We've all read the headlines, the articles, heard the commentators - we know what happened in Steubenville and what the verdict was. A 16 year old girl, passed out, was assaulted by classmates. They took photos and video. They were convicted in juvenile court and will serve time in a juvenile facility.
Most of the coverage, positive and negative, focuses on the depiction of the boys and the responses to that coverage.
Naturally, I think about the girl. The Internet truly is forever. Some day, when she's a grandparent and hasn't thought about the assault for years, the photos will resurface, and those around her will react. Because they're human, some will react with compassion, and some won't. Life is never easy, but we shouldn't make it unnecessarily hard on others.
I really don't care what she was wearing, or how much she'd had to drink. I belong to a religion that forbids alcohol and advises a far more modest clothing standard than is the norm, so I'm not a big fan of teenage drinking, binge drinking, passing out from alcohol consumption or skimpy clothes (and to me, average clothes such as tank tops qualify as "skimpy"). Still, none of that is material. It's like the temperature, or time of day, or the month - it exists, it's a fact, but it shouldn't make any difference. None of it is a green light to commit a crime, or even be disrespectful. If a male was passed out, would we say, "Well, of course we took his keys and address from his wallet and robbed his home"? If a person's property isn't considered forfeit after they've been drinking, or even after they've exercised questionable judgement, why should someone's body be?
It doesn't matter if she was promiscuous, virginal or anywhere inbetween. I don't care if she was naked and had just had sex with every guy in the room - if she doesn't want anything to do with you, right now, THAT'S HER RIGHT. A person can say "no" at any time, even after saying "yes," and it should be honored each time. You don't have to like it, but you do have to honor it.
It also should go without saying that if someone is unconscious, they cannot give consent, and that's an automatic NO. Do we really have to spell this out? Several people who witnessed parts of the assault said that they were unaware that it constituted rape (or assault). I can almost - almost - cut them slack for being kids, and therefore not as mature and clear thinking as adults, or for thinking, "Well, nobody else thinks it's a big deal, so I must be wrong," but only almost. If a person is unconscious, the answer to any question except "Should I save this person from any imminent harm?" is NO. If what you're doing won't make them happy when they're awake, don't do it.
Much has been said about the fact that several journalists bemoaned the ruin of the promising lives and careers of the young men. At the risk of bringing wrath down on myself, I will say, yes, it's a shame. To be a teenager and be convicted of a serious crime means that their lives will be radically altered. They will spend time in the equivalent of jail. They will have to register as sex offenders. Their lives will be very different than they would have been had this not happened.
The shame, however, lies with the young men themselves. It is not a shame that the crime was reported, that they were prosecuted or that they were convicted. It is a shame that they consciously chose, repeatedly, over a prolonged period, to treat another human being as though she was not, in fact, human, as if she and her thoughts and desires did not matter. It is a shame that they thought that calculated, criminal activity was fun. It is a shame that others thought the same thing. It is a shame that they continued, after sobering up and presumably having time to consider what they'd done, to think it was funny, recreational and no big deal. It's a shame that they thought that they were more important than the girl is. It's a shame that they don't seem informed enough to know that any sexually oriented act can be rape. Rape is not limited to a single sex act. Bluntly, it is rape even if there's no chance that she'll get pregnant.
It is a shame that they still don't seem to realize that they ruined their own futures. No outside force did it for them.
So, yes, that loss of potential is a shame, but not in the same way it would be if, say, they'd been injured in an accident. It's a shame that they had it and didn't value it and tossed it aside.
Also, consider the fact that they'll be out of the facility by, at the latest, their 21st birthdays. If they've done anything even halfway productive and earned a diploma or GED, they can then go to college, get an education, choose a career, have a family. They probably won't play college or pro ball, but that doesn't mean that their lives will be miserable and poverty riddled. Let's keep some perspective.
No comments:
Post a Comment