When I learned about the legal
definition of sexual assault in my training last year for the U of
A's Sexual Assault Centre, I was surprised at how comprehensive it
was. I was surprised because it didn't really match up at all with
typical attitudes and views surrounding sexual assault that I'd
encountered before. That's when I discovered that Canada is in a
weird situation where law is actually ahead of social attitudes with
regards to sexual assault. We've also been learning about legal
precedents that have been set - situations where these laws were
upheld in court. The Ewanchuk decision established that, legally,
there is no such thing as “implied” consent – yet, popular
opinion still holds that consent can be, and indeed often is, implied
through someone's clothing. The JA decision established that no one
can consent to sexual activity when unconscious (even if they are in
a relationship) – yet the prevailing attitude is that it's fine to
have sex with an extremely drunk person, though they aren't capable
of consenting either. The gap between case law and predominant social
attitudes is severely disappointing.
Perhaps even more alarming, however, is
the discrepancy between the law and how it is enforced. Many police
officers are just as subject to myths and misconceptions about sexual
assault, and often put those in play when dealing with victims
reporting it. I know that so many survivors have such bad experiences
with police and the reporting process, and it seems to stem largely
from deep misunderstandings about sexual assault. This is especially
true with patrol officers (as opposed to a sexual assault detective).
This all leads me to wonder, if myths
about sexual assault are still so prevalent among law enforcement
officers and the general public despite our very progressive laws
(which have been held up in court), how powerful is law really? I
think it's important but not all-determining. Often, people's
reaction to any systemic problem in society is that we need some new
law. We saw an example of this in this week's video about Rehtaeh
Parsons – many people responded with outrage to her death and
demanded a new law be put into effect. The woman from the Elizabeth
Fry Society, who was being interviewed, was very insistent that we
don't need a new law in Canada; we have the necessary laws right now,
but they are not being enforced. Brownmiller also thought the
solution to the issue of sexual assault was law reform, but while
laws have been reformed popular attitudes have not caught up. It's
evident that law is only part of what must be a multi-faceted
approach.
Jill,
ReplyDeleteI am completely agree with you that law is not enough unless it is being properly enforced to prevent sexual assault. Focusing on law alone is a fatal flaw when we attempt to change the cultural behaviours that contribute to the formation of systemic oppression.
Not only are unnecessary laws constantly being proposed, but these laws are very general and contribute to the culture that is making them so inefficient. For example, with the Rehtaeh Parsons case, the "cyberbullying law" completely ignores the systemic oppression associated with every single case of "cyberbullying". Why aren't we using words like sexism, racism, homophobia, and transphobia when we describe incidents like the Rehtaeh Parsons case? Even just the word "cyberbullying" implies that these problems are trivial and almost inevitable when using the internet. If we actually started calling bullying what it is and address it as racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, fat phobia and classism, children will become aware of these power dynamics that exist in society, and they will be better prepared for them as they reach adulthood. At the same time, adults will be given more responsibility to challenge the intolerance that is rooted within our society overall and start fighting those oppressions to create a safer world for the children they are raising.
A major shift in dialogue needs to take place so that we stop questioning the behaviors of children, like Rehtaeh Parsons, and start questioning the behavior of government officials, police officers, and school administrators who passively allow this behavior to snow-ball instead of acting proactively to prevent future incidences from occurring in the first place.
No longer should we stand for the idea that youth sexual assault and humiliation is something that "just happens". It is violence. Instead of implementing more and more laws as a reaction to the deaths of youth that are the product of sexism, we should start proactively stopping this violence and harassment by challenging the behvaviors and norms of people that hold the power in our communities, as well as identifying what exactly is meant by a case of "bullying" and not being afraid to use specific terminology.