(Trigger warning for survivors of sexual assault)
“I cannot escape one simple fact: that if we continue to subject future generations of young men to great barrages of aggressive, misogynist, over-sexualized and violent imagery in pornography, movies, computer games and advertising, we will continue to see the rates of sexual violence against women and children that continue unabated today. Or worse.”
Alison Grundy is a Clinical Psychologist with 20 years experience working with victims of sexual and interpersonal violence. We got to know each other when she asked me to address sexual assault counsellors on the sexualisation of girls, at a seminar in Sydney last year. Alison posted a comment on my piece Sexism: alive and well in Australia (reprinted here from The Drum Unleashed)which I thought deserved expansion as a guest post.
As a therapist in the field of sexual violence for 20 years now, I always thought things would get better over time. As more people became aware of the pain and suffering, the utter devastation, the long-standing and often severe psychological problems, the drug and alcohol addictions, the relationship and parenting difficulties, society would change and we would protect women and children from abuse, especially sexual abuse. In short, we would become more civilized.
But as I look at the Calvin Klein poster clearly intimating the gang rape of a woman to advertise the brand, the inescapable conclusion is that we have somehow gone badly backwards. All kinds of questions occur to me.
How can it be OK to use sexual violence as a marketing tool? When did gang rape stop being abhorrent and become “sexy”? When did gang rape get minimized to “group sex”? Why does it seem so easy for the average person to believe that a woman (often a very young woman) would really consent to having sex with large groups of drunken, abusive men?
Of course there are many complex socio-political and psychological issues involved in sexual violence in all its forms. Given that orgasm is a powerful reinforcer of behaviour -and I would argue, attitudes – if our boys and men are watching and masturbating to endless scenes of women being sexually tortured by groups of men while breathlessly claiming they want more (through gritted teeth), we can hardly be surprised that our daughters are less safe from this type of sexual crime now than ever before.
Unfortunately, as this advertisement shows, the mainstreaming of pornography and violent sexualised imagery is ubiquitous. Boys and men no longer need to be ashamed of accessing demeaning and debasing images of women. They are everywhere, condoned by society, reflecting its values and therefore proudly shared on computers and phones, billboards and catalogues.
Meanwhile the sex industry is now seen as just that, an industry as like any other in the market place. But instead of selling the newest type of skateboards to our young men it sells the degradation of women. In doing so, it reduces their humanity to what they offer sexually, and contributes to making the world a very dangerous place – especially for women and children.
We now have 30 years of research demonstrating that what we watch on TV, play in interactive games and see in pornography, does affect us, does change us and does influence our choices of behaviour.
I am still surprised that most people think sexual violence is relatively uncommon. I think this is because the victims are so blamed, shamed and persecuted they rarely speak up – and because the perpetrators of this type of violence rarely face any consequences.
There are many studies showing that interpersonal violence is so common. As a clinical psychologist it is the foundation of most of the issues I will ever encounter no matter where I work. And one of the most damaging forms of interpersonal violence is of course, sexual abuse.
In its 2006 report, the Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research tells us there were more than 7000 reports to police of sexual and indecent assault in NSW in 2004. However, it is widely recognised that reports to police represent only a fraction of the assaults that are actually happening, perhaps only ten to fifteen percent.
So the Bureau’s statistics roughly translate, in the real world, to 50-70,000 crimes of this type against mostly women and children in 2004 in NSW. (The year 2004, by the way, did not differ much from the previous 10-year data and is probably reflective of the years since).
Most people would be staggered to know that only about one in ten of these reported incidents resulted in someone being found guilty in court and about half of those who were found guilty did not receive a prison sentence.
So, to summarise, a rough (and probably conservative) estimate of 50- 70,000 acts of sexual violence in one year in NSW and only 251 people receiving a full time prison sentence as a consequence of these actions. This sobering reality perhaps explains some of the high recidivist rates.
These are very complex issues, and there are very many reasons why sexual violence is so endemic in Australia. We need a much more concerted effort to bring these crimes into the light.
We need to believe victims and help them to heal with compassion and justice. We need to treat offenders with programs that accept no excuses and help them to recognise the immense damage their behaviour has caused.
But this will only happen in the context of the society we live in and the kind of world we allow. In this world, the horrifying crime of gang rape is being increasingly reported to professionals such as myself.
And this crime is being carried out on the bodies of young and younger girls. A phenomena my colleagues and I are seeing is younger and younger girls presenting – often 13 and 14 years of age – after gang rape.
I have sat in counseling with many women – often very young – and therefore just beginning to define what they would like their lives to be – who have experienced the terror and unrelenting horror of rape and gang rape. It’s a struggle that goes on and on through years of rebuilding a sense of self, a world view and working out a way of being part of a society again that not only allows the vast majority of rapes to never be punished but allows constant in your face debasement and trivialization of their trauma in billboards like this.
Where are the regulators? Where are the minds and hearts of the people who get paid to make these offensive campaigns? Maybe they can spend just an hour or two in my office any day of the week.
I cannot escape one simple fact: that if we continue to subject future generations of young men to great barrages of aggressive, misogynist, over-sexualised and violent imagery in pornography, movies, computer games and advertising, we will continue to see the rates of sexual violence against women and children that continue unabated today. Or worse.
We should be striving to be more, not less civilized. But Calvin Klein just makes this goal less attainable.
14 Responses
Actually we know the reasons why male sexual violence against women is endemic to all countries and the reason is patriarchy or the male supremacist system. Given men continue to be the ones who hold positions of power, whether it is in politics, the law, media, commercial institutions – all of these factors ensure the dominant voice is male and hence it is the male view of what is and is not ‘male sexual violence’ which dominates.
Then there is the very, very powerful media in all its forms which is also male dominated and male owned. Put these two factors together and we should not be surprised male sexual violence against women and girls is increasing all the time.
Who are the regulators? Why the men in suits of course and they do not want their rights and privileges curbed just because some (sic) men and boys commit group rape and other forms of sexual violence against women and girls. Then there are the huge profits to be made from eroticising male sexual violence against women and girls. Note too it is not men and boys who are reduced to one-dimensional sexual service stations for other males to rape and then discard because the victims are apparently not human.
Then there is what feminists keep repeating and that is widespread denial – keep telling Josephine and Joe Public it is women’s and girls’ fault for supposedly causing males to rape them and nothing will change. Of course the group which benefits from all this victm blaming is men because they do not believe it is their problem or issue.
Boys are growing up believing it is their right to commit group rape against their female peers because this in itself supposedly proves to other boys that the male rapists are ‘real men.’ The dominant construction of what it means to be a ‘man’ as well as dominant ideas of masculinity also serve to reinforce the notion that no male must ever be held accountable for his sexual behaviour or beliefs. Responsibility is supposedly the woman’s/girl’s role and is it not odd that given women and girls have such little socio-economic power that when it concerns preventing a male(s) from raping her – she not the male is held accountable and responsible.
Finally, constantly using passive language when describing/analysing the causes of male violence against women and girls ensures the male perpetrators remain invisible. Why are we so afraid of naming the sex of the perpetrators? Is it because we know men continue to be the ones who hold socio-economic power and will immediately retaliate.
Change does not happen by hiding the sex of the perpetrators, neither does change happen when we do not challenge the male-centric lies concerning men’s pseudo right of sexual access to women and girls 24/7. Band aid solutions do not work – they do not help the innumerable female survivors of men’s and boys’ sexual violence – what these women and girls want is for male sexual violence against women and girls to if not cease, to be reduced and especially for the male perpetrators to be punished.
As regards Calvin Klein he is not alone in promoting male sexual violence against women but because Klein does not engage in using racist imagery his misogynistic hatred of women is not seen as hatred for women – instead it is proclaimed to be ‘edgy’ or ‘erotic’ or even ‘sexy.’ But as always we have to ask ourselves who is benefitting from the promotion of male violence against women? Women or men?
My experience as a psychologist isn’t nearly as extensive or as long as Alison Grundy’s – but the experience I have garnered in the last 4 years in working in Victims of Crime programs, and in my own private practice as a female counsellor working mostly with a female clientele, mostly who have experienced some form of violent crime from an intimate partner or spouse really mirrors hers.
Things are getting worse, not better. And the lack of empathy that our society shows sexual assault and rape victims is not only heart breaking but completely concerning.
I don’t know that things will ever change for as long as women’s bodies are the landscape on which the messages of society are written, and on which products are made and sold.. I think the commodification and sexualisation of women for profit is going to worsen, not get better, until it becomes impossible for the mainstream conscious to ignore – at which point something MAY get done about it. I hope this is reaching saturation point, at which time we might wise up to what’s happening to our girls and boys, and start to demand change from unscrupulous corporations who care nothing of the lives they have a hand in ruining, but only of their profit margin.
I hope so many things, but I fear that my hopes will never come true.
I wonder if some of the feminist, women can do anything and they don’t need mens help has a part to play. With the antagonism towards chivalry and the I can do it myself attitude of women I think we have lost some of the advantages of being the ‘weaker’ sex. There was a time when boys were taught to open doors, carry heavy burdens, put themselves between a woman and danger and I think we have lost the care of women and respect of women has gone with it. Men are no longer expected to put women first, to care for their needs. We have come a long way from when women where seen as incapable, dumb, and second class but I think we have come too far. Women are now treated as a body and not a person. As well as fighting the porn industry we need to be teaching our young men to respect women and to care for them and women need to let men care for them before they find themselves doing all the caring and not being cared for.
Jennifer Drew, your postulation that the woes of the world are because of men in power are completely wrong and I, for one, am sick of hearing that cop out. Where I live in In the city of Sydney, the mayor of the suburb is a woman, the major of the city is a woman, the Premier of the state is a woman, the Prime Minister is a woman, the Governor-General is a woman, and of course the Queen is a woman. Indeed there isn’t even ONE man in that chain of power. I don’t hear too many men bleating about that.
I’m glad that feminists have been (finally) waking up to the rising tide of sexualization of *all* women, and the misogyny that it is linked to and are deciding to act (I hope).
For about 3 decades now, feminists have let the so-called “pro-sex” feminists, and their ideological allies in the porn industry essentially create a new narrative of what a women is – a very sexualized one.
The “pro-sex” feminists are not actually representative of very many women. Many are simply exhibitionists who found an ideology that suited them in “pro-sex” feminism.
However, most other women are sexual exhibitionists, and now find themselves in a culture where the social norms have disproportionately influenced by that small set of highly vocal “pro-sex” (exhibitionist) feminists. The pro-sex feminists also provided the ideological ‘cover’ for the rise of porn industry (eg, ‘it’s empowering’ – no, it is not).
Woops, last paragraph should read:
“However, most other women are NOT sexual exhibitionists, and now find…”
I’m male, definitely not feminist even if I could be (most hardcore feminists really get on my nerves, but so does anyone who talks about the same subject in different ways for two hours). However, I must argue that one city, one mayor one country does not make the difference.
A leader is subject to his/her cabinet/ministers/endorsing companies. Most of the people in control of these positions are still male. Until the figures in power by actual percentage of total becomes equalized, we cannot argue that men in power is not a problem for women.
Now, I’m not arguing that we men cause all strife on Earth. Far from it, I believe women are not going to be more intelligent or peaceful about many matters (they are subject to the same voters/criminals/citizens afterall), however I believe that affairs important to women rather than men will get more airing.
The sexualization of women and young men in general is a direct means of connection with a target audience for marketing purposes. We all know the saying ‘sex sells’, because it does. Men’s interests are more activated by sexual signals in general than women (come on, if you went to a boy school you should know this is true).
That said, the target audience for much advertising is male (where the product is suitable for both genders), this is due to the fact that market forces know that males are in general the buying power of a family. As much as we’d like to believe this is not true and shout about cases to the opposite effect, the very fact that these cases make news or are names we all recognize means they are not the norm. And this means we flash them about when it’s convenient for us to believe that everything is fair and equal already.
So if the target audience for these companies are people with buying power suiting their predetermined gender preference (males), this then makes the best marketing bracket working age to retired men. Now it is best to market the product to the biggest percentage of this group who is likely to be affected by marketing, and are likely to be interested in the product (no point spending a lot more money trying to sway people who aren’t going to be swayed either way).
So the age group is lowered for fashionable produts. The most effective age bracket then is around 19-30. The most effective theme to affect this range (19-30 year old males) is sex. Advertising targeted at maximum revenue for minimal cost for this bracket must obviously include sex.
Since the female bracket is more likely to be affected by a role model (a woman looking beautiful and desirable, someone they want to be, rathe than someone they want to bed), the combination of this is:
Sex for the males, a beautiful woman being sexed for the girls.
Ludicrous really, and obviously thought has been replaced by statistics and marketing school, but it does work, and because it works, morality and sexual ethics take a backseat.
It comes down to money, personal/company gains, and how much ethics compares to that. Since comapnies and politicians answer to share holders, voters, sponsors and such and not to morality, we can see where this goes in the end. Always.
SUCCESS!
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/8109416/calvin-klein-gang-rape-billboard-removed
Sairen
“I’m male, definitely not feminist even if I could be ”
A feminist is a person who thinks men and women should have equality. There are many very powerful and influential MALE feminists. If u are not a person that thinks women deserve equality with men then u are misogynist. If u are not a feminist then u are misogynist.
I am as much for equal rights as anyone, but I think Kylie hit the nail on the head. I have to take it further, however. Chivalry isn’t dead. There are still many men who have been taught right by their mothers and fathers on how to treat women, with respect and love, as sisters. It kills me how many men would protect their sisters’ virtues but would do the same thing to another female that they would rip some other guy’s head off for doing to their sisters. It’s absurd. Many people may not have heard the saying, “Jesus was the first feminist,” but it’s true. Some things get missed because people don’t understand societal norms back then, but Jesus taught us how to treat others, and he showed others how women should be treated showing them love, by paving the way of education for them, and by showing through his words and actions that he considered them equal. But I do also believe that God always had different roles in mind for men and women. He created us to be complements to each other, not to be people who fight for the same roles and butt heads. You can’t have two heads of a house. There will be contradiction and butting of heads. Great example for the kiddos. That said, in the Bible, men are taught to put their wive’s needs above their own. Men are to treat young women who are not their wives as sisters, guarding their honor. Orphans and widows are to be cared for by the community. It’s a protective society.
There have always been violent men in society … and women. And there always will be. As long as there is evil in the world, evil will persist. There are many statements that have been made here that are troubling, including the generalization that seems to peg all men as sexual offenders. Until we have mutual love and respect, this will always be a fight. And I’m afraid to say it, but I truly believe that we will never have mutual love and respect, not as long as people continue to think that they know best.