A hotel worker’s allegations of sexual assault by IMF chief and possible French presidential candidate Dominique Strauss-Kahn are disturbing. But also disturbing is the way the case is being reported in some sections of the media.
Strauss-Kahn has been arrested on charges of sexually assaulting a woman at his expensive hotel suite in New York. This is a summary of the story from the New York Times:
According to the law enforcement official, the woman entered Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s suite early Saturday afternoon by saying “housekeeping.” She heard no answer and believed that the suite was unoccupied. She left the door open behind her, as is hotel policy.
She went to the bedroom and a naked man rushed from the bathroom to the bedroom. She apologized, the law enforcement official said, and tried to leave.
But according to the official, the man chased her, grabbed her and shut the door, locking it. He then pulled her toward the bedroom, the official said, and tried to attack her there.
He dragged her to the bathroom, the official added, and forced her to perform oral sex. The police said the woman eventually escaped from the suite and reported the attack to other hotel personnel, who called 911.
So how did Crikey headline this story yesterday? Like this:
Although it is common in American usage, the word “maid” used to describe the woman also conjures up pornographic fantasies of Fifi the French maid in a skimpy frilly apron. But Strauss-Kahn was charged with a criminal sexual act, attempted rape and unlawful imprisonment. How does a report of these charges warrant Oh la la, an expression of feigned surprise with a salacious undertone?
When the journalist Lara Logan was assaulted in Cairo, was that characterised as Oh la la and a “sex scandal”? Of course not. But allegations made by a hotel cleaner against a French high official seem to be attracting a different approach.
Other women who have had dealings with Strauss-Kahn allege a history of reckless indifference to consent in sexual matters. Strauss-Kahn himself had predicted in a recent interview with Libération that this history would lead to him being the victim of a set-up:
He said he thought he was under surveillance and named the three principal difficulties he foresaw if he was to stand for the presidential elections. “Money, women and the fact I am Jewish.” He added: “Yes, I like women … so what?” He said he could see himself becoming the victim of a honey trap: “a woman raped in a car park and who’s been promised 500,000 or a million euros to invent such a story …”
Jean-Marie Le Guen, a Socialist party MP who has known Strauss-Kahn for 25 years, said the story was “not credible” and inconsistent with what he knew of the politician’s character. “Seduction, yes, but no way would he use constraint or violence. A certain number of facts, and certain aspects of the story we are hearing from the press, make this not credible.”….
Le Guen said his friend knew he would be the target of mud-slinging but added: “What they are asking us to believe … it’s just hallucinations. I’m a doctor and I know this can happen. We knew there would be hyper-violent attacks on him [Strauss-Kahn]. We could hear the knives being sharpened in preparation.”
Seduction? That is not what the women allege. For example, Anne Mansouret, the mother of Tristane Banon (the goddaughter of Strauss-Kahn’s second wife) claimed on Sunday that Strauss-Kahn had attacked her journalist daughter in 2002, in the course of an interview. In a 2007 television program, Banon named Strauss-Kahn (it was bleeped) and she described him as a “rutting chimpanzee” in telling how she had struggled with him:
It ended very badly, because we ended up fighting … I told him clearly. … We fought on the ground, it was more than a couple of slaps, I kicked him, he opened my bra, tried to open my jeans. … It finished very badly. …
I got out of there and he immediately sent me a text message saying “So, are you scared of me?”… I had said the word “rape” when we were struggling to scare him, and it didn’t seem to scare him, as if he was used to it. After [the incident] he wouldn’t stop sending me text messages saying “Are you scared of me?”
In 2002, Banon’s mother persuaded her not to press charges. But Mansouret now says she is sorry to have discouraged her daughter to complain against him. “my daughter, despite the passing years, is still shocked by these facts”.
And yet the story here continues to be depicted as that of an aging libertine who has unfortunately been a little naughty with the hired help – unfortunate because of the consequences for his career. The Australian headline today read: “Brought undone by his sex life”. Sex life?
Little has been said about the possible impact on the woman. The New York Times reports that she is an African immigrant with a teenage daughter. Hotel employees were instructed not to speak to her about the allegations, but to give her a hug, “Because she is sad.”
Some French journalists are reporting that the allegation is unlikely because the woman is “très peu séduisante”. Very unattractive. Strauss-Kahn, who has not used his twitter account since Christmas 2010, posted a tweet today citing this report: (basic translations)”the lawyers were surprised at the appearance of the arrival of a very unattractive young woman”.
Strauss-Kahn, in contrast, is described as ‘a charmer of women’ , who has a ‘taste for the fairer sex’, is ‘unresistant to feminine attractions’ and ‘romantic’ . His reported perchant for repeated harassment of women is described as a ‘quirk’.
All this plays into Oh la la: charming old French admirer of women couldn’t keep from helping himself to the feminine attractions of a chamber maid. Albeit an unattractive one. (They should get their story straight on the “honey trap” scenario here.)
Strauss-Kahn has not has his day in court, and I am not assuming he is guilty. What I am taking issue with is reporting along lines that are very common in rape mythology. Men attacking women is not charming or romantic. They cannot be excused as ‘unresistant to feminine attractions’.
The unfolding story here of an unrestrained sense of entitlement to any woman from a journalist to a hotel worker. There’s nothing remotely Oh la la about any of it.
One Response
The various media outlets who claim to be ‘reporting’ this case are not ‘reporting the case’ rather they are engaged in spurious speculation and using every means in their power to discredit the woman who charged Strauss-Kahn with attempted rape and orally raping her.
Nothing new in how malestream media consistently fails to report accurately cases of male violence against women because they always write from the male-centric perspective and yet claim to be ‘objective!’
The media should focus on reporting facts – including the fact Strauss-Kahn keeps changing his story. Strauss-Kahn initially claimed he was somewhere else when the woman was subjected to male sexual violence; now Strauss-Kahn is claiming he engaged in ‘consensual sexual activity with the woman.’ Make up your mind Srauss-Kahn because the more your story changes the more suspicious it becomes.
Whenever women dare (sic) to charge powerful white men with rape/sexual harassment/sexual violence then immediately it is the woman who is the subject of intense media misogynistic scrutiny. The man meanwhile disappears off the radar because he is deemed to be respectable solely because of his powerful socio-political position and particularly if he is white and the victim is black. So the media needs to be very careful when writing speculative articles because white male supremacy has always claimed that non-white women cannot be subjected to rape by white men!
Furthermore the male-centric media is sending a clear message to all women and that is ‘if you dare to charge a powerful male with rape you not the male will be subjected to vindictive speculative articles concerning your personal history; your character’and any other dirt they can locate.’ The reason is because men must never be held to account for their crimes against women and even before a case reaches court, the media ensures its readers will read misogynistic and speculative articles posing as ‘objective reporting.’ This is how rape myths and women-blaming is enforced, because men’s pseudo rights to coerce – sorry that should read ‘seduce’ because forcing a woman; threatening a woman; or even using physical violence against a woman is all just ‘male seduction’ is it not – if one adheres to male supremacist dogma. Men supposedly have the right of male sexual domination over women and it is euphemised under the term ‘male seduction.’
I have a ‘taste for chocolate’ but I know chocolate is not a human being. However misogynistic media blatantly states Strauss-Kahn has a ‘taste for the fairer sex’ which means he does not see women as human beings, rather they are like chocolate – products which men consume and use to prove to other men they are ‘real men!’ Of course once the man has ‘consumed the woman/chocolate’ he immediately moves on to the next ‘woman/piece of chocolate’ because that is what women are – just products or objects to be sexually consumed by men. I’ve yet to read media reporting that a woman ‘has a taste for males!’ But that is because men are human and hence have subjectivity whereas women – well we are just men’s sexual service stations and nothing else.
Whilst this case has not yet proceeded to court; we need to remember a prominent ex president of Israel believed he was entitled to engage in serially raping women and also sexually assaulting them. Why? Because he believed his position of political power meant he was above the law and how wrong he was. Eventually after years of denial and trying to escape a court case this male rapist was charged and convicted of raping a number of women, subjecting them and other women to sexual assault.
Sometimes prominent white men who are believed to be ‘respectable’ because they hold powerful political positions and yet blatantly abuse their power by raping women and/or subjecting them to sexual violence are finally charged for their crimes against women.
Sometimes, as in the case of the ex president of Israel – these men are even convicted and sentenced to prison. But only after these men have engaged in years and years of systemic male sexual violence against women because they know their chances of being charged let alone convicted are almost zero. That is the meaning of male power and male supremacy – male violence against women excused/justified/trivialised because it is essential men must never be held accountable for their sexual behaviour and actions.