Cathy Young Responds To Critics Of Her Piece On The Columbia "Mattress Girl's" Rape Accusation
CORRECTED -- Cathy Young notes that these messages just below came BEFORE the alleged rape -- but as she notes (and prints), the ones that came after are "almost as incompatible with the rape scenario."
I posted some of the quotes from a page of messages from alleged rape victim Emma Sulkowitz to her alleged rapist, Paul Nungesser -- after the alleged rape allegedly happened:
"I want to snuggle with you""And talk about our summers"
"But not right now"
"I also love you"
I'm not sure in what realm of the imagination it's possible to be that snuggly with a man who -- you say -- violently raped you. No, it isn't proof that there wasn't a rape -- as Cathy Young points out below -- but, as Young also points out, it sure doesn't do wonders for Sulkowitz's credibility.
Cathy Young's response at Real Clear Politics to criticism of her Daily Beast piece:
In recent months, Emma Sulkowicz, the Columbia University senior who carries her mattress around campus as a protest against the university's non-expulsion of her alleged rapist (and an art project for her senior thesis) has been hailed as a heroine in the battle against campus sexual assault. Earlier this week, The Daily Beast published my article about the case--based mainly on interviews with the alleged rapist, Paul Nungesser, and materials he provided--which raises serious questions about the pro-Sulkowicz narrative, partly because of her friendly behavior toward Nungesser for weeks after the alleged rape. The response from the rape-culture feminist camp has been to argue that there's no "right" way to deal with sexual assault, generating a #TheresNoPerfectVictim Twitter hashtag. But it's a straw (wo)man argument. Yes, of course victims deal with trauma in different, often startling ways. However, "no perfect victim" doesn't mean that anything an alleged rape victim says or does, no matter how it defies common sense, reason and human experience, must be rationalized as "that's what some victims do!" in deference to the commandment, "Believe the survivor."...I can readily believe that when a rape happens in a previously consensual intimate situation and involves minimal force--for instance, when the man holds or pins the woman down and has sex with her despite her verbal protests--neither perpetrator nor victim may think of it as rape or assault, especially if they know each other well. (If that was Sulkowicz's story, the friendly messages would not have been nearly as damaging to her credibility.)
On the other hand, when activists talk of not realizing they had been raped and staying friendly with their rapists for some time, it's not always easy to tell if they mean what most of us would recognize as actual rape. It could be regretted drunk sex, or giving in to unwanted sex because you didn't have the nerve to say no or because you were nagged, coaxed, or guilt-tripped into it. It could be something like Lena Dunham's so-called rape, in which she admits that she verbally encouraged her "rapist" and was able to halt the encounter as soon as she chose to--but still eventually decided to call it rape, apparently because she didn't feel in control of things and was handled more roughly than she would have preferred (and because the man may have taken off his condom).
Of course, as Cosmopolitan political writer Jill Filipovic and others have pointed out, many domestic violence victims stay with their batterers even after brutal assaults. But this usually happens when victims feel trapped and isolated; often, the abuse escalates gradually and by the time it reaches severe levels, the victim is too psychologically and/or economically dependent, or too scared to get out. Moreover, even in ongoing abusive relationships, a violent outburst is typically followed by a show of repentance from the batterer and a promise not to do it again.
In Sulkowicz's case, the claim is that an Ivy League student with abundant social resources was suddenly and horrifically attacked by a male friend who had never been violent before--and that she went on to exchange chatty, flirty messages with him and offer to have a "chill sesh" two days later and continued to have similar interactions with him for another two months. I have yet to see a single expert say that this is common behavior in rape victims. (Amusingly, The New York Daily News' Victoria Taylor asserted that "experts backed up Sulkowicz" in her claim that she continued a friendly relationship with Nungesser because she was "confused," then cited the president of the New York City chapter of the National Organization for Women.)
In an interview to Mic's Zeilinger, Sulkowicz elaborated on why she sought conversations with her alleged rapist: "I wanted to have a talk with him to try to understand why he would hit me, strangle me and anally penetrate me without my consent." But the tenor of her chats with Nungesser seems, to put it mildly, inconsistent with such a motive.
Do communications--even affectionate communications--with the accused after the alleged rape automatically discredit a rape report? No, of course not; it depends on the communications and the circumstances. In these specific circumstances, you'd have to be a hardcore ideologue to deny that these specific communications are highly relevant and highly damaging.
...The advocates' reaction to the new evidence in the Columbia University case makes it plain that for many feminists, disregarding any evidence or argument that may interfere with "believing the survivor" is now a matter of principle. The danger of such an ideology is self-evident. In his 1995 book, "With Justice for Some: Victims' Rights in Criminal Trials," veteran Columbia University law professor George Fletcher wrote, "It is important to defend the interests of women as victims, but not to go so far as to accord women complaining of rape a presumption of honesty and objectivity." Striking that balance is an essential task for the justice system; to abandon it is to endorse a lynch-mob mentality.
via @CHSommers
Just a quick note: those particular messages are from BEFORE the alleged rape.
But the ones after are almost as incompatible with the rape scenario.
Cathy Young at February 5, 2015 11:09 PM
I dunno, it could be a Stolkholm-syndromy-like thing, I guess. If women can fall in love with their abductors, I can see wanting to make good with your rapist, especially if you had feelings for him before...
... BUT ...
Really, these things need to be determined by a jury, not by us.
NicoleK at February 6, 2015 12:26 AM
Occam's Razor suggests that hell hath no fury like a woman scorned is the better answer.
I'll remind the readers that one of the two tribunals that cleared the young man was at a preponderance of the evidence level.
If the young man were smart, he'd file a Title IX complaint against this woman, for inciting a hostile school environment. This is how you tie up bureaucracies: they have rules and regulations, make them live up to those rules and regulations. Not one administrator will come out and say that men are not entitled to Title IX protections, even if that's how they actually view the situation.
I recall reading about a Soviet refusnik, and how he would be constantly filing complaints and lodging grievances in the gulag. The officials were required to address each and every complaint. He became such a massive thorn in their side that they eventually freed him and sent him into exile.
I R A Darth Aggie at February 6, 2015 6:34 AM
You, its the women who refuse to report their rapes to police who are the real rape apologists and supporters of 'rape culture'
Their inaction is responsible for actual additional rapes.
Asking a woman, who waited 8 months to decide the voluntary sex she had was rape because half a beer made her "too drunk" to consent, why she waited until after she broke up with her boyfriend to accuse him of rape doesnt give a rapist time and opportunity to rape again.
Failing to report real rapes does
lujlp at February 6, 2015 9:30 AM
Jezebel has what is mostly an adhom attack piece on Young.
http://jezebel.com/how-to-make-an-accused-rapist-look-good-1682583526
But if you read Emma's annotations in the pdf there, Emma is saying she recognized it as rape within a day or two and apparently PRIOR to communicating with Paul again. She doesn't report it because she just wants to get over it, but she does want to confront Paul about it. At which point she claims her apparent cooing to Paul was her being disingenuous and a way to get him agree to talk to her.
Poor Emma! I really feel for her. The victim of terrible decisions.
She is brutally raped, almost chocked out, and then she decides:
1) instead of going to cops because that would be too arduous, she'll carry a mattress around for a year and a half
2) when trying to convince the rapist to talk to her about it, she uses tweets and phrases that would lead many people to wonder later on if she was telling the truth
3) she doesn't document any of her seriousness about this rape with emails to friends and advisers
And then of course, worse luck of all, after her mattress campaign of 18 months gets nationwide attention by major media and she is given more attention by a Senator and goes to the SOTU, some damned reporter tries to invade her privacy and look at her Facebook comments for verification.
Who would have seen that coming!?
Anyway, think about it, she was willing to go through all of that to avoid going to the cops and letting the legal system handle it with due process which basically proves how hard going to the cops must be!
jerry at February 6, 2015 1:54 PM
Maybe she's too confused to be at Columbia?
KateC at February 6, 2015 6:22 PM
This girl ...she went to the SOTU and complained that John Kerry and others didn't know who she was.
I'm think Cathy Young is very brave considering the hell George Will caught for suggesting that some of these cases have "victim status " that they have turned into a sort of celebrity. I think Emma is one of them and she is loving the attention and new career. Meanwhile the young man she accuses has no choice, but to stay at that school because who else will take him.
CatherineM at February 7, 2015 11:36 AM
Is her real name Brianna Williams?
Jeff Guinn at February 7, 2015 9:38 PM
Ms, Young, are you aware that "giving in to unwanted sex because you didn't have the nerve to say no or because you were nagged, coaxed, or guilt-tripped into it" DOES count as actual rape? So does "not using a condom"--because the conditions for consent were removed. In the latter case, they made the agreement to use birth control when they had sex. He broke that agreement by removing the condom without her permission, thus the sex was not consensual. She consented SPECIFICALLY to sex with a condom. This is why if one consents to vaginal sex, but then their partner forces anal sex, it is also considered rape--the conditions of consent were broken.
If this logic is new to you, Ms. Young, then that would explain a lot about the way you choose to write about survivors.
Alex at February 9, 2015 9:05 AM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2015/02/cathy-young-res.html#comment-5840730">comment from AlexMs, Young, are you aware that "giving in to unwanted sex because you didn't have the nerve to say no or because you were nagged, coaxed, or guilt-tripped into it" DOES count as actual rape?
You cannot expect another person to know your mind or to say no for you because you have low self-worth or whatever. The notion that it is rape because you were, perhaps, sweet-talked into sex you don't want, is outrageous and terrible.
Amy Alkon
at February 9, 2015 10:26 AM
Leave a comment