"Systematic" Sexual Abuse at Lackland Air Force Base: Report to Be Released
Unfortunately the scandals surrounding top commanders are overshadowing it, but this report on unchecked, systematic and wide-spread sexual abuse of women at Lackland AFB needs to be widely publicized and recognized. Female warriors are being ill-served and stalked by predators in an already stressful, life and death environment. This is intolerable, immoral, and unconscionable. Forget the 3 and 4 start generals and their dalliances. Concentrate on this.
Keyon Dooling, PTSD, and Recovering from a Nightmare Past
A great piece in Yahoo! sports on the former Celtics star. Dooling lived with his abuse buried deep within his psyche for decades. Not everyone responds the same way, but he was almost emotionally destroyed by. Kudos to him and blessings to his family- he seems to have overcome, and with the added courage and poise to join survivors as a spokesperson against child sexual abuse.
Mentally Challenged Woman Raped on LA Bus: Bystanders Present and Surveillance Camera Don't Prevent It
The shocking rape of a mentally challenged woman on a Los Angeles bus late last week- despite the presence of passengers, a driver and a surveillance camera- should underscore how predators can sexually abuse victims in the most unlikely of circumstances. Particularly for individuals with disabilities, the risk of sexual abuse or attack is shockingly high. Sadly, most families don't have the resources to be as vigilant as they need to be. The rest of us as potential intervening bystanders must be attentive.
Racist Tweets From Teens and the Adolescent Brain: Trying to Withhold Judgment
The online magazine Jezebel published a long and disgusting list of racist, sometimes violent tweets sent out by mostly teenagers in response to the re-election of the President. Today, editors reported on efforts to track down the schools the kids attend, in order to alert them to the behavior. I don't blame Jezebel and I hope the people charged with educating these kids intervene while there's- perhaps- still time to correct their self-destructive behavior if not their poisoned thinking. One thing that should be kept in mind, though, is the neurological development level of the kids who are now being exposed, disciplined and in some cases very publicly punished. The American Bar Association's Juvenile Justice Center has an excellent article on the subject: crimjust_juvjus_Adolescence.authcheckdam. Bottom line is we don't learn to control impulse well until much later than has been previously believed. Actions have consequences and these kids are learning that fast. That's just. But as the floodgates of social media retribution open, it's fair to consider the source.
Child-beating Judge William Adams Will Return to the Bench
The Supreme Court of Texas has apparently approved the reinstatement of Judge William Adams of coastal Aransas County, provided that he doesn't hear child abuse cases. Adams was suspended last year when his daughter released a secretly taped video of Judge Adams from 2004 mercilessly beating her with a belt and cursing at her (she was a teenager at the time and suffering from a form of cerebral palsy; I blogged on that issue here). There is no higher honor for a practicing attorney than to be chosen to sit in judgment under the law. The judicial robe carries with it respect, authority, and immense, raw power over the lives of others. William Adams has proven- in a rare and startlingly clear image of his true character- that he is not fit to wear it. Is Aransas County that devoid of men and women who can take the bench and who have not viciously beaten and cursed a disabled child? The Texas judiciary should be ashamed, period.
Rough Justice for Rape Victims on Social Media?
Two acquaintances of a 17 year-old girl raped her after she passed out at a party last year. They also took pictures and shared them with friends. Some justice was meted out as her assailants pled to felony charges, but apparently she was also silenced by the same court that punished them. Defying the court order, she has turned to Twitter to identify the two and speak out about her victimization. It's a trend that other women are joining in as well- some see it understandably as the only recourse they'll ever have in a system organically unfriendly and unsupportive in most ways.
"Wut" Happens Next When An Older Child "Hits Him Back?"
Andre Curry has been acquitted of unlawful restraint for binding his 22 month old daughter's hand, feet and mouth with tape, and then posting a picture of her bound thusly on Facebook. The caption below read "This is wut happens wen my baby hits me back." Perhaps, as Curry's attorney successfully argued (on the unlawful restraint charges- battery verdict is still pending), what the father did was simply stupid and not cruel or- more to the point- criminal. Regardless, I remain quite concerned for the little girl in the situation who has no voice. I hope the Cook County State's Attorney's Office, CPD, and the involved child protection agencies stay vigilant for her sake.
A Great Explanation of the Zombie Phenomenon And How It Relates to Institutional Control
It's Halloween (a holiday I honestly just hate), and zombies are a fair topic. They're also instructional with regard to how institutions both formal and informal create myths to control adherents. Here's a great piece by Amy Wilentz in the NYT describing how Haitian slaves were controlled by myth- even beyond death. The same myths create opportunities for predators of all kinds. The nightmare is real; no movie magic needed. That's the cruelest truth.
It Shouldn't Take Blond Hair and Light Skin To Get a Country Up in Arms About Children in Poverty
But in Mexico, apparently it does. Worse, the original photographer who released the photo of her on Facebook sparked a response from authorities challenging whether the child's parents were actually hers. Race shouldn't matter in child welfare. But it absolutely does. If a child is white, blond, and meets European standards of beauty, she'll be valued, protected, searched for and vindicated in much grater numbers than a child with darker skin. It's shameful and deadly accurate.
Arkansas Candidate Advocates Child Execution
An Arkansas candidate for state representative (he's already served in the state house and once represented the Arkansas Department of Human Services) has been quoted in his own book as advocating in certain cases the execution of one's own "rebellious children" under strict Biblical principles. The candidate, Charlie Fuqua, has been roundly ridiculed in places like Gawker for this tragically misguided statement, but it's worth noting that cyber critics outside of his district won't have a say in whether he's elected (again) to the state house. What's more worrisome to me about an attitude like Fuqua's is less how literally some will take it or how much power he's likely to amass in any political arena. I worry more about attitudes like Fuqua's- even when much less extreme- because of the potential effect they have on child protection. Fuqua's opinion might seem somewhere between clownish and horrific, but the idea that God has given parents ultimate authority over their children is one that can foster hostility toward any societal or governmental effort to protect them from abuse and neglect. I get it- religious parents want the freedom to raise and discipline their children without government intrusion or societally crafted 'rules' on how to do so. That's understandable. But the fact is, abuse, neglect and child murder sometimes happen at the hands of parents who are followers (often strict followers) of all types of religious practices. Those who wish to hide behind religion in order to destroy a child or get away with it have an ally in Fuqua, however unwitting.
For The Beta Frat Guys At Wesleyan, Here's How You Take Responsibility
At Wesleyan University, a former student was raped at the fraternity house of Beta Theta Pi, a locale she describes in a recently filed civil suit as being known as a "rape factory." Her assailant later pled to lesser charges; the fact of an attack is not in dispute.What is disputed is whether the house was known as a "rape factory" by other students and in particular by the school's administration, responsible for her educational well-being under the federal anti-discrimination law known as Title IX. In the wake of the lawsuit, some students claim they weren't aware of such a characterization. One claims with dubious certainty that he knows the Beta brothers "on a really personal level" and they're "not the the kind of people who would do something like that." Sad to say, that kind of blanket dismissal of suspicion due to observable characteristics is exactly what predators rely upon. In this case the predator was not a member of the fraternity but an invited guest who undoubtedly used the environment the brothers are responsible for creating as a convenient tool.Whether the house has the reputation the suit is assigning to it or something less ("sketchy" has been suggested by some at very least), changes in how the brothers conduct themselves will not likely be seen anytime soon. A statement by the fraternity's national spokesperson says the following:"Beta Theta Pi’s concern first and foremost is for the well-being of the woman so significantly impacted by O’Neill’s [the convicted perpetrator] illegal behavior. Convicted of third-degree assault and first-degree unlawful restraint — resulting in a 15-month sentence in a Connecticut prison — O’Neill has affected in an extremely negative manner both a young woman in the prime of her life and 64 Beta Theta Pi students unassociated with and unaware of his atrocious actions." He added that the fraternity "has long prided itself on the respectful treatment of all women — at all times."It's hard to imagine a statement more superficial in terms of actual concern for the woman who was raped (or anyone else for that matter) and simultaneously self-serving where the fraternity is concerned. Parse it out and here's what you've got:1. A noble sounding but ultimately meaningless utterance about the survivor being "impacted by illegal behavior." Yes, and behavior that the spokesman makes clear was resolved by the court as short of rape with a sentence of 15 months. This detailed description of both the convictions and the sentence are designed to downplay what occurred in the fraternity's midst even though the result of the criminal justice process was hardly reflective of what actually happened. The case was resolved with a plea and evidence was limited (extremely common in sexual assault cases). The conviction, when weighed against the account of the woman who was raped and whom I believe, reflects a sad fraction of what O'Neill did to her.2. An insulting equalization of the harm done to the woman and the harm suffered by Beta's 64 poor, innocent brothers the spokesman claims were (according to them, I suppose) unaware of the perpetrator's actions. There is zero acceptance of responsibility in this statement; rather, it's as if O'Neill disguised himself and snuck into the party without anyone's knowledge. Never mind that he was an invited guest of one of the brothers. Never mind that the noisy, dark, isolating and liquor infused environment the Beta's are so proud of creating was remarkably helpful to O'Neill.Beta Theta Pi isn't asking for my advice, but I'll offer it anyway. Brothers, want to stand up and be counted as decent, honorable men? Then try this on:"A woman was sexually attacked at our fraternity event, and we are disturbed, saddened and shamed by this occurrence, despite the fact that the perpetrator was not a fraternity brother but a guest. As forthright, responsible and honorable men, we take ourselves to task for this harrowing event which does not reflect our values. We also vow to examine every aspect of the environment we create, and our own commitment to the safety and security of women who socialize with us."It's grow up time, boys. Starting acting like real men.
Two More Attributes Boy Scout Leadership Could Use: Introspection and Shame
A boy scout for years, I remember well the Scout Law, those twelve traits we were taught to cultivate as we approached manhood. Presumably, BSA's national executives should embody them. But two recent revelations (decades of substandard attempts to protect boys from predators and the denial of an Eagle rank to a gay scout), suggest that, at the leadership level, two other traits should be added to those venerable twelve: One would be introspection. The other, a sense of shame.Introspection- the willingness and ability to take cold and honest inventory of their own values, responsibilities and limitations- might have helped BSA stanch the emotional (and in some cases physical) bleeding of untold numbers of boys abused by trusted and empowered leaders over the years. We now know that the feeble, naive and ultimately self-serving efforts by the national organization to prevent predatory access to children were largely feckless. "Perversion files" secretly kept in order to prevent predators from reentering scouting were at best incomplete and improperly cross-checked, allowing known abusers to rejoin troops in other communities and continue to offend. A lack of clear standards from above, coupled with an execrable desire to protect the reputations of abusers even in compelling cases meant that oftentimes a file wouldn't be created at all.Scouting's leaders, much like religious leaders who failed repeatedly to protect anything other than their institutions, can be forgiven for not fully comprehending what research has, relatively speaking, only recently revealed: That active child molesters, usually heterosexual, in most cases abuse dozens to hundreds of children over the lifespan; that promises by the abusers to get treatment or simply stop are almost always worthless; that "evidence" of rehabilitation and pledges of being "healed" are often either ruses played by skilled and unrepentant predators, or sincere but ultimately ineffective barriers to a grave compulsion.So, too, we can forgive the common but misguided belief that criminal background checks (instituted in 2008) would do much to prevent molesters from joining scouting. Most molesters have no criminal history of any kind and remain undetected because rates of reporting are so low, especially with boys. Requiring suspected abuse to be reported to authorities (as medical professionals have been required to do for years) is a better step, albeit one that should have been instituted far sooner than 2010.Far more disturbing than missteps and delays, though, is the familiar sense that BSA, at least in part, protected itself over the desperate needs of its scouts as the cases invariably arose. It's easy to claim the need for a secretive process allowing little to no public knowledge in the name of "protecting victims, witnesses, and the falsely accused." It's also largely unnecessary as victims can often be de-identified and false allegations are extremely rare. What secrecy does instead is to conceal a shameful but addressable problem, and in a way that only temporarily protects the institution and exposes ever greater numbers of children to life-altering damage. Worse, it perversely attracts even more predators who understand innately that what's valued within is not the boys but the brand.Introspection would assist with correcting both the well-intentioned missteps and arresting the more cynical urges to protect the institution over the very children it seeks to nurture. Introspection would allow for more transparency, the invitation of outside experts (to be fair BSA is doing this now) and cross-checking within the leadership to assure that priorities are in line.What might a sense of shame create? Maybe a hesitance, after such dismal failure on a much more important front, to deny the rightful honor of an Eagle badge to a young gay man. BSA spokesman Deron Smith himself used the term "sexual orientation" (rather than "preference" or "lifestyle choice") to describe exactly what Ryan Andresen's sexual identity is: A natural and unchangeable characteristic.Regardless of its regrettable insistence that homosexuality is a legitimate bar to scouting, perhaps less self-righteousness and a more penetrable institutional conscience would inspire honoring anyway this remarkable and brave young man's accomplishments. Rather than judging and rejecting Ryan Andresen, better the Boy Scouts of America remember the largely heterosexual monsters it failed to bar over the painful decades instead.
On Sandusky: Gladwell Close, Deadspin's Cosentino Closer
Regarding child sexual abuse recently, Deadspin editor Dom Cosentino and blockbuster author Malcom Gladwell politely traded barbs. The issue was whether Jerry Sandusky was ignored and thus abetted by PSU's leadership (as Cosentino believes) or simply fooled- largely for understandable reasons- as Gladwell argues.The fact is, neither writer's take is inaccurate, and there is plenty of room for reasonable disagreement where something as dark and misunderstood as this subject is concerned. That being said, I tend to side with Cosentino when it comes to wanting to hold the leadership of Penn State more responsible than Gladwell seemingly does. Cosentino believes Gladwell's error is trying to fit the Sandusky story neatly into a universalist "parable" by ignoring relevant facts. It's a criticism Gladwell has heard before, namely that the effort to make complex occurrences and dynamics explainable sometimes leads him to oversimplify.But after carefully reading Gladwell's description of victim identification, grooming, and hiding-in-plain-sight as predator characteristics, I don't think he's missed anything in terms of a general understanding. Indeed, and not surprisingly, Gladwell's take on how child molesters "get away with it" is spot-on. I'm especially impressed with how he appreciates that "grooming," the insidious, methodical process whereby predators seek to introduce sexuality into their relationships with children, is not just something predators engage in with individual children. In fact, families, organizations and entire communities are groomed by molesters. Gladwell cites a great example in a predator who didn't go looking for children directly, but rather for their parents, playing the sympathetic sounding board in bars for moms and dads who seemed to need help with familial situations.Sandusky, it is obvious now, groomed an entire region and dozens of communities, schools, organizations, families and individuals within that region. And beyond central Pennsylvania, his persona charmed sportswriters and other journalists, and won him no less than Presidential recognition for his Second Mile foundation. Gladwell is sharply accurate to state that Sandusky chose a perfect environment within which to hunt children. His boss was obsessed with the game and socially distant, disinterested and indeed lightly disdainful of Sandusky's constant parade of kids. The ethos around Sandusky was one of male-bonding and physical contact. Communal dressing and bathing were typical and expected. He relished in a cover of not only charity and selflessness but also of deep masculinity and social acceptance. And of course, both the PSU community and Second Mile provided him a steady, endless stream of trusting victims and unsuspecting families.However, this list of the things Sandusky enjoyed to the tragic detriment of so many and so much is not quite complete. The third crucial thing predators crave is the one Gladwell overlooks, and from which Cosentino's criticism seems to stem although he doesn't state it as such.Predators need a cover for what they're doing and/or who they are, and they need a victim pool. They also need, almost invariably, an institution of one form or another to protect them if they are detected, and to undermine efforts to shed light on their activities even if victims are lost as grist for the mill.To be fair, Gladwell discusses Sandusky's rich and protective environment as a factor that assisted him and it did. But what protected Sandusky wasn't just the cover of football culture and a distant, other-focused boss. It was the leadership of Penn State University- Curley, Schultz, Spanier and Paterno- who made the series of crucial and damning decisions that allowed Sandusky to continue unchallenged. While none of them will ever admit it, or perhaps even be fully cognizant of it, those decisions were driven at least in part to protect the institution of PSU, it's money-machine of a program, and it's theretofore sterling reputation. How cynical a thought process this was surely differs for every one of the four. But doubtlessly it played a part.Thus is the lesson that Gladwell perhaps missed, and Cosentino perhaps sensed as deficient in Gladwell's analysis: The larger, more venerable and more powerful the institution, the more stubbornly its leaders will protect it. If necessary, to the detriment of anyone who stands vulnerable to something within its midst.
Father Groeschel and Reflections on Liberalism: What Protects Children?
A couple weeks back, a Franciscan friar on his television show made a terrible misstatement, suggesting that in many cases of priestly sexual abuse, the priests were themselves emotionally struggling and the adolescent victims "seducers." He was rightly criticized, but what's more disturbing is the continuing ignorance surrounding this crisis. Sexual abuse and exploitation is almost never an event that follows a valiant but failed struggle within the heart of an otherwise decent person. Rather, it is almost always the methodical and predatory act of a hunter.As I've discussed before, the two most prevalent theories about the abuse crisis were both dead wrong. The anti-Catholic view that celibacy and the priestly life are turning young men into predators is complete bunk. Equally foolish, and still stressed by many hardline conservative Catholics, is the idea that the abuse crisis is the inevitable result of the liberalization of the Church, and tolerance for things like homosexuality both within and without the vocations. The argument is that a "homosexual culture" within the priesthood exacerbates the problem. This is beyond foolish, of course; it's deeply offensive in that it falsely conflates same-sex attraction with the urge to hurt and exploit children or any weaker person.Neither the Roman Catholic Church nor any other religious institution, (and there are many aside from the Church who have similar issues) is manufacturing predators. Instead it's attracting them, unknowingly. A cover, a steady stream of victims, and an institution willing to protect them are the three things predators have sought from the Church and other religious institutions since time immemorial.So while it's tempting to gain an advantage for one's view of the faith (or a view hostile to the faith) by claiming a solution to child endangerment, it's a fruitless endeavor. If liberalization were the issue, then the parish I grew up in should have been a terrible place for kids. Christ the Redeemer, a parish my parents helped to found, was staffed in the 70's by friars who were paragons of post Vatican II liberalization. There were guitars and brown robes, and a teen Bible called "The Way." There was tolerance for other faiths, and other ways of living and thinking.What there wasn't, at least in my experience, was child abuse. Of course I can't say that categorically. But I can say that despite researching the issue, I know of no complaints from that parish. I can also say I was in close contact on a weekly basis with our priests from the age of five through my teens. I was alone with both parish and visiting priests as an alter server, donning the alb for mass as they donned vestments. My parents were close with them. I never had a bad moment. I knew they were imperfect, of course. Although it was hidden from me as a small child, there were priests I knew who struggled with alcoholism, and probably with celibacy. I knew they were human; at least one or two probably would have identified as homosexual but for their vows.My point is not that the hippyish, folksy way the Friars of the Atonement did things then was the best expression of Catholicism. It worked for some, it didn't for others, and I'm hardly the authority on how it jived with larger doctrinal concerns. My point is that a liberal environment, tolerant and less authoritarian, is not an incubator for predatory behavior. In fact, the opposite is what we often see when child abuse occurs within any religious community. In environments that are more authoritarian, where religious leaders have more power and where the community is insular and isolated from outsiders, predators thrive. Not because they are made there. Because they are attracted there.It's the attraction to a favorable environment that must cease by changing that environment. That's the only chance the Church or any other institution has to protect the children it claims; predators can almost never be screened out. The Church is unfairly attacked for producing predators because of its traditions and demands. But the draw toward intolerance and the emerging call from within for a smaller but more militant, doctrinal Church will not protect its children either.
Todd Akin's Hornet's Nest: It Will Get Worse
The dark ignorance and insulting disregard beneath the remarks of Rep. Todd Akin go deeper than I've heard commented on so far. Both Akin and those like him should prepare for the backlash against that ignorance and disregard to go deeper as well.It's not "just" that Akin and men who think like him believe, however baselessly, that rape allegations are often fabricated, or at least embellished in order to create an excuse to procure an abortion. For enemies of choice, this suspicion- that women stretch the truth in order to seek support for terminating a pregnancy- is a natural outgrowth of the equally baseless male hysteria that birthed the myth that women regularly lie about rape in order to recapture their virtue.No, it's far worse in the effluent, boiling camps of thought that produced Todd Akin. Because as that thinking goes, there are really three classes of women who claim to be raped, and only one is worth caring about. In the first group (the smallest by far, in their minds) are the "real" victims- the chaste and blameless- attacked within narrowly defined and traditionally accepted scenarios. The second group (to them the largest) contains the liars and embellishers, either devil-women or shame-shedders who will "cry rape" in order to avoid personal responsibility, or simply out of sheer malevolence.For many people, however badly misinformed, these two groups in whatever percentages make up the whole population of complainants. But for Akin and his ilk there is a third group as well: Women who may have been violated, but whose immodesty and ungodly behavior led directly to their victimization. These women are, perhaps, "real" victims in the sense that they lack the scheming underhandedness of the red-lipped Jezebels (and yes, a Freudian could and should have a field day with the projection and self-loathing going on here), but they fall short of a full measure of sympathy. There are teachings, after all, that if followed strictly, prevent that kind of unpleasantness. I'll stress here that I'm not only picking on Akin's apparent brand of Christianity. The idea that strict obedience to religious commandments will shield an observant woman from sexual assault precedes Christianity by millennia and is practiced by other religions as well. The adherence to religious rules, for those who obtain solace and fulfillment from them, are not bad in and of themselves (the sexist aspects excepted, but that's a much longer discussion). But as deliverance from the evil of sexual violence, they are worse than ineffective; they are insidiously and falsely reassuring.For me, Akin's comment about "legitimate rape," however botched an attempt at coherent thought, was a glimpse into the workings of a brain that sees a narrow band of true victimization in a spectrum of self-injury or worse. While perhaps driven (in men like Akin) by deep-seated male hysteria and ancient angst, it is also used with precision by predators who rape again and again, gleefully protected by the shame, guilt and fear aimed miserably in the wrong direction.The irony involved (women viewed as hysterics while men hysterically consume rape-myth nonsense generation after generation) might be comical.But rape isn't funny.And the millions of women victimized (to say nothing- here- of the millions of men also) aren't laughing. Somewhere on the campaign trail in the great state of Missouri, Rep. Akin is doubtlessly wondering how he managed to kick over such a hornet's nest. The quick answer, because he spoke ignorantly and insensitively on a topic deeply familiar to far more people than Akin probably suspects, is only a part of the larger explanation.The rest is answered, in my mind, by a tide of moral certitude and cultural defensiveness meeting an increasing demand for non-traditional recognition of other ways of life and self-determination. The backdrop is the continuing, widespread unease of an oddly stubborn recession, an exhausting war, and the flinty, itching suspicion in more and more minds- on either side of the debate- that everything they love and depend on is slipping away from them.People are angry. They are frightened. They are clinging more and more obdurately to their respective positions.It will get worse.
Kayla Harrison's Uncommon Valor, and Society's Far Too Common Shame
“I think,” she said, “it’d be pretty cool to be a kid.” – Kayla Harrison, the New York Times.If I knew her as a baby, with enough clairvoyance to know of her remarkable talent and drive, I would have made some assumptions about the path she’d take, for better or worse. I would have assumed she’d have a very different experience from most children, interacting less and less with them as she grew. I would have assumed confidently that, before adolescence, she would be at least partially separated from her family and entrusted with little oversight to a coach known for grooming champions. I would have assumed that the influence of that coach over her would be profound, and that she would have looked upon that person as an ultimate authority in many areas of her life.And I would have been very frightened.I’m in no way implying anything negative about the choices Kayla or her family made. Nor could I have been certain she would suffer any harm, much less the harm that found her. Some children gladly trade a “normal” childhood for the glories, rewards and growth that come with top levels of competition. Athletics aren’t the only activities that create these kinds of experiences; chess champions, musical prodigies and other unusually gifted children find themselves in similar situations. Whether a lifestyle of practice, pressure and endless drive is healthy depends in large measure on the child and the family dynamics involved. Some kids flourish, and the price exacted is balanced by the goals achieved.What’s undeniable though is that the typical environment of a child at a global competitive level will be at least challenging and at most very dangerous. For many parents, when a child’s abilities swiftly surpass their ability to coach or instruct her, the obvious next step is to entrust her development to coaches who can both assess her potential and then nurture it forward. For most parents, the intention is not to abrogate parental duties or to in any way abandon their child. But at world-class levels of competition, the time, intensity and level of commitment that must be sustained mean that mentors in many cases become surrogate parents. Their relationship with the child involves close-quarters time alone for hours on end, often on travel. It involves emotional intensity and a high level of discipline and deference to the coach. The stakes grow higher as the child progresses.Enter the predator.As in all situations, it’s not because anything about the experience of working closely with a child or getting to know her somehow “warps” the coach into becoming predatory. Rather, predators go where victims are, where opportunities are, and where detection is least likely. The urge to harm a child and the ability to nurture one to glory are not at all necessarily joined. Most mentors, be they tough but benign or effective but cruel, are not predisposed to sexually abuse children. But as well, no link exists between professional ability and inherently decent character. For a predator who has the needed skills, child mentoring at the highest competitive levels is simply as good as it gets.Kayla’s experience was atypical in that she was moved eventually to disclose, and her abuser was imprisoned. This is a just and often healing outcome, but hardly a common one. Most victims bear the abuse, fold it into their lives, and go on, more commonly so, I’d bet, at Olympic levels of competition. As we stand in awe of the grace, beauty, poise and skill of our competitors, we should also be aware of the pain and abuse- most of it grossly under-reported- that might have been borne by them during the process. We must assess whether our thirst for victory in our competitors is eclipsing our concern for their welfare.Kayla is a champion in every possible respect, content not only with a gold medal but an angelic desire to pave a better world going forward. We honor her best by acknowledging a cruel but accurate fact: Kayla Harrison is anything but typical. But her experience as a world-class athlete is far more common than most will acknowledge. Or anyone should tolerate.
Chik-Fil-A, Money and Jesus. And No, I Won't Give It A Rest
So I wrote on the sensitive subject of recent fast-food controversy, and I challenged the founders of the franchise. Since then, I’ve been "reminded" of three things:1. It’s not fair to compare the struggle for gay equality to that of racial equality. Gay people are sinning, black people weren’t.2. It’s not a sin to be rich, and in fact it’s what God wants for us.3. My blog is supposed to be about violence against women and children, so I should take up another point.The remainder of those who disagree with me really just want me to give it a rest.That won’t happen. No one, God willing, will give this a rest. And by “this” I don’t mean the Chik-Fil-A controversy. “This” isn’t about a restaurant, any more than racial equality was about lunch counters (they were restaurants, too, where offensive things happened). People didn’t like it. They made a big fuss. It went on and on. Until things changed.Instead of resting I’ll answer the questions posed to me and others like me:1. The secular law will never have an opinion on whether gay people are "sinning" by living in same-sex relationships. This is by the nature of a government we fought a revolution to form and untold amounts of blood and treasure to preserve. I seek no blessing of same-sex marriage by any religion. I seek equality under the law.2. I singled out the billionaire Cathy brothers, founders of Chik-Fil-A, because they spend millions of dollars on attempting to make the lives of others more difficult through support of groups who seek to prevent equal rights for those others. Period. Not for what they believe. For what they do. With buckets of fast-food profits.Sally Ride left behind a partner of 27 years who gets nothing in Federal benefits, thanks in part to the efforts of organizations the Cathy brothers pour money into. That seems cruel to me, religious beliefs aside, and so, believing them to be not cruel I assumed the Cathy's do what they do because they feel Biblically commanded, regardless of the objectively unfortunate consequences of their financial exertions. For that reason I encouraged them to, perhaps, consider attempting to follow another command of Jesus, one I’ve been aggressively told I have taken “out of context.” Because wealth is just another blessing, and Jesus wants us to have it.Sell that to someone who is buying it, because I am not. If His words aren’t good enough, at least look at His life, to the extent we can: He didn’t own much of anything.I don’t believe it’s sin to be wealthy. I don’t believe it’s what God wants for us either. I think it just is. And I think that using it to harm others, to make their lives harder to simply live in an already vicious and unpredictable world, is a far greater sin than loving someone for decades and caring for them while they endure pancreatic cancer.And so I challenged the Cathy brothers and I challenge them again: Give it away, boys. Happily keep 50, 60, even a 100 million if you want. Is that not “blessing” enough? Give the other 4.49 billion to help eradicate the sea of misery around you.3. Yes, this blog is about, among other things, children. And violence that stalks them. Often, that violence comes from within. Lesbian, Gay, Bi-Sexual and Transgendered youth (LGBT) commit suicide in numbers 4 to 6 times greater than straight youth, in large part because all three Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) in their stricter forms, reject what these youth discover themselves becoming.Due to that rejection, they are far more likely to be thrown out of those same religious homes and tossed, alone and marginalized, into a world far darker and more violent than most are willing to accept. They’re victimized on the streets, in the brothels, the bars, the bus stations, the alleyways, and the cold, dead farm fields.They’re children, or damn close to it. I’ve written about them before. I’ll do it again. That’s my job. As far as I’m concerned, the job of the Cathy brothers and all who are similarly “blessed” is at very least to do them no further harm.
Bullying, Chik-Fil-A, and a Personal Plea For Help
I was bullied as a kid. Profoundly so in the worst years surrounding puberty. The reasons were varied and sometimes self-inflicted, but it came down to me being different. I got lucky and found a home in childhood friends I still count as my closest. But it could have gone differently. Suicide was not something I planned but I can’t say I didn’t contemplate it.Interestingly though, even for the worst of my abusers I never envisioned taking anything from them. I just wanted what they had, which was the ability to blend and disappear. As it happened I was never meant to do those things and I’m happier for it. But that simple invisibility was what I wanted in the darkest times; it was infinitely preferable to the alternative.Every gay couple I know craves no more than that same invisibility. The ability to be everyday, lawn-mowing homebodies, gently disgruntled spouses, fretful, scrambled parents of gloriously germy toddlers. I’ve yet to meet one gay person who wants to claw back or limit the rights of straight people. But if the Cathy brothers of Chik-Fil-A, with their $4.5 billion in net worth, get their way, that’s what will happen: The right of gay people to unite legally will be blocked. Their lives as couples will be less abundant and simply harder to live.The Cathy’s put their money where their mouth is. To gay people, it feels like being bullied. Pushed around. Limited. That’s what bullies do after all, and have done for time immemorial. They limit where their victims can go and how they can live. They strip them of dignity and individuality. It hurts, badly. Trust me.Hence the passion evoked by a sandwich.If there’s a mitigating factor to the Cathy brother's efforts, it’s that Biblical principles- to them- compel them to act as they do. I remain in love with a woman who felt similarly compelled to believe and support causes that, in my mind, amounted to bullying. We were incompatible for a few reasons, but that was high among them. She is one of the most decent, loving and compassionate people I’ve ever known. She often didn’t like what she felt compelled to believe and support as a Bible Christian, but she believed it was God’s command for her to do so. If the Cathy brothers are anything like she is, I assume they struggle similarly.Alas, the Bible includes other admonitions, including one from Matthew which instructs Christians, if they want to be perfect, to sell their possessions, give the money to the poor, and them come follow Him. This was Jesus- the rabble-rousing Rabbi who also said that it was easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle then for a rich man to enter His Kingdom. He had almost nothing to say about sexual morality. He had plenty to say about wealth redistribution and disparity. I’m well aware of theologians in every denomination who can provide comforting answers to the inconveniences posed by His commands to successful money makers. But they never fail to impress anything in me other than my gag reflex.Regardless, to the Cathy brothers my plea is simple, and should be just as compatible with Biblical restraints as their efforts against homosexuals:Sirs, if you would be perfect, liquidate your fortune, or perhaps a bit less. Over the next few weeks, myself and hopefully many friends in the business of eradicating violence against women and children will join forces and assist you in identifying areas where those billions could be spent. I know that the two of you and your corporation already give. Would you enlighten me as to how much, and how much remains? That should help us both to determine, perhaps, how much closer to perfection you might reach in this life with your considerable blessings.For now, in the spirit of this message, I’ll suggest bullying as something you could help eradicate. It's a phenomenon that affects, conservatively, millions of children each year, driving some to suicide and truncating the lives of others. If you’d be so moved, there are great organizations (follow the link above for just one example) currently operating on shoe strings to make a difference.The well of need, of course, is bottomless. But a multi-billion dollar fortune has remarkable potential to make a dent in the suffering that surrounds us all. If perfection is your aim, I can’t imagine you’d resist the opportunity.Please, lets begin.
A Statue is Removed, and Still Warnings Will Go Unheeded
As a rookie prosecutor in Alexandria, Virginia, I brought my first cases before an ancient and distinguished judge who at times had a penchant for the impeccable and brilliant aphorism. One he used when adjudicating minor traffic cases has stuck with me throughout the years. “The world is basically divided into two groups. The caught, and the uncaught.”His meaning was simple: Folks, we’re all guilty of minor traffic violations. If you’re here, you’re probably just caught. If not, you’re uncaught, but only for now. That is the Penn State Community in a nutshell. It is devastated. It is bewildered. It is ashamed. It is grieving, reflecting, adjusting and hopefully persevering. But what’s important to remember is that PSU is not doing these penances because it is unique or alone. Simply put, PSU is going through these things because its leadership was- to put it bluntly- caught. They were caught harboring a predator for at least sentimental and naïve reasons, and at worst for cynical, self-protecting ones. But as the reality of the sanctions settles and the pain to this remarkable and time-honored community is fully realized, it’s worth noting a basic and persistent truth: Predators like Jerry Sandusky are everywhere, and operating- as my fingers type these words- as efficiently as ever.Sandusky’s circumstances were mournfully peculiar in that he was a god-like figure in his environment, backed by the most pervasive and defining aspect of the culture, Penn State Football. But far below these uncommon circumstances, predators like him have found havens, and are doing untold amounts of damage, in academic communities and organized social settings of all kinds, right this minute. Every venerable, time-honored and values-based institution has a predator problem. All that separates the exposed from the unexposed is the machinery of victimization, cloaking as it does- for a time- the horrors of the abuse and the cries of the abused.If there is anything positive that can emerge from the deep sadness permeating PSU, it is not the belief- for other institutions- that “there but for the grace of God go we.” Rather, it’s the darker and more terrifying reality of “there we are as well- simply unexposed as such.” This, while desperately needed, will be the pill tragically unswallowed by similar organizations watching events at PSU unfold.Rather than do what they must, which is to take an unvarnished look at their own environments and the endless vectors for infiltration that exist, they will confidently and foolishly distinguish themselves somehow from Penn State and assure themselves that they “know” the mentors, coaches and leaders that direct and control their environments. They’ll fool themselves into believing, for a string of ironically specious reasons, that their venerable and respected enclaves are simply not the kinds of places that bad people would seek to infiltrate. Indeed, it is this terrible dichotomy- predators seeking prey and protection in an environment so antithetical to what they are- that has foiled so many great institutions blind to their own weaknesses and tricked into thinking they are somehow above the invisible but very real laws of osmosis that attract bad actors to good environments.Rather than do the difficult but crucial work of self-examination, rather than seek transparency within their own leadership structure with the help of outside observers trained to assist in making best-practice recommendations, they will retreat to a pernicious blind-spot and convince themselves they are somehow oddly enlightened, even “blessed” with introspection and unusual clarity- again because of the sanctity of their mission, whatever it is.Rather than engage internally in honest, open debate about whether they have at any time placed the reputation, value and productive capability of their institutions over the well-being of even the least notable of the people affected by it, they will delude themselves into believing they are led by an unassailable and internal moral compass.And the suffering will continue, until the stone is finally rolled away and light is allowed to penetrate, wounding the institution that believed itself protected and impenetrable. But this damage can only follow the most shameful of all- the destruction of human beings who looked to it for the opposite of what they received.