have to apologise now. So let me say this:
I am ashamed that so many of my journalist colleagues have used the attacks in Cologne to produce sensational headlines serving their greed for more reader – and totally ignored facts, known numbers – and that they deeply inflict damage with this on all refugees and especially refugees from Syria in Germany. I apologise for these shameful actions.
I am ashamed that in the last year alone Germans have torched over 400 refugee camps and homes, have beaten up refugees, frightened women and children, attacked their buses – even shot at refugees sleeping at night in their beds and wounded them. Those actions are criminal and disgusting and not what Germany is about. I apologise to all refugees for these attacks and especially to those who have been wounded, frightened and robbed of their peace after all they endured fleeing here.
I do. – But at the end of the day – you and I apologise for crimes we did not commit.
And as much as I understand the urge to do something, to say something to make this shame go away, neither you can with your apologies nor I can with mine.
We have to face the fact that in every basket of good apples there are rotting bad apples that ruin it for us all if we don‘t watch out.
Germans are not a pure, innocent breed. We are humans like you with all the good and the bad that comes with it. While right-wingers now produce a huge uproar over the ugly attacks on women at New Years Eve – they never speak up for German women being attacked by Germans, sexually assaulted by Germans or even raped by Germans. And they ignore that we have special institutions in this country where women can and do flee to to save themselves from the brutality of their male companions, husbands or lovers.
No, we Germans are humans like all, and we have terribly bad apples amongst us, men who do not respect women, who assault them sexually and act criminally and disgusting.
We just don‘t talk about it. We don‘t want to point the finger at ourselves.
You however come in handy. If we can point the finger at you – whether rightfully so or not – we can ignore how much bad apples we have amongst ourselves and make you the scapegoat for everything. Then we don‘t have to think about our own actions. And before you know it, everyone is talking about refugees sexually assaulting innocent German women – and no one notices anymore that we do so much bad things ourselves.
It is true – men from North Africa and Arab states, so witnesses tell us, have attacked women on that night and shown shameful aggression. Some men. Some 40, 50 or 60, perhaps 70 men – out of way over 1 million refugees.
If we had so few criminals within our 80 million German population we could be happy. But sadly not. In 2014 we had more than 7,200 reported cases of rapes and sexual assaults on women in Germany, in the vast majority commited by Germans. A shocking number. – We just don‘t talk about it.
The bottom line is that those men who attacked women on New Years Eve where brainless, shameless criminals. It doesn‘t matter where they came from. And the truth is too, that those men who rape and sexually assault women in such horrific numbers in Germany in one year are also brainless, shameless criminals. Their nationality doesn‘t matter a bit. You find criminals all over the world. It is part of the human race, not of one a nation or people.
I am not ashamed as a German when some who call themselves German torch refugee camps. Because I don‘t consider such people Germans in a way that I am German. They are standing outside of any civilisation, and you sadly find such sick people all over the globe. So, I am not ashamed – but I am outraged. Incredibly outraged.
And so you should be. Don‘t be ashamed as refugees or Syrians or Syrian refugees for the action of some sick people who may or may not (we still don‘t know all the facts) have come from a region near you. It means nothing about you as a Syrian, nothing about your dignity, your pride and your decency – and it is not your doing. You did not attack women on New Years Eve and I don‘t torch refugee homes or rape women. These people are not us, they are outside our sphere of civilisation. They simply don‘t belong in this world, but we sadly have to face the fact that they exist. But they are neither Syrian nor German – they are just a sick breed of people we could not manage to heal with education and civilisation.
Besides working as a journalist I took up teaching refugees in northern Germany in October last year because I feel we all have to do something to get you integrated as fast as possible, to give you back a life that will enable you to have a future and be strong and proud and able to support yourself. If we help you to help yourself, you can make it. And you will make it, I am convinced of that.
I have a large number of Syrians in my class. They are the finest people I could possible have come across. Decent, well-mannered, polite, interested to learn, eager to shape their future and find a place in German‘s society. I am blessed to be allowed to teach them.
Last week we talked about the events of New Years Eve. They were outraged, disgusted – and as I could see: hurt. Hurt to get blamed for something they not only did not commit – but something they would never commit. If you are a decent person there is nothing worse than if people insinuate you could do such shameful things. I really felt sorry for them. They did not deserve this.
Here‘s what I told them: Stay proud, stay strong, don‘t let this get to you personally. And if people on the streets now in Germany occasionally look at you with a grim face because of this – just ignore it. We have idiots in our society just as every nation has. But they are not the society. They are just a tiny minority that lacks any compassion, any humanity and any decency. I could apologise for them but I shouldn‘t. They are not me and I am not them, and luckily they are not Germany.
And I gave my ‘pupils‘ this advice: always stay friendly and walk away. And learn German to the best of your abilities, because the better you speak German, the less these idiots will be able to brand you as refugees and will have to accept the fact that you are here and welcome to stay.
Build your future, build your life. The stronger you become the better for us all. In the end we can fight these idiots in societies only if we stick together. Because in attacking you they mean nothing else but to attack us all – the Germans who welcome you, who show humanity and compassion and who treasure this democracy that you are now beginning to be part of. We are not going to give them the pleasure and hand over this democracy and the values of civilisation we have achieved. No such luck. But it is nothing less they hope for when slashing you with insults and accusations for crimes you did not commit.
Let‘s not play their game. You don‘t need to feel ashamed and neither do I. You don‘t have to apologise and I don‘t have to either. In the end we can only win if we keep our heads up high, stay proud and strong and not get deterred by those who want us to fall and fail.
You are here and you will stay here. So are we. Then let‘s do it together and it will be win-win. And the triumph that those idiots had nothing in their helpless little hands but hate – useless, idiotic hate – will give us the strength to build the future. Because what they do not want to understand is this: Your future is ours too. While we help you to build your future, we build our own.
For this reason we need you to be strong. Don‘t hang your head in shame. Keep it up high and proud on your shoulders where it belongs. Only then can we shape a future that will be a gain for us all.
Wishing you all the very best in your new life. Never lose hope. Just never.
____________________________________
The letter has been widely read now on Facebook and commented, with many Syrians expressing gratitude for these words. It can be found here.
Showing posts with label sexual harassment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sexual harassment. Show all posts
January 13, 2016
June 27, 2012
Denying sexual assault on women assaults them once more
The accounts of horrific sexual assaults against women in Cairo have been accumulating in the last weeks on social media and garnered a lot of attention by users of twitter and facebook. Reports of women attacked by mobs - sometimes up to a hundred - of sexually crazed men, ripping off the women's clothes in public places, raping them with fingers and tearing at them to a point where the victims believe they will die, are hard to bear - both in their description of an unimaginable amount of aggression as in their conveyance of utter helplessness and anxiety on behalf of the victims. Reading such accounts can be a harrowing experience and is an emotional challenge to say the least.
Perhaps this is the reason for reactions that - to put it mildly - are hard to take for the victims on top of the horrors they experienced. When Natasha Smith, a British freelance journalist and documentary film maker living in Cairo, published the account of an unbelievably horrid and aggressive sexual attack on her by hundreds of men during the celebrations of the outcome of the presidential elections in Egypt, the social media world was in shock. Comments of disgust and true compassion made the rounds and her blogpost describing her ordeal was posted and reposted in huge numbers.
Not long after the blogpost got viral however a reaction set in that seems to become typical in such cases: the questioning of the credibility of her account. Was it true what she told us? Could this have happened in the way she described it? Was the account logical and coherent or were things missing, unclear, incomprehensible? Was she in fact just making all of this up to be in the limelight, get attention and become famous?
Apparently there are not few who think that writing in detail about how you get gang raped is a pleasurable way of garnering attention and becoming famous. The numbers of those who seemed to think so and started questioning the credibility of Natasha Smith rose after the first tweet started to tip off the wave. As with a rumour that spreads, the discussions in minutes flushed across social media platforms, now concentrating on the questions "who is she?" - "has she ever done something credible before?" - "is she lying?" - "does she want to makes us believe...?" - and away from the actual thing that needed discussing: the indisputable gross sexual aggression against women rampant on the streets of Cairo.
Often women deny it happened
While it is always good to not immediately fall for every story that is posted on the net the willingness to suddenly flatly reject the possibility of this sexual assault happening came close to denial. And the most troubling - and this I have not seen for the first time - was the fact, that it was almost only women who quickly jumped on board and called out that this female not necessarily had to be trusted. Not because they know her personally - but because ... - Yes, because of what?
Why is it that women much more than men so often in such cases resort to insinuating the story of sexual assault by a woman is fabricated, is a lie, is only made up to garner the attention of the world? Why are women not naturally inclined to take the side of the female victim that after all represents them as possible target of another assault tomorrow? Wouldn't this be the natural reaction and not the opposite?
Psychologists have studied for decades the reactions of humans on emotionally charged and troubling accounts of victims and found several reasons why one of the reactions almost always is to deny the victim's credibility. There are reasons that both genders have and reasons that are specific to women when it comes to accounts of sexual assaults and rape. In both cases it would be good to reflect on them.
It didn't happen, so I have nothing to fear
One of the main reasons in both genders for denial is the urge for 'self-protection'. By discrediting the victim's account one can brush it off with no fear to become victim oneself one day. Humans need a feeling of safety to live and continue to do what they are doing without the constant fear that all this could - as in the case of the victim of the accounted assault - break into pieces within minutes and shatter their lives. By looking away and denying this truly happened, lives can continue trouble free. And apparently this urge is so intense that inflicting hurt on the victims by discrediting them or questioning their credibility is willingly accepted.
It didn't happen, so I don't have to get emotionally involved
Another reason is the emotional self-protection many feel in need of. Getting emotionally engaged in what horror has happened to another human is energy draining to say the least and can seriously jeopardize being able to continue a happy, contented life. Empathy, showing sympathy for a victim, almost always needs a lot of emotional power that people are not willing to sacrifice for someone they do not know. There seems to be the belief that resources on this per person are limited and one better be stingy. And the easiest way to do this without feeling remorse for being selfish or cold hearted is by doubting that there is any story that would need such an input in the first place. If the victim's story is fabricated, no emotions, no empathy is needed, no energy must be put up and now power sacrificed. There is nothing to be empathetic about because there is no assault that happened. The human mind is full of tricks when it wants to get off the hook and shy away from personal responsibility and the urge to emotionally protect oneself and not get involved seems to be intense in many.
It didn't happen, so men are not as bad after all
While these reasons are common in both male and female they do not satisfactorily explain why so many women especially dispute the credibility of sexual assaults recounted by other women. There must be additional reasons for this reaction that surprisingly is quite the opposite of the solidarity one would have expected to find.
One reaction that one encounters is the unwillingness to accept the other gender as potentially dangerous and harassing as it often is. As one female tweep wrote to me on one such occasion a few weeks back when I was criticizing men for assaulting women: "You are not allowed to speak like that of men! I like men! And I want to love men!"
Fine. But what if they don't love you back? Is that too hard a truth to take? Apparently so, for the amount of energy put up in defending the men - be it in an isolated incident or as a gender - is often remarkable to read. In denying the victim's story the attempt is clearly made to rehabilitate the men that are accused in the account, men as such, men women need, men women don't want or cannot be without. A natural reaction, one would say, as there is only one other gender for any one of us to have (leaving out those for a moment who find more inventive ways to solve the drawbacks of this minimal variety on offer).
Of course, if women would have to concede that men are sexually assaulting animals the idea of bonding with them for partnership would seem less tempting. Yet hormones do not care, so for reasons of hidden forces steering the gender through life, the urge to acquit men of blame is going strong in women. Men must be likable, lovable for partnerships or marriages to work. In blaming men, this dream many women have of men - the most intense version is of course the famous knight in shining armour - would be crushed. Then what? - As this is not allowed to happen - acquitting it is.
But if men are not to blame, the victim surely must be the one to take responsibility. The easiest way for this is discrediting her credibility. If she told a lie, if this horrific report is untrue, it only proves what we have known all along - that men would never do such things to women, that some, few women only make this up. - And women would find peace of mind that life with a man is yet possible and something to strife for. No questions asked. Mission accomplished.
If it happened, it was probably her, so it can't happen to me
The other only method of reaching acquittal of the men is to acknowledge the incident happened - where witnesses attest to it so that the truth of the story cannot be denied - but immediately asking questions if not the victim is to blame for this in the first place. "Why did she have to be there at such a time?" is a common question posted on social media, basically saying nothing else but that no decent, acceptable woman would have gone to a place like that at such a time and therefore would not have been attacked. As - for all to understand - undoubtedly the author of such a line only proves too well. She didn't go to such a place so she didn't get assaulted. So clearly it is the victim's own fault if something goes wrong - which also relieves of the task to ponder on the men's behaviour that is part of this story. In more blatant versions one can even read a "well, some men are like that" - which is usually accompanied with a shrug of a shoulder ("such is life") - and the pointing out that everyone knows this and who doesn't act accordingly has to blame only herself.
A remarkable way to get the attacking men out of the limelight and an astonishing lack of solidarity. And that for a good reason that once more is embedded in the wish to self-protect. If as a woman I have to admit to myself that vicious attacks by men on women actually happen and - worse - can happen anytime to any women, I as a woman will have no peace of mind anymore. If however I pinpoint the blame for this assault on this one particular woman (aka "slut" in worst versions) then of course I myself will not ever get into this trouble and can wholeheartedly be both denying such incidences for myself and thereby be at peace of mind. A famous example of this is the Muslim Brotherhood MP Azza El-Garf who pointed out to the stunned Egypt that there was no sexual harassment on the streets of Cairo, as she herself had never been harassed. A flawed logic taken up by others who now point out that they too were in Tahrir joining the celebrations on presidential election and - take note - it did not happen to them! So clearly, again - was Natasha Smith making this up or doing something wrong? Was she perhaps to blame?
Men would not do it if women would not tempt them
Often the attacks by women on female victims of sexual assault are clear and outspoken. She dressed wrong. She walked wrong. She did not wear a veil (which as experience shows does not protect from sexual attacks). She was blonde. She looked foreign. She wore high heels. She looked men in the eyes. - The possibilities are innumerous and all boil down to the same: it was her that was at fault to produce this reaction in men. She alone is to blame, so I - as a women dressing rightly, covering up, lowering my eyes - will never have to fear such an attack (oh please, dear God, please!).
The almost unbearable extreme of this thinking - powered by fear the story could be true after all - is to blame the victim of such an assault to make the streets more dangerous "for all of us" by inciting men to think along the lines of attacks. Which - clearly - men do not do on their own if women do not make them. An even more flawed logic that perfectly blends in with the identical conviction of men in patriarchal societies who do not tire to point out that women are an evil temptation that make men do what they would never otherwise do. Hence the covering up, the shutting out, the keeping them in the house. Women who echo this logic resemble people handing the key to their prison cells to the warden asking them to shut them away. One would think this impossible but unfortunately one reads more of this on social media than is imaginable.
To the victims of sexual assault this is impossible to bear, because the collaboration with the attackers feels as if the rest of the women condone what happened and leave her, the victim, with the guilt. And psychologically it boils down to another attack on top of what was endured already. It will leave even more scars on the victims souls that will need years - if ever - to heal. Inflicted this time not by the men that sexually attacked but by the women that pretend to find fault in this only with the female victim and not with her attackers.
For the egotistic urge to have peace of mind and be at peace with men these women sell off their sisters who are in pain. And thereby too allow these gross human rights violations against women to continue.
Telling of sexual assault to become famous?
But blaming the female victim for apparent misconduct is usually only done when all else fails, when for reasons of witnesses present the incident as such cannot be denied. Where this is not the case, the easiest way yet to get out of the fix remains to dispute that a sexual assault as described in a testimony ever happened. For this, any argument will often do. As someone with regard to questioning Natasha Smith's account wrote on twitter yesterday: "I'm not suggesting she's making it up but people lie. Gay Girl in Damascus anyone?"
A not too convincing argument, for if one points out that people lie one is of course already short of suggesting "she's making it up". Why else would one doubt her credibility and point out that "people lie"?
The comparison to the Gay Girl in Damascus - which was in fact a 46 year old idiotic American male obviously lacking all comprehension of what empathy and human feelings are about - is in addition flawed, because it ignores the fact, that as much as the Gay Girl in Damascus wrote fantastical stories, 'she' never pretended to recount a story of a sexual assault on herself with vivid details of her genital zones.
That's where the thinking once more goes wrong trying to ward off the horror, a victim of sexual assault could actually tell the truth. A truth one would have to face, which apparently is harder for many women to do than to spread doubt it ever happened.
The insinuation that a victim only tells such a story to become famous and interesting shows an astonishing lack of understanding what telling such a story for the victim actually means. It is not like telling some story of everyday life or political pressure, as the Gay Girl of Damascus did. Telling of a sexual attack is like stripping yourself in public, giving people insights into the worst happenings to your private parts, which doesn't come easy to anyone. It's for a reason we call them 'private' parts, because out of shame we do not expose these voluntarily in public. To tell the story however how men groped and shoved their fingers into your private parts, these become public. And it feels like you might as well stand on the market square and rip off your clothes for all to see and watch you naked - knowing well, all will. No one wants to be stared at, but in recounting such a story of sexual assault this will happen, if only in the minds and imagination of the readers.
That is a very unpleasant knowledge the victim has and is anything but easy. To imply anyone would do this just for getting attention or becoming famous shows that the critics - luckily - have never experienced sexual assault personally and do not know what goes on inside a victim when it takes the courage to tell the world.
To recount a sexual assault is a horror relived
A few months ago one night on twitter a hashtag suddenly sprang up called #IDidNotReport. With starting their tweets with this hashtag women suddenly began to recount what happened to them days or years ago with regard to sexual harassment, sexual assault, sexual abuse and even rape. "I did not report", they said, and went on to explain what it was they did not report and why they didn't and why now they thought it was time to let it out. The accounts that were coming in suddenly with the force of a tidal wave were harrowing and innumerous and tweeps I followed started to open up and tell stories I would never have imagined happened to them. I was stunned, shocked - and paralyzed. For I too did not report many years ago and had promised myself never to tell.
As I saw a wave of testimonials sweep across my timeline and women showing an unbelievable bravery in speaking out what had happened to them, I began to realize the importance of not hiding what happened, of not pretending it didn't, which obviously - see above - is so much easier for society to bear.
It took me a while and I first confided silently in a woman friend, but then I took up my courage so as not to fail these brave women speaking out and I started to tell my story. I thought it was important, that a man too admits that this happened to him because especially men think such assaults are 'unmanly' and are convinced that they should never tell. As did I.
It took seven or eight 140 character tweets only in which I described that I did not report the sexual attack on me many years back on a trip home in a sleeper from Luxor to Cairo, when I was seriously ill with high fever and the elderly tourist in the bed below made use of my incapacitation and assaulted me in my sleep. Due to my illness and very high temperature I could hardly fight him off, battled what felt like hours until he seemed to give up and I fell asleep again exhausted. When I woke up the next morning he was gone from the compartment and so was my necklace. He had been at me once more at night and to this day I don't know what else he did after I had fallen asleep again.
Telling this story in those few lines on twitter without going into any more detail was sheer horror. I had always imagined to have put off this unpleasant incident long ago and never felt it had in any way interfered with my sexual well-being or self-confidence. I worked this out for myself, classified it as an unfortunate incident that I could not prevent - wrong place, wrong time, wrong circumstances - but not as something that could easily happen again any day to come. That probably made it easier for me to put it aside. So much more surprised and shocked I was to see that when that hashtag appeared on my timeline and I started to read all the reports from others, this long settled story came up like a wave of hot and cold hitting me and the idea of telling the world what had happened - 26 years after the assault occurred - seemed impossible to do.
After I had pulled myself together and had told my story in those few tweets, a wave of positive reactions set in with tweeps - both female and male - praising me for my courage and telling me how undoubtedly strong and brave I was. Only to the woman friend from before did I confess that I was neither, but that I was in fact and literally shaking, trembling and sweating to such an extent that I had to take a shower at 2 o'clock in the morning to get back into normal life. Sweating like this, feeling dirty, abused, disturbed, hurt and confused on an incident that had happened so long ago - only because I took it upon me to finally speak about it. And only in a few tweets.
There is nothing more hurtful than to encounter disbelief
If this personal experience is anything to go by, I can assure you that telling the story of how you were sexually assaulted - and that even in detail and only a few days after it happened - is anything but easy, is anything but something you would do for fun or to get attention or to get famous. You would more than gladly miss out on such fame, thank you very much, if only it didn't happen or if it did you could keep quiet about it. Anyone taking up the courage to tell his story however to alert the world that these attacks happen, that sexual assaults must be taken seriously and not ignored or put off as figments of the imagination, suffers hugely inside and will encounter an anxiety that compares to the initial horror experienced.
For this reason the attempt to discredit victims of sexual assault - be they female or male - by insinuating they only tell such a story to become famous and garner attention borders on the malicious. It blatantly ignores the pain inflicted by recounting such an attack and the emotional stress a victim is going through when it tells of what happened, knowing only too well what images the account will invoke in the readers. The private parts will become public parts, the readers will visualize what you tell, you will thus become the victim again to what happened - only this time it seems in front of everyone's eyes. And what after that? Will you still be able to hold your head up high now that everyone sees you as a "sexual victim", sexualizing you in every aspect as if this was what you were made up of, the only thing that mattered about you?
It is incredibly difficult to do. And if Natasha Smith told her story the way she did - and others did before her too - then partly due to still being severely traumatized but also because with every detail you describe you know that the imagery in readers minds will begin to tick like a clock gone wild. And these images will stick to you - and it will be difficult to rid yourself of this knowledge.
To whoever picks up the courage nevertheless to tell the story of sexual assault in order to shake up the world and say: Hey listen! This happens! - there is nothing more hurtful than to encounter disbelief, discrediting, ignorance of the pain inflicted. The worst that victims of such crimes report when going to police stations is having to face officers who shake their heads in disbelief, disinterest, disregard and show willingness to believe the accused more than the victim - is to be treated like a liar, not taken seriously - left in the end alone with the horror one barely survived.
There is no excuse for this at all. In all statistics done on women reporting sexual crimes the number of fabricated stories turned out to be insignificantly low. And yet disbelief rather than belief seems for many the initial name of the game. Apparently it still makes more sense to doubt the credibility of a victim than to trust that no one in her sane mind would make up such a horribly story - which once told excessively burdens the victim and her sexual privacy. Not only after surviving such an assault but too after telling about it, nothing for the victim will ever be the same. To imply a women would do this easily, is baseless and inexcusable. If not malicious, it can only result from the sheer ignorance of what truly goes on in a victim after a sexual assault.
With denial the victim is assaulted a second time
With all the stories we find on the internet, posted and reposted via social media tools, it does make sense to be cautious and awake and to think twice when hearing a story that is unpleasantly bold. However in the case of sexual assault testimonials this has become an automatic reaction for many, and sadly many women. The shying away from the horror told and the wish not having to acknowledge the truth about such attacks leads into denial mode and starts to discredit the victim. With that nothing is gained. The situation - for all women believe it or not, not only for the 'liar' or worse the 'slut' - will stay like it is, but above all the victim will be hurt even more.
And if you find out Natasha Smith did not lie about the assault but told it as it is - will you then let the horror of what happened to her reach you or will you find another reason to not let it touch you? - And will you then apologize to her for inflicting even more pain on her by doubting her credibility? - Or will you just pretend your public doubting never happened and look away? - How decent is this then? Is it truly her story you worry about or not much more your own?
Even if the urge is felt to go into denial mode for reasons shown above, the victim will seriously feel that it is assaulted a second time - on top of what it already had to endure. Out of of fairness, compassion and responsibility it would therefore be vital and wise to tread softly. If you are in doubt, wait and watch and do research if you must but don't discredit publicly, creating wrongs that cannot be undone. And don't think it is cool - when others show empathy - to go against the wind and openly question the victim's credibility. There is nothing cool about being in denial and the issue at hand is too serious to use it for playing games.
It would be better to first give the victim the benefit of the doubt and not the culprit. Otherwise, whether you like it or not, you become unwillingly the collaborator to such horrific, inexcusable attacks on women. And then, as much as you deny it to yourself now, the next victim could be you after all.
Perhaps this is the reason for reactions that - to put it mildly - are hard to take for the victims on top of the horrors they experienced. When Natasha Smith, a British freelance journalist and documentary film maker living in Cairo, published the account of an unbelievably horrid and aggressive sexual attack on her by hundreds of men during the celebrations of the outcome of the presidential elections in Egypt, the social media world was in shock. Comments of disgust and true compassion made the rounds and her blogpost describing her ordeal was posted and reposted in huge numbers.
Not long after the blogpost got viral however a reaction set in that seems to become typical in such cases: the questioning of the credibility of her account. Was it true what she told us? Could this have happened in the way she described it? Was the account logical and coherent or were things missing, unclear, incomprehensible? Was she in fact just making all of this up to be in the limelight, get attention and become famous?
Apparently there are not few who think that writing in detail about how you get gang raped is a pleasurable way of garnering attention and becoming famous. The numbers of those who seemed to think so and started questioning the credibility of Natasha Smith rose after the first tweet started to tip off the wave. As with a rumour that spreads, the discussions in minutes flushed across social media platforms, now concentrating on the questions "who is she?" - "has she ever done something credible before?" - "is she lying?" - "does she want to makes us believe...?" - and away from the actual thing that needed discussing: the indisputable gross sexual aggression against women rampant on the streets of Cairo.
Often women deny it happened
While it is always good to not immediately fall for every story that is posted on the net the willingness to suddenly flatly reject the possibility of this sexual assault happening came close to denial. And the most troubling - and this I have not seen for the first time - was the fact, that it was almost only women who quickly jumped on board and called out that this female not necessarily had to be trusted. Not because they know her personally - but because ... - Yes, because of what?
Why is it that women much more than men so often in such cases resort to insinuating the story of sexual assault by a woman is fabricated, is a lie, is only made up to garner the attention of the world? Why are women not naturally inclined to take the side of the female victim that after all represents them as possible target of another assault tomorrow? Wouldn't this be the natural reaction and not the opposite?
Psychologists have studied for decades the reactions of humans on emotionally charged and troubling accounts of victims and found several reasons why one of the reactions almost always is to deny the victim's credibility. There are reasons that both genders have and reasons that are specific to women when it comes to accounts of sexual assaults and rape. In both cases it would be good to reflect on them.
It didn't happen, so I have nothing to fear
One of the main reasons in both genders for denial is the urge for 'self-protection'. By discrediting the victim's account one can brush it off with no fear to become victim oneself one day. Humans need a feeling of safety to live and continue to do what they are doing without the constant fear that all this could - as in the case of the victim of the accounted assault - break into pieces within minutes and shatter their lives. By looking away and denying this truly happened, lives can continue trouble free. And apparently this urge is so intense that inflicting hurt on the victims by discrediting them or questioning their credibility is willingly accepted.
It didn't happen, so I don't have to get emotionally involved
Another reason is the emotional self-protection many feel in need of. Getting emotionally engaged in what horror has happened to another human is energy draining to say the least and can seriously jeopardize being able to continue a happy, contented life. Empathy, showing sympathy for a victim, almost always needs a lot of emotional power that people are not willing to sacrifice for someone they do not know. There seems to be the belief that resources on this per person are limited and one better be stingy. And the easiest way to do this without feeling remorse for being selfish or cold hearted is by doubting that there is any story that would need such an input in the first place. If the victim's story is fabricated, no emotions, no empathy is needed, no energy must be put up and now power sacrificed. There is nothing to be empathetic about because there is no assault that happened. The human mind is full of tricks when it wants to get off the hook and shy away from personal responsibility and the urge to emotionally protect oneself and not get involved seems to be intense in many.
It didn't happen, so men are not as bad after all
While these reasons are common in both male and female they do not satisfactorily explain why so many women especially dispute the credibility of sexual assaults recounted by other women. There must be additional reasons for this reaction that surprisingly is quite the opposite of the solidarity one would have expected to find.
One reaction that one encounters is the unwillingness to accept the other gender as potentially dangerous and harassing as it often is. As one female tweep wrote to me on one such occasion a few weeks back when I was criticizing men for assaulting women: "You are not allowed to speak like that of men! I like men! And I want to love men!"
Fine. But what if they don't love you back? Is that too hard a truth to take? Apparently so, for the amount of energy put up in defending the men - be it in an isolated incident or as a gender - is often remarkable to read. In denying the victim's story the attempt is clearly made to rehabilitate the men that are accused in the account, men as such, men women need, men women don't want or cannot be without. A natural reaction, one would say, as there is only one other gender for any one of us to have (leaving out those for a moment who find more inventive ways to solve the drawbacks of this minimal variety on offer).
Of course, if women would have to concede that men are sexually assaulting animals the idea of bonding with them for partnership would seem less tempting. Yet hormones do not care, so for reasons of hidden forces steering the gender through life, the urge to acquit men of blame is going strong in women. Men must be likable, lovable for partnerships or marriages to work. In blaming men, this dream many women have of men - the most intense version is of course the famous knight in shining armour - would be crushed. Then what? - As this is not allowed to happen - acquitting it is.
But if men are not to blame, the victim surely must be the one to take responsibility. The easiest way for this is discrediting her credibility. If she told a lie, if this horrific report is untrue, it only proves what we have known all along - that men would never do such things to women, that some, few women only make this up. - And women would find peace of mind that life with a man is yet possible and something to strife for. No questions asked. Mission accomplished.
If it happened, it was probably her, so it can't happen to me
The other only method of reaching acquittal of the men is to acknowledge the incident happened - where witnesses attest to it so that the truth of the story cannot be denied - but immediately asking questions if not the victim is to blame for this in the first place. "Why did she have to be there at such a time?" is a common question posted on social media, basically saying nothing else but that no decent, acceptable woman would have gone to a place like that at such a time and therefore would not have been attacked. As - for all to understand - undoubtedly the author of such a line only proves too well. She didn't go to such a place so she didn't get assaulted. So clearly it is the victim's own fault if something goes wrong - which also relieves of the task to ponder on the men's behaviour that is part of this story. In more blatant versions one can even read a "well, some men are like that" - which is usually accompanied with a shrug of a shoulder ("such is life") - and the pointing out that everyone knows this and who doesn't act accordingly has to blame only herself.
A remarkable way to get the attacking men out of the limelight and an astonishing lack of solidarity. And that for a good reason that once more is embedded in the wish to self-protect. If as a woman I have to admit to myself that vicious attacks by men on women actually happen and - worse - can happen anytime to any women, I as a woman will have no peace of mind anymore. If however I pinpoint the blame for this assault on this one particular woman (aka "slut" in worst versions) then of course I myself will not ever get into this trouble and can wholeheartedly be both denying such incidences for myself and thereby be at peace of mind. A famous example of this is the Muslim Brotherhood MP Azza El-Garf who pointed out to the stunned Egypt that there was no sexual harassment on the streets of Cairo, as she herself had never been harassed. A flawed logic taken up by others who now point out that they too were in Tahrir joining the celebrations on presidential election and - take note - it did not happen to them! So clearly, again - was Natasha Smith making this up or doing something wrong? Was she perhaps to blame?
Men would not do it if women would not tempt them
Often the attacks by women on female victims of sexual assault are clear and outspoken. She dressed wrong. She walked wrong. She did not wear a veil (which as experience shows does not protect from sexual attacks). She was blonde. She looked foreign. She wore high heels. She looked men in the eyes. - The possibilities are innumerous and all boil down to the same: it was her that was at fault to produce this reaction in men. She alone is to blame, so I - as a women dressing rightly, covering up, lowering my eyes - will never have to fear such an attack (oh please, dear God, please!).
The almost unbearable extreme of this thinking - powered by fear the story could be true after all - is to blame the victim of such an assault to make the streets more dangerous "for all of us" by inciting men to think along the lines of attacks. Which - clearly - men do not do on their own if women do not make them. An even more flawed logic that perfectly blends in with the identical conviction of men in patriarchal societies who do not tire to point out that women are an evil temptation that make men do what they would never otherwise do. Hence the covering up, the shutting out, the keeping them in the house. Women who echo this logic resemble people handing the key to their prison cells to the warden asking them to shut them away. One would think this impossible but unfortunately one reads more of this on social media than is imaginable.
To the victims of sexual assault this is impossible to bear, because the collaboration with the attackers feels as if the rest of the women condone what happened and leave her, the victim, with the guilt. And psychologically it boils down to another attack on top of what was endured already. It will leave even more scars on the victims souls that will need years - if ever - to heal. Inflicted this time not by the men that sexually attacked but by the women that pretend to find fault in this only with the female victim and not with her attackers.
For the egotistic urge to have peace of mind and be at peace with men these women sell off their sisters who are in pain. And thereby too allow these gross human rights violations against women to continue.
Telling of sexual assault to become famous?
But blaming the female victim for apparent misconduct is usually only done when all else fails, when for reasons of witnesses present the incident as such cannot be denied. Where this is not the case, the easiest way yet to get out of the fix remains to dispute that a sexual assault as described in a testimony ever happened. For this, any argument will often do. As someone with regard to questioning Natasha Smith's account wrote on twitter yesterday: "I'm not suggesting she's making it up but people lie. Gay Girl in Damascus anyone?"
A not too convincing argument, for if one points out that people lie one is of course already short of suggesting "she's making it up". Why else would one doubt her credibility and point out that "people lie"?
The comparison to the Gay Girl in Damascus - which was in fact a 46 year old idiotic American male obviously lacking all comprehension of what empathy and human feelings are about - is in addition flawed, because it ignores the fact, that as much as the Gay Girl in Damascus wrote fantastical stories, 'she' never pretended to recount a story of a sexual assault on herself with vivid details of her genital zones.
That's where the thinking once more goes wrong trying to ward off the horror, a victim of sexual assault could actually tell the truth. A truth one would have to face, which apparently is harder for many women to do than to spread doubt it ever happened.
The insinuation that a victim only tells such a story to become famous and interesting shows an astonishing lack of understanding what telling such a story for the victim actually means. It is not like telling some story of everyday life or political pressure, as the Gay Girl of Damascus did. Telling of a sexual attack is like stripping yourself in public, giving people insights into the worst happenings to your private parts, which doesn't come easy to anyone. It's for a reason we call them 'private' parts, because out of shame we do not expose these voluntarily in public. To tell the story however how men groped and shoved their fingers into your private parts, these become public. And it feels like you might as well stand on the market square and rip off your clothes for all to see and watch you naked - knowing well, all will. No one wants to be stared at, but in recounting such a story of sexual assault this will happen, if only in the minds and imagination of the readers.
That is a very unpleasant knowledge the victim has and is anything but easy. To imply anyone would do this just for getting attention or becoming famous shows that the critics - luckily - have never experienced sexual assault personally and do not know what goes on inside a victim when it takes the courage to tell the world.
To recount a sexual assault is a horror relived
A few months ago one night on twitter a hashtag suddenly sprang up called #IDidNotReport. With starting their tweets with this hashtag women suddenly began to recount what happened to them days or years ago with regard to sexual harassment, sexual assault, sexual abuse and even rape. "I did not report", they said, and went on to explain what it was they did not report and why they didn't and why now they thought it was time to let it out. The accounts that were coming in suddenly with the force of a tidal wave were harrowing and innumerous and tweeps I followed started to open up and tell stories I would never have imagined happened to them. I was stunned, shocked - and paralyzed. For I too did not report many years ago and had promised myself never to tell.
As I saw a wave of testimonials sweep across my timeline and women showing an unbelievable bravery in speaking out what had happened to them, I began to realize the importance of not hiding what happened, of not pretending it didn't, which obviously - see above - is so much easier for society to bear.
It took me a while and I first confided silently in a woman friend, but then I took up my courage so as not to fail these brave women speaking out and I started to tell my story. I thought it was important, that a man too admits that this happened to him because especially men think such assaults are 'unmanly' and are convinced that they should never tell. As did I.
It took seven or eight 140 character tweets only in which I described that I did not report the sexual attack on me many years back on a trip home in a sleeper from Luxor to Cairo, when I was seriously ill with high fever and the elderly tourist in the bed below made use of my incapacitation and assaulted me in my sleep. Due to my illness and very high temperature I could hardly fight him off, battled what felt like hours until he seemed to give up and I fell asleep again exhausted. When I woke up the next morning he was gone from the compartment and so was my necklace. He had been at me once more at night and to this day I don't know what else he did after I had fallen asleep again.
Telling this story in those few lines on twitter without going into any more detail was sheer horror. I had always imagined to have put off this unpleasant incident long ago and never felt it had in any way interfered with my sexual well-being or self-confidence. I worked this out for myself, classified it as an unfortunate incident that I could not prevent - wrong place, wrong time, wrong circumstances - but not as something that could easily happen again any day to come. That probably made it easier for me to put it aside. So much more surprised and shocked I was to see that when that hashtag appeared on my timeline and I started to read all the reports from others, this long settled story came up like a wave of hot and cold hitting me and the idea of telling the world what had happened - 26 years after the assault occurred - seemed impossible to do.
After I had pulled myself together and had told my story in those few tweets, a wave of positive reactions set in with tweeps - both female and male - praising me for my courage and telling me how undoubtedly strong and brave I was. Only to the woman friend from before did I confess that I was neither, but that I was in fact and literally shaking, trembling and sweating to such an extent that I had to take a shower at 2 o'clock in the morning to get back into normal life. Sweating like this, feeling dirty, abused, disturbed, hurt and confused on an incident that had happened so long ago - only because I took it upon me to finally speak about it. And only in a few tweets.
There is nothing more hurtful than to encounter disbelief
If this personal experience is anything to go by, I can assure you that telling the story of how you were sexually assaulted - and that even in detail and only a few days after it happened - is anything but easy, is anything but something you would do for fun or to get attention or to get famous. You would more than gladly miss out on such fame, thank you very much, if only it didn't happen or if it did you could keep quiet about it. Anyone taking up the courage to tell his story however to alert the world that these attacks happen, that sexual assaults must be taken seriously and not ignored or put off as figments of the imagination, suffers hugely inside and will encounter an anxiety that compares to the initial horror experienced.
For this reason the attempt to discredit victims of sexual assault - be they female or male - by insinuating they only tell such a story to become famous and garner attention borders on the malicious. It blatantly ignores the pain inflicted by recounting such an attack and the emotional stress a victim is going through when it tells of what happened, knowing only too well what images the account will invoke in the readers. The private parts will become public parts, the readers will visualize what you tell, you will thus become the victim again to what happened - only this time it seems in front of everyone's eyes. And what after that? Will you still be able to hold your head up high now that everyone sees you as a "sexual victim", sexualizing you in every aspect as if this was what you were made up of, the only thing that mattered about you?
It is incredibly difficult to do. And if Natasha Smith told her story the way she did - and others did before her too - then partly due to still being severely traumatized but also because with every detail you describe you know that the imagery in readers minds will begin to tick like a clock gone wild. And these images will stick to you - and it will be difficult to rid yourself of this knowledge.
To whoever picks up the courage nevertheless to tell the story of sexual assault in order to shake up the world and say: Hey listen! This happens! - there is nothing more hurtful than to encounter disbelief, discrediting, ignorance of the pain inflicted. The worst that victims of such crimes report when going to police stations is having to face officers who shake their heads in disbelief, disinterest, disregard and show willingness to believe the accused more than the victim - is to be treated like a liar, not taken seriously - left in the end alone with the horror one barely survived.
There is no excuse for this at all. In all statistics done on women reporting sexual crimes the number of fabricated stories turned out to be insignificantly low. And yet disbelief rather than belief seems for many the initial name of the game. Apparently it still makes more sense to doubt the credibility of a victim than to trust that no one in her sane mind would make up such a horribly story - which once told excessively burdens the victim and her sexual privacy. Not only after surviving such an assault but too after telling about it, nothing for the victim will ever be the same. To imply a women would do this easily, is baseless and inexcusable. If not malicious, it can only result from the sheer ignorance of what truly goes on in a victim after a sexual assault.
With denial the victim is assaulted a second time
With all the stories we find on the internet, posted and reposted via social media tools, it does make sense to be cautious and awake and to think twice when hearing a story that is unpleasantly bold. However in the case of sexual assault testimonials this has become an automatic reaction for many, and sadly many women. The shying away from the horror told and the wish not having to acknowledge the truth about such attacks leads into denial mode and starts to discredit the victim. With that nothing is gained. The situation - for all women believe it or not, not only for the 'liar' or worse the 'slut' - will stay like it is, but above all the victim will be hurt even more.
And if you find out Natasha Smith did not lie about the assault but told it as it is - will you then let the horror of what happened to her reach you or will you find another reason to not let it touch you? - And will you then apologize to her for inflicting even more pain on her by doubting her credibility? - Or will you just pretend your public doubting never happened and look away? - How decent is this then? Is it truly her story you worry about or not much more your own?
Even if the urge is felt to go into denial mode for reasons shown above, the victim will seriously feel that it is assaulted a second time - on top of what it already had to endure. Out of of fairness, compassion and responsibility it would therefore be vital and wise to tread softly. If you are in doubt, wait and watch and do research if you must but don't discredit publicly, creating wrongs that cannot be undone. And don't think it is cool - when others show empathy - to go against the wind and openly question the victim's credibility. There is nothing cool about being in denial and the issue at hand is too serious to use it for playing games.
It would be better to first give the victim the benefit of the doubt and not the culprit. Otherwise, whether you like it or not, you become unwillingly the collaborator to such horrific, inexcusable attacks on women. And then, as much as you deny it to yourself now, the next victim could be you after all.
April 25, 2012
Men Do Hate Women, Dear Dima!
In the newest edition of "Foreign Policy" the columnist Mona El-Tahawy wrote an article with the title "Why do you hate us?" describing the problems women face at the hands of oppressing men in the Arab world. In the last 24 hours the article has ignited a firestorm on social media with people heatedly debating the issue and many lashing out at the author for the things she wrote. Many blogposts were written attacking her for supposedly being anti-Islam, depicting men in a bad light, shaming the Arab region in front of the western world and much more. Most blogposts transport the old thinking that the truth should not be told openly - most often considered a taboo - and that men aren't the way Mona describes them. The journalist Dima Khatib now too replied to Mona's article in a blogpost named "Love, Not Hatred, Dear Mona" - it is the first blogpost I find respectable, although I do not share her views. But I encourage you to read her post - and here is my reply to her.
-------------------------
Dear Dima Khatib,
though I do not agree wholly with your euphemistic view of the situation of Arab women it can be said that this is undoubtedly the most sincere and constructive post dealing critically with the article of Mona.
Unfortunately Dima, I - as a man - have to tell you that the 'hate' you all get so heated up about and don't want to believe exists is very much inherent in many men around the globe. While you all naturally would love to see us men in a good light so as not to rob you of hope it has to be noted that very many men in the world - not only in MENA - are not only afraid of women but truly hate them. Why?
Because you make our blood boil, you make us lose our head, you incite us to do things we normally wouldn't do, you make us skip our friends over you and fall out on their friendship, you get us to show emotions (we hate that the most), you tick off a process in us that we cannot control, a sex urge that leads us to a point of no return - which we hate, because we men always want to be in control. And then we awake from the orgasm - which in men other than in women can be like cooling down high temperature in seconds - and suddenly we are back to our normal self. And then many men say: What was this? Why did I do this? Why did I react this way? Why did I lose my head, my control, my composure? I, a man who is always in control? What did this evil woman do to me?
Bewitched me, tempted me (shame on her), transformed me into a person without own will (hate you for that).
If it hadn't been for Eve then Adam would never have stumbled, would never have been expelled from paradise. It is women who cause all the trouble, because they lure us into sexuality where we do not know anymore what we are doing.
Grossly exaggerated? You wish. - I am not saying that every man reacts this way. Many in fact have learned to control themselves or to let themselves go in relationships, to even show emotions without dying from it - yes, to even learn to enjoy enjoying sex and not just working off an urge that needs to be removed from the system.
The sad fact - and I know more intimate details of men's thinking on this then any woman will ever want to learn - is that many men who do react uncontrollably fear you women like the devil - worse indeed hate you for producing such reactions within us.
And it is at this point that the whole critique at the word 'hate' Mona used is running empty. The salafis show in every inch of their behaviour that they do indeed hate women and for that reason suppress them. And if you want to know why - see above. Because they have a huge issue with sexuality that they do not enjoy but see as something devilish that drives them into an uncontrollable state. They don't want to ever lose control of themselves - you come and make it happen. They don't want to show emotions - you come and demand just that. They hate to not know what they are doing - you are the reason they get into such a miserable state.
I've been following up on the discussion about this article now for 24 hours and all I can say - it is a bitter truth, but swallow it. Many men - and many men in the Arab world (that is what Mona talked about) - do hate women and show it in all their contempt - starting from condoning female genital mutilation (if she does not feel something, he can finish quicker and won't lose control), encouraging teenage marriages (treat the young already as possession then they won't get ideas), denying fundamental rights so all will be in control. In the male control. Stuff the women who only cause trouble.
Then there are those you talk about - nice men, respectful, perhaps even worshipping women. But those are not the issue - neither in the article nor in the real life oppressing women. Mona talked about those men that DO oppress you. And she said bluntly and truthfully what is behind that oppression.
If you don't believe men can hate women, just go to Iran and see what happens there in forcing 9 year old girls into marriage, watch women get lashed 90 times in Saudi - for having been raped -, check teenage girls getting forced to marry rapists in Morocco, or acknowledge young women getting honour killed for having been abused by soldiers in Libya. You call all this love, and love will solve all problems?
What unfortunately you and all other women will have to accept is that it is hatred that is behind that and that men who torture, rape, beat, oppress and even kill women do this out of hate, not out of love. Obvious one should think, but apparently so hard to bear for women who would love to see the world be so much better.
Sorry for the truth, but it does not help oppressed women if we deny what cannot be denied. I am grateful to Mona she had the guts to say how it is. And I wish more women would have the courage to face the truth - and start thinking about ways to change from there. It would help you all a lot more than remaining in a state of wishful thinking - quoting you: "If only we could learn how to love again, so that men learn to love women without controlling them, and women learn to love men instead of loving to please men. How about we start from love, Mona, instead of hatred?" - and idealizing those men that lash, beat, force, deny and do even a lot worse to you wonderful women.
They don't talk love, they talk hate, Dima. That is a fact that must be faced. It's not easy and it needs courage, I know. But in overcoming oppression facing facts is a must.
-------------------------
Dear Dima Khatib,
though I do not agree wholly with your euphemistic view of the situation of Arab women it can be said that this is undoubtedly the most sincere and constructive post dealing critically with the article of Mona.
Unfortunately Dima, I - as a man - have to tell you that the 'hate' you all get so heated up about and don't want to believe exists is very much inherent in many men around the globe. While you all naturally would love to see us men in a good light so as not to rob you of hope it has to be noted that very many men in the world - not only in MENA - are not only afraid of women but truly hate them. Why?
Because you make our blood boil, you make us lose our head, you incite us to do things we normally wouldn't do, you make us skip our friends over you and fall out on their friendship, you get us to show emotions (we hate that the most), you tick off a process in us that we cannot control, a sex urge that leads us to a point of no return - which we hate, because we men always want to be in control. And then we awake from the orgasm - which in men other than in women can be like cooling down high temperature in seconds - and suddenly we are back to our normal self. And then many men say: What was this? Why did I do this? Why did I react this way? Why did I lose my head, my control, my composure? I, a man who is always in control? What did this evil woman do to me?
Bewitched me, tempted me (shame on her), transformed me into a person without own will (hate you for that).
If it hadn't been for Eve then Adam would never have stumbled, would never have been expelled from paradise. It is women who cause all the trouble, because they lure us into sexuality where we do not know anymore what we are doing.
Grossly exaggerated? You wish. - I am not saying that every man reacts this way. Many in fact have learned to control themselves or to let themselves go in relationships, to even show emotions without dying from it - yes, to even learn to enjoy enjoying sex and not just working off an urge that needs to be removed from the system.
The sad fact - and I know more intimate details of men's thinking on this then any woman will ever want to learn - is that many men who do react uncontrollably fear you women like the devil - worse indeed hate you for producing such reactions within us.
And it is at this point that the whole critique at the word 'hate' Mona used is running empty. The salafis show in every inch of their behaviour that they do indeed hate women and for that reason suppress them. And if you want to know why - see above. Because they have a huge issue with sexuality that they do not enjoy but see as something devilish that drives them into an uncontrollable state. They don't want to ever lose control of themselves - you come and make it happen. They don't want to show emotions - you come and demand just that. They hate to not know what they are doing - you are the reason they get into such a miserable state.
I've been following up on the discussion about this article now for 24 hours and all I can say - it is a bitter truth, but swallow it. Many men - and many men in the Arab world (that is what Mona talked about) - do hate women and show it in all their contempt - starting from condoning female genital mutilation (if she does not feel something, he can finish quicker and won't lose control), encouraging teenage marriages (treat the young already as possession then they won't get ideas), denying fundamental rights so all will be in control. In the male control. Stuff the women who only cause trouble.
Then there are those you talk about - nice men, respectful, perhaps even worshipping women. But those are not the issue - neither in the article nor in the real life oppressing women. Mona talked about those men that DO oppress you. And she said bluntly and truthfully what is behind that oppression.
If you don't believe men can hate women, just go to Iran and see what happens there in forcing 9 year old girls into marriage, watch women get lashed 90 times in Saudi - for having been raped -, check teenage girls getting forced to marry rapists in Morocco, or acknowledge young women getting honour killed for having been abused by soldiers in Libya. You call all this love, and love will solve all problems?
What unfortunately you and all other women will have to accept is that it is hatred that is behind that and that men who torture, rape, beat, oppress and even kill women do this out of hate, not out of love. Obvious one should think, but apparently so hard to bear for women who would love to see the world be so much better.
Sorry for the truth, but it does not help oppressed women if we deny what cannot be denied. I am grateful to Mona she had the guts to say how it is. And I wish more women would have the courage to face the truth - and start thinking about ways to change from there. It would help you all a lot more than remaining in a state of wishful thinking - quoting you: "If only we could learn how to love again, so that men learn to love women without controlling them, and women learn to love men instead of loving to please men. How about we start from love, Mona, instead of hatred?" - and idealizing those men that lash, beat, force, deny and do even a lot worse to you wonderful women.
They don't talk love, they talk hate, Dima. That is a fact that must be faced. It's not easy and it needs courage, I know. But in overcoming oppression facing facts is a must.
June 20, 2011
A man's view on sexual harassment
Sexual harassment of women in Egypt has become a horrible plague. The reports of cat calling, whistling, grabbing, groping to really getting violent and tearing at clothes in Cairo's streets is shocking to say the least. It seems all control of a male dominated society is lost if women are harassed to this extent while just walking through the streets of their city. In broad daylight mind you. It does not even have to be dark for harassers to do what they think is their right - the verbal or physical attack on a woman they see walking by.
While it would be interesting to know how much women are harassed in Assiut, Minya, in Beni Suef, Asswan or Hurghada, it is definite that in Cairo at least the sexual harassment of women escalates above all bounds. And men let it happen. That is the problem.
Because if men would not let it happen, harassers would not stand a chance and the attacks on women would stop. So why do men not interfere knowing this phenomena is prevalent all over town?
To find this out, one has to take a look at the men that are behind this ugly practice. There are three groups of men contributing to harassment in Egypt, each in its own special way.
Firstly there is the uneducated, primitive group that simply thinks women are there for their common pleasure, men that fail on empathy and understanding and just let themselves be guided by their very simply urges (how can a man be guided by brains when the guidance deep below is stronger!). Those men actively harass and in their private thinking find excuses for their behavior by stating women want it this way, women actually crave for it, women can't do without it (and without men) and women dress accordingly thus sending out signals of willingness (that no man can resist).
You don't have to be a psychologist to know these guys urgently need help.
Then there is the second group of men, fairly educated but strongly conservative and mostly religiously blinded that dare perhaps not to harass themselves, but if not encourage it excuse it for almost the same reasons as the first group. They suppress their women in their homes, declare themselves the masters of everything feminine in their family and condemn any woman that chooses to walk on her own - be it in society or on the street.
This group is dangerous because it gives the attackers of the first group a mental backing, a shielding behind which to attack. Through their suppressing, women-hating stance they create a social environment in which the attacker-group does not have to feel guilty. After all they are just carrying out what the others support too.
The third group of men is educated, calls itself liberal and says it is against harassment of women - mostly anyway - and accepts that women even take part in a revolution. As long as they don't steal the show and are willing to return to their places once the battle is successfully won and the gravy pots are being dished out and the booty is distributed. There of course they don't necessarily find women should partake. They don't all openly say it, but if you look close enough you will find their attitude is not as woman-friendly as they like you to believe.
This group allows harassment to happen because its men do not actively show solidarity with women when they are treated as minor, as inferior, as less important - to a revolution, to politics, to society. Under the shroud of liberalism basically hides a pretty paternal and chauvinistic attitude and when women really need help, these guys won't budge - later saying: I wasn't asked loud enough - I was busy running politics - I wasn't the center of the action (as a man!) - so how could I possibly know you wanted my support?!
Fail. One can only say.
It is these three strong groups in Egypt's society that make sexual harassment of women possible. It is the harassing man on the street - single or in a group - that gropes, it is the cab driver that looks away, the family father that laughs when his son misbehaves, the revolutionary that does not actively protect because his own interests are higher rated than those of a woman molested in his vicinity. If all these men would not partake, women in Egypt would be safe. They are not.
Well, for the first group the remedy is clear: Working and living conditions that allow for a decent life combined with education, education, education. As long as poor living conditions are combined with illiteracy leaving young men stranded with a defunct ego and bulging sexual urges - the harassment of women will never stop. The foremost task of every government therefore must be to improve the living conditions of the poor, to better educational standards and ensure children get an education in the first place, to work together with NGOs and trusts to curb illiteracy as fast as possible. In a society where almost half of the population is illiterate it is almost impossible to get any sense into (male) heads.
The second group can only be reached if in society awareness is raised that the suppressing of women in homes must stop, that the belief is wrong that women are only half as much worth as a man - no matter what any old religious book might say about this - that women have to obey their male masters, that only males are allowed to decide on the future of female family members, that woman cannot be allowed to shape their own country for various most idiotic reasons that are best not even repeated here.
Again this can only be achieved by education, education, education. But this time not only in form of schooling to curb illiteracy. The teaching that is needed here must come from imams at the mosques, must come from the priests in their sermons just as much as from ministers, politicians, journalists, judges - society as a whole. Only if the atmosphere of suppression in the country is curbed and women are allowed to breath freely will there be a chance that the harassement-allowing male will vanish into oblivion.
More than half the Egyptian society is below the age of 25. Don't tell me there isn't a true chance to make this happen if the young only take things in their hands and demand the change in society they said they were initially demanding in Tahrir square.
All this will of course only work if the so called elite of a society plays along, joins in the same tune and is truly willing to change the society - from bottom to top - into a society fair and respectful to women. These elitists are not asked to get their hands dirty or their clothes torn while attempting to rescue women in dark alleys from attacking harasser. Forget it. Nobody asks you to be brave. You say you have brains? That is enough. Use it - and leave the rest to those who know how to work with their hands.
But use your brains you must. Just bathing in the glow of a revolution, in the memories of bullets flying that you stopped virtually with your determination and vicious glances will not be good enough. That is not helping women in this country at all. In fact it is rather shocking to see that some of the most disturbing comments failing on women's rights and solidarity come from literate, well off-to-do, young revolutionaries dreaming more of having sex as a reward for their heroic fighting than understanding the real issue at hand. While in those 18 days in Tahrir the sexual harassment commonly known on the streets of Cairo was not prevalent, now too in revolutionary circles of young men a respectful attitude towards women and their rightful demands is often lacking.
The last of the three groups has to do its job alone. No one can help. While the first needs to be supported by the government and institutions fighting illiteracy, low wages and poor housing conditions - the second needs support from those that shape societies awareness - the religious leaders, the role models, the media - the third has brains enough (or should have) to do the job on its own: Listen to women and their horror stories of what happens to them each and every day on the street; let it sink in just how bad this truly is, how degrading, how disgusting, how hurtful and bad for anyone's self-esteem; show empathy and mean it by using the helpful trick of imagining it could have happened to you (yes it could, there is even male-harassement, so why not on you?) - and stand by the women when they need your support most. In the street, in the office, in the media, in court, in parliament - and in a protest march when women shout out the pain this causes them - and even then have to fear to be attacked by men of the first group - because you of the third group let it happen.
Some men of this third group let it happen because they have witnessed that they themselves could get attacked and verbally harassed. When women demonstrated for their rights on March 8 in Tahrir square, a small number of men stood by them and tried to ward off the attacks from harassing males. Soon came the ultimate dreaded horror question, uttered with a low growling voice: "Why do you defend these women? Are you faggots?"
From what I know, those that were there stood their ground and were undeterred. Others however of the third group pretending to be so open minded, so liberal and understanding, crouched on hearing that word and decided to not get involved. For just imagine someone would say such a ghastly thing to them in public!
Welcome to the club boys! When you crouch on that idea - you finally have unknowingly begun to feel what it is like to be sexually harassed. It happens to women every day. And they still have to go on. And if you feel bad being the recipient of such a verbal attack - then you learn the hard way how a woman feels who crouches just like you, who is hurt just like you, and who has no one to help her in this situation - if you don't get it a grip on yourself!
Don't mess up the revolution and what it achieved by now ducking away in cowardice. Big liberal revolutionary words and postures help no one put an end to women's plight in the streets of Cairo or elsewhere. No story you tell how great you were in the fight for freedom will impress anyone if you don't prove that you understand what freedom really means. Because only if the sexual harassment of women stops can the society truly say of itself: We are proud to be Egyptian!
There's work to be done, men of Egypt, for all of you. Stop fantasizing, stop suppressing, stop dreaming - just go and do it! The women need you. Don't fail them. Half of society is the best half you have. Get that into your heads.
*********************
While it would be interesting to know how much women are harassed in Assiut, Minya, in Beni Suef, Asswan or Hurghada, it is definite that in Cairo at least the sexual harassment of women escalates above all bounds. And men let it happen. That is the problem.
Because if men would not let it happen, harassers would not stand a chance and the attacks on women would stop. So why do men not interfere knowing this phenomena is prevalent all over town?
To find this out, one has to take a look at the men that are behind this ugly practice. There are three groups of men contributing to harassment in Egypt, each in its own special way.
Firstly there is the uneducated, primitive group that simply thinks women are there for their common pleasure, men that fail on empathy and understanding and just let themselves be guided by their very simply urges (how can a man be guided by brains when the guidance deep below is stronger!). Those men actively harass and in their private thinking find excuses for their behavior by stating women want it this way, women actually crave for it, women can't do without it (and without men) and women dress accordingly thus sending out signals of willingness (that no man can resist).
You don't have to be a psychologist to know these guys urgently need help.
Then there is the second group of men, fairly educated but strongly conservative and mostly religiously blinded that dare perhaps not to harass themselves, but if not encourage it excuse it for almost the same reasons as the first group. They suppress their women in their homes, declare themselves the masters of everything feminine in their family and condemn any woman that chooses to walk on her own - be it in society or on the street.
This group is dangerous because it gives the attackers of the first group a mental backing, a shielding behind which to attack. Through their suppressing, women-hating stance they create a social environment in which the attacker-group does not have to feel guilty. After all they are just carrying out what the others support too.
The third group of men is educated, calls itself liberal and says it is against harassment of women - mostly anyway - and accepts that women even take part in a revolution. As long as they don't steal the show and are willing to return to their places once the battle is successfully won and the gravy pots are being dished out and the booty is distributed. There of course they don't necessarily find women should partake. They don't all openly say it, but if you look close enough you will find their attitude is not as woman-friendly as they like you to believe.
This group allows harassment to happen because its men do not actively show solidarity with women when they are treated as minor, as inferior, as less important - to a revolution, to politics, to society. Under the shroud of liberalism basically hides a pretty paternal and chauvinistic attitude and when women really need help, these guys won't budge - later saying: I wasn't asked loud enough - I was busy running politics - I wasn't the center of the action (as a man!) - so how could I possibly know you wanted my support?!
Fail. One can only say.
It is these three strong groups in Egypt's society that make sexual harassment of women possible. It is the harassing man on the street - single or in a group - that gropes, it is the cab driver that looks away, the family father that laughs when his son misbehaves, the revolutionary that does not actively protect because his own interests are higher rated than those of a woman molested in his vicinity. If all these men would not partake, women in Egypt would be safe. They are not.
What possible ways could there be to cure the society of these evils coming in multiple forms of men?
Well, for the first group the remedy is clear: Working and living conditions that allow for a decent life combined with education, education, education. As long as poor living conditions are combined with illiteracy leaving young men stranded with a defunct ego and bulging sexual urges - the harassment of women will never stop. The foremost task of every government therefore must be to improve the living conditions of the poor, to better educational standards and ensure children get an education in the first place, to work together with NGOs and trusts to curb illiteracy as fast as possible. In a society where almost half of the population is illiterate it is almost impossible to get any sense into (male) heads.
The second group can only be reached if in society awareness is raised that the suppressing of women in homes must stop, that the belief is wrong that women are only half as much worth as a man - no matter what any old religious book might say about this - that women have to obey their male masters, that only males are allowed to decide on the future of female family members, that woman cannot be allowed to shape their own country for various most idiotic reasons that are best not even repeated here.
Again this can only be achieved by education, education, education. But this time not only in form of schooling to curb illiteracy. The teaching that is needed here must come from imams at the mosques, must come from the priests in their sermons just as much as from ministers, politicians, journalists, judges - society as a whole. Only if the atmosphere of suppression in the country is curbed and women are allowed to breath freely will there be a chance that the harassement-allowing male will vanish into oblivion.
More than half the Egyptian society is below the age of 25. Don't tell me there isn't a true chance to make this happen if the young only take things in their hands and demand the change in society they said they were initially demanding in Tahrir square.
All this will of course only work if the so called elite of a society plays along, joins in the same tune and is truly willing to change the society - from bottom to top - into a society fair and respectful to women. These elitists are not asked to get their hands dirty or their clothes torn while attempting to rescue women in dark alleys from attacking harasser. Forget it. Nobody asks you to be brave. You say you have brains? That is enough. Use it - and leave the rest to those who know how to work with their hands.
But use your brains you must. Just bathing in the glow of a revolution, in the memories of bullets flying that you stopped virtually with your determination and vicious glances will not be good enough. That is not helping women in this country at all. In fact it is rather shocking to see that some of the most disturbing comments failing on women's rights and solidarity come from literate, well off-to-do, young revolutionaries dreaming more of having sex as a reward for their heroic fighting than understanding the real issue at hand. While in those 18 days in Tahrir the sexual harassment commonly known on the streets of Cairo was not prevalent, now too in revolutionary circles of young men a respectful attitude towards women and their rightful demands is often lacking.
The last of the three groups has to do its job alone. No one can help. While the first needs to be supported by the government and institutions fighting illiteracy, low wages and poor housing conditions - the second needs support from those that shape societies awareness - the religious leaders, the role models, the media - the third has brains enough (or should have) to do the job on its own: Listen to women and their horror stories of what happens to them each and every day on the street; let it sink in just how bad this truly is, how degrading, how disgusting, how hurtful and bad for anyone's self-esteem; show empathy and mean it by using the helpful trick of imagining it could have happened to you (yes it could, there is even male-harassement, so why not on you?) - and stand by the women when they need your support most. In the street, in the office, in the media, in court, in parliament - and in a protest march when women shout out the pain this causes them - and even then have to fear to be attacked by men of the first group - because you of the third group let it happen.
Some men of this third group let it happen because they have witnessed that they themselves could get attacked and verbally harassed. When women demonstrated for their rights on March 8 in Tahrir square, a small number of men stood by them and tried to ward off the attacks from harassing males. Soon came the ultimate dreaded horror question, uttered with a low growling voice: "Why do you defend these women? Are you faggots?"
From what I know, those that were there stood their ground and were undeterred. Others however of the third group pretending to be so open minded, so liberal and understanding, crouched on hearing that word and decided to not get involved. For just imagine someone would say such a ghastly thing to them in public!
Welcome to the club boys! When you crouch on that idea - you finally have unknowingly begun to feel what it is like to be sexually harassed. It happens to women every day. And they still have to go on. And if you feel bad being the recipient of such a verbal attack - then you learn the hard way how a woman feels who crouches just like you, who is hurt just like you, and who has no one to help her in this situation - if you don't get it a grip on yourself!
Don't mess up the revolution and what it achieved by now ducking away in cowardice. Big liberal revolutionary words and postures help no one put an end to women's plight in the streets of Cairo or elsewhere. No story you tell how great you were in the fight for freedom will impress anyone if you don't prove that you understand what freedom really means. Because only if the sexual harassment of women stops can the society truly say of itself: We are proud to be Egyptian!
There's work to be done, men of Egypt, for all of you. Stop fantasizing, stop suppressing, stop dreaming - just go and do it! The women need you. Don't fail them. Half of society is the best half you have. Get that into your heads.
*********************
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)