This is worth a read: Jaclyn Friedman v Naomi Wolf, feminists debate the Assange rape allegations, on Democracy Now. The preamble transcript gives a good overview of the facts, if you’re a little in the dark still (and confirms no charges have been pressed, they’re allegations only).
Jaclyn Friedman argues the sexual assault allegations shouldn’t be dismissed just because they’re politically motivated, while Naomi Wolf says by going after Assange, the state is not embracing feminism, it’s “pimping” it. Friedmans says:
Rape is a very serious crime, and it’s also one of the most underreported crimes across the globe. And one of the reasons is because every time the issue comes up in the media, people come out of the woodwork to blame the victims and to minimize the crime. And unfortunately, when we see someone who is a progressive hero, like Assange is, those critics, those people who are doing that minimization and that victim blaming often come from the left, as well as the right. And we’ve seen that across the board. Unfortunately, with—Naomi Wolf has participated in that, as well as Michael Moore, Keith Olbermann, Glenn Beck—of course, plenty of people on the right are participating, as well.
Wolf rebukes by pointing out that there was consent from the two Swedish women. But also that the allegations will never get off the ground:
So, because I take rape seriously, because I’m aware that in 23 years, you know, in Sweden, which has been criticized by Amnesty International for disregarding rape, for letting rapists go free, because you have a better chance in Sweden, if you’re a rape victim, of, you know, dying in an accident or getting breast cancer than having a serious rape allegation prosecuted or getting any kind of legal hearing, according to Amnesty International’s report “Case Closed”—it’s because of that that I know that these charges are utterly, utterly atypically handled. In 23 years, I’ve never seen any man in any situation this ambiguous, involving this much consent, have any kind of legal process whatsoever.
I think they both miss a point. And it’s one a lot of people are scared to say. And that is that these charges ruin it for women with what I consider far more authentic and serious charges to lay. Rape cases can’t afford to be treated with rolls of eyes around the world. Sad. But true. It’s unfortunate this case has been knotted up in the broader political issues. Wolf’s argument speaks to this. But weirdly she doesn’t quite say it as such.
What do you think?
So really wanted to get the...
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by sarah wilson. sarah wilson said: good read: Wolf and Friedman debate the Assange rape allegations http://bit.ly/dJhxIe [...]
I tend to agree Sarah. I didn’t watch the Democracy Now clip but just read the exerts you posted. Maybe the exerts are taken out of context but I’m reading Friedman’s comments and thinking ‘who cares about left or right claims….they are opinions and miss the point.’ The sexual assualt allegation is a seperate charge that needs to be treated as such. I think the UK judge preceding over Assange’s bail application had some poignant comments reagrding the sexual assualt claim and the people willing to attest to Assange’s character and help post bail. They hardly knew Assange out of the context of Assange being hailed (rightly or wrongly) as a free speech liberal/progressive advocate.
Sexual assualt and some other very important topics that most people have an opinion about are being accutely blurred and it isn’t doing genuine sexual assault victims (I hate the use of that term – victim) any justice at all.
Increasing awareness this year throgh such things as White Ribbon day has been absolutely fantastic.
[Reply]
“And that is that these charges ruin it for women with what I consider far more authentic and serious charges to lay. ”
Actually, I think that the way these charges are being discussed ruin it for women who have more “authentic and serious” charges to lay. In fact, the way you’ve talked about it in this very post make it difficult for women with rape complaints. It’s the same the world over — what makes rape “authentic”? Is it being held down at knifepoint by enemy soldiers or a complete stranger? Sure, I get that. But what about the young woman in a situation where there is an imbalance of power and she has a “bad experience” and then feels shamed into shutting up about it? Because for me, that’s rape too. I have personally known people who’ve been sexually assaulted and who were subsequently shamed or encouraged into not giving evidence or dropping the charges. The evidence stated in this Guardian piece sound like rape to me, and deserve to be taken seriously http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/17/julian-assange-sweden
It’s not unusual for rape victims to try and dismiss it or normalise things immediately after the fact. Hence behaviour like boasting or playing it down or just forgetting about it. But we don’t know what exactly happened here. That’s for the courts to find out, and the smear campaigns that Assange’s legal team have engaged in (and that is what it is, a smear campaign — they have spread blatantly wrong information like the “sex by surprise” thing, their names have been leaked and death threats given — hell, not much different from what many rape victims go through) aren’t helping at all.
I find Naomi Wolf’s argument slightly bizarre — she’s essentially saying that because most rape charges in Sweden and around the world aren’t brought to light, these shouldn’t be? Or should be disregarded as unserious claims? And she’s been victim-blaming in her two columns (that I’ve read) in the Huffington Post — almost sounds like a rape apologist. You know, the kind that she as an advocate for sexual assault victims is meant to be fighting against.
I would encourage you to go back in Sady Doyle’s blog a little bit where she goes into how and why so many people are angry http://sadydoyle.tumblr.com/
[Reply]
December 23rd, 2010 at 1:53 pm
Quote “The evidence stated in this Guardian piece sound like rape to me, and deserve to be taken seriously”.
Inncocent until proven guilty in a court of law. And that’s not a rape apology, it’s a statement of fairness and equity in most western judicial systems.
My understanding is that it’s not evidence until given in a court of law, in the meantime it’s a ‘statement’ made to police by the alleged victim/s.
[Reply]
December 23rd, 2010 at 2:36 pm
My bad for using the word “evidence” — I’m obviously no legal expert! And when I say “deserve to be taken seriously” I mean their complaints should be taken seriously.
You say “innocent until proven guilty” referring to Assange. Interesting how many people aren’t giving the two women making the complaints that same benefit of the doubt.
[Reply]
I disagree… I think the fact that other rape cases have been mishandled should not mean that this high profile case should be ignored. The allegations may not be as “serious” as others, but they are still serious. Having sex with a sleeping person (without a condom), having sex with somebody without a condom after they had expressly asked for him to wear a condom, using his body weight to hold a woman down in a sexual manner… they may not be as vicious as a violent, non-consensual sexual assault but I definitely think they are worth addressing in court. (Link here: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5iLBCkkC5l0NVV0gEYkAA04x83Wrg?docId=B32488671291733403A00 ). It seems that the allegations would not have been pursued had Assange not been famous – but that does not negate the illegality and immorality of his actions.
I certainly don’t think that people “rolling their eyes” at these allegations is reason enough to drop them. I think the issue is not the nature of the allegations themselves but the fact that people are rolling their eyes at them (while knowing next to nothing about the events that took place), and it says more about the eye-rollers than the victims… I found Kate Harding’s article a lot more illuminating than either of the opinion pieces Sarah posted. (Link here: http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/12/07/julian_assange_rape_accuser_smeared/index.html ).
Of course, everybody is entitled to their opinion, but I think people have jumped to hasty conclusions here… the case should progress or be dropped on the merit of the allegations, and definitely not dropped because lesser rape charges have not been pursued in the past. Committing one injustice to give credence to a greater injustice… that’s just more injustice! I don’t understand the logic at all.
[Reply]
This is a great analysis: http://kateharding.info/2010/12/16/some-shit-im-sick-of-hearing-regarding-rape-and-assange/
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2010 at 1:53 pm
Having read the article and most of the blog comments, while I don’t disagree with the sentiments of Kate Harding, it is very hard to take this lady seriously. I sense a woman full of hate, rage, anger and resentment. A narcissist in the extreme. In her own words:
‘let it be known that I am an arrogant, man-hating c*nt who hates free speech, can’t tolerate dissenting opinions, and lives to preserve my echo chamber of brainwashed sycophants. So keep that in mind when trying to get a comment through moderation.’
Deary me………..
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2010 at 2:19 pm
Oh dear… I think by her own definition she has lost all respect from anyone who thinks for themself! Even tongue-in-cheek, that statement is awful.
[Reply]
I also agree that the media portrayal surrounding this particular case, does not help the cause of women worldwide in feeling safe to report rape or sexual assault charges. The word “rape” is very emotive, and brings up a picture of violent sexual assault or at the very least, non-consensual sex. The Swedish prosecution would like to speak to Assange regarding several accusations, the most serious being of “rape, less serious crime”…
“The most serious accusation Swedish prosecutors made against him in a statement on their website is that he committed “rape, less serious crime” — the least serious of three levels of rape charges that are on the statute books in Sweden. Conviction carries a maximum four year jail sentence and a minimum of less than two years, depending upon the circumstances.” (Reuters, 7/12/2010)
The media have jumped on this and using “rape” for its headline grabbing abilities. When the general public then read the story and hear that it was consensual sex, they immediately dismiss the women as attention seekers, or money grabbing, which is often the general opinion whenever a rape story involving a well known personality is reported. This obviously has a detrimental effect on any woman who has a legitimate case to bear, and it’s no wonder that rape is one of the most under-reported crimes.
If, as Wolf suggests, that Sweden has a very low prosecution rate of rape cases, and Friedman opines that this “is an opportunity to prove that the Swedish government can take these issues seriously. This is an opportunity to set the international bar higher for the way we take seriously rape charges.”, then I’m afraid that Friedman is setting her hopes on a very weak case. Rape does need to be taken seriously, but I dont think that the Assange case will be changing people’s opinions that the women who come forward are not doing it for some ulterior motive.
It is my opinion that the furore and media hype surrounding this particular case has been whipped up and politically motivated to discredit Assange and therefore by association, the WikiLeaks organisation. Which is a shame. The topic of rape and sexual assault deserves to be treated with more credibility in the media, and not used as tool for possible political machinations.
This is the link to the Guardian article they referred to in the Democracy Now! article:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/17/julian-assange-sweden?INTCMP=SRCH
And this is a link to the Reuters article I referred to:
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6B669H20101207
[Reply]
This is nearly too contentious to comment on. But, I shall attempt it.
On one hand, the charges against Assange are incredibly flimsy especially with the consent given by both women, that the idea of him still being held without charge is nearly ludicrous. On the other hand, rape cases are notoriously hard to prove and find evidence for, and often he said vs she said. Either way, I think legitimate victims are being belittled and discouraged from coming forward. This situation is just bad all around.
I dont think it should have anything to do with feminism, because that lumps it in the same circle of influence as those god-awful anger-driven “feminists” who just want to hurt men and cause chaos for their own pleasure. Which are a very small minority of feminists to be sure but unfortunately they are the most vocal. I wish sexual assault could be seen as a human rights issue, and not a feminist issue, maybe that would be cause for the world to take it more seriously?
[Reply]
“And that is that these charges ruin it for women with what I consider far more authentic and serious charges to lay. ”
Actually, I think that the way these charges are being discussed ruin it for women who have more “authentic and serious” charges to lay. In fact, the way you’ve talked about it in this very post make it difficult for women with rape complaints. It’s the same the world over — what makes rape “authentic”? Is it being held down at knifepoint by enemy soldiers or a complete stranger? Sure, I get that. But what about the young woman in a situation where there is an imbalance of power and she has a “bad experience” and then feels shamed into shutting up about it? Because for me, that’s rape too. I have personally known people who’ve been sexually assaulted and who were subsequently shamed or encouraged into not giving evidence or dropping the charges. The evidence stated in this Guardian piece sound like rape to me, and deserve to be taken seriously http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/17/julian-assange-sweden
It’s not unusual for rape victims to try and dismiss it or normalise things immediately after the fact. Hence behaviour like boasting or playing it down or just forgetting about it. But we don’t know what exactly happened here. That’s for the courts to find out, and the smear campaigns that Assange’s legal team have engaged in (and that is what it is, a smear campaign — they have spread blatantly wrong information like the “sex by surprise” thing, their names have been leaked and death threats given — hell, not much different from what many rape victims go through) aren’t helping at all.
I find Naomi Wolf’s argument slightly bizarre — she’s essentially saying that because most rape charges in Sweden and around the world aren’t brought to light, these shouldn’t be? Or should be disregarded as unserious claims? And she’s been victim-blaming in her two columns (that I’ve read) in the Huffington Post — almost sounds like a rape apologist. You know, the kind that she as an advocate for sexual assault victims is meant to be fighting against.
I would encourage you to go back in Sady Doyle’s blog a little bit where she goes into how and why so many people are angry http://sadydoyle.tumblr.com/
[Reply]
December 22nd, 2010 at 9:12 pm
Thanks for approving the first one Jo, you can delete this double up if you like!
[Reply]
http://www.fugitivus.net/2010/12/22/dear-second-and-third-wave-feminists-with-publicly-recognizable-names/
The above makes a really interesting point: we haven’t heard from the older guard feminists on this issue. I’d love to hear their views.
[Reply]
I used to be questioning what is up with that bizarre gravatar??? I know 5am is early and I’m not trying my greatest at that hour, but I hope I don’t seem like this! I might nonetheless make that face if I’m asked to do one hundred pushups. lol
[Reply]