There Are Victims in the Penn State Tragedy, Not “Accusers”

By Jackson Katz, Ph.D.
The Huffington Post
November 18, 2011

At least one positive development has emerged from the Penn State sexual abuse scandal. In news and commentary about that tragic case, the victims are actually being referred to as “victims.” While it’s easy to find references to “Jerry Sandusky’s accusers,” it is perhaps equally as likely to read and hear about “Sandusky’s victims.”

This marks a significant break with journalistic convention in several high-profile alleged sex crime spectacles in recent years, such as the ones involving Pittsburgh Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger, former International Monetary Fund chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn, or the current sexual harassment scandal surrounding Republican presidential primary candidate Herman Cain.

In each of these (in)famous cases the alleged victims of powerful men were labeled almost exclusively as “accusers.” According to sexual assault victim advocates, the Kobe Bryant rape trial in 2004 was a pivotal moment in this emergent journalistic practice. From that point on, media accounts of sex crime reports and prosecutions began referring to alleged victims as accusers, and their behavior and motives have come increasingly under the glare of media scrutiny and public skepticism. The alleged victims of Roethlisberger, Strauss-Kahn, Cain and many others have been pilloried on TV and in the blogosphere. Unlike in the Penn State case, where the alleged victims are presumed to be telling the truth, in these other cases doubts about the honesty and integrity of the “accusers” became central to the story.

Of course there are critical differences between the Penn State situation and these other events. The chief one is that in the State College tragedy, Jerry Sandusky’s victims were boys at the time of the alleged abuse, so there can be no ambiguity about the notion of “consenting adults.” By contrast, the aforementioned scandals all involved adult women as the complaining witnesses. This difference in the social position and gender of the victims is largely responsible for the qualitative difference in the tone and tenor of media coverage and commentary about the Penn State case.

For one thing, few people are willing to publicly defend the alleged perpetrator’s character in the face of these appalling charges. In previous high-profile sexual violence cases that involved adult men as alleged perps and women as their victims — perhaps most poignant among them the recent case involving DSK and an African immigrant hotel maid in New York City — friends and associates of the accused man have been quick to declare that the man they know is incapable of acting in the way he was alleged to have acted. This implicitly — and explicitly — casts aspersions on the credibility of the alleged victim. If he is incapable of it, she must be making it up. And so in the court of public opinion if not in the actual courtroom, she’s the one who is put on trial. It is important to note that these testimonials of confidence in the alleged perpetrator are typically offered even in the face of criminal indictments that were brought on the basis of specific and credible evidence of a crime.

Another key difference between the Penn State case and previous ones is that at Penn State there were eyewitness accounts that a crime occurred. Most sexual abuse takes place in private, without witnesses. But in the case of Sandusky’s alleged crimes, at least two men reported that they observed the prominent football coach sexually assaulting young boys on school property. This precluded predictable dismissals from people blindly supporting the perpetrator that this was another “he said-she said” (or “he said-he said”) case, where it’s impossible to know the truth — and where as a result there can never be any accountability.

But in spite of these important differences, it is surely worth noting that the gender of the Penn State victims has affected the way the story has been framed in media and the court of public opinion. As this case makes clear, boys as well as girls are too often the victims of sexually predatory men (and sometimes women) who exploit their vulnerability, violate their trust, and shatter their innocence. Like girls who have been sexually abused, boys and men can and do sometimes suffer lifelong negative consequences. They are at increased risk of suffering from depression, developing eating disorders, alcohol and other drug addictions, and a range of other problems. In addition to the shame of being violated that causes pain in victims of both sexes, boys also have to struggle with the added shame of not having been “man enough” to protect themselves.

But generally speaking boys do not have to contend — as do girls — with the sexist presumption that their sex somehow causes them to entice or invite men to sexually abuse them. To be sure, many boys who are sexually abused by men do indeed struggle with issues of sexual identity. But in public discourse, boys/men who are victimized are less likely than girls to face criticism for bringing it on themselves. Our cultural landscape is littered with examples where young girls — not women — have been blamed for men’s sexual violence against them. One notable example of this phenomenon: the case in Cleveland, Texas in early 2011 where an 11-year-old girl was brutally gang-raped by a group of young men and boys and community members, defending the boys, explained that she had “dressed provocatively.”

In a blog entry entitled, The Penn State Scandal: Connect the Dots Between Child Abuse and the Sexual Assault of Women on Campus, Claire Potter, professor of history and American studies at Wesleyan University, argued that:

“As you absorb the news about the key people at Penn State who ought to have reported what they knew of Coach Jerry Sandusky’s alleged assaults on little boys, please keep one thing in mind. Penn State’s cover-up is embedded in the interest it, and all universities, have in keeping many forms of sexual violence and sexual harassment a private, internal matter. The mistake Penn State made was, in many ways, a simple category error: they mistook these pubescent boys for women. They forgot that children occupy a very different status in the law than do the female students, faculty and staff who are most frequently the object of unwanted sexual attention and/or violence… Since most people don’t believe that ten-year-olds want to be anally penetrated by grown men, once there is credible evidence that the sex happened, people tend not to spin alternative scenarios about little boys like: ‘look what he was wearing;’ ‘he’s probably just mad that Coach Sandusky wouldn’t hook up with him;’ ‘he was drunk;’ or ‘it was just bad sex and he’s trying to get back at Coach.'”

In other words, the cynicism and deep mistrust of women that is woven into the DNA of patriarchal cultures is not a big factor in a case where a powerful adult man was alleged to have sexually assaulted vulnerable boys.

One of the ways this sexist cynicism is operationalized linguistically is in the journalistic convention of referring to female victims as “accusers.” Male victims are sometimes tagged with that label as well. There were many “accusers” in the Catholic Church sexual abuse scandal, or in the Georgia sexual abuse scandal involving the popular Baptist Minister Bishop Eddie Long. But in sheer numbers the references to women as “accusers” clearly predominates.

This language usage plays a powerful ideological function. Consider: the public is inclined to sympathize — even empathize — with female and male victims of rape, or prior to a finding of guilt of the accused/defendant, “alleged victims.” Unless our psyches have been hopelessly distorted by misogyny or desensitization we not only feel badly about what has happened to them; we identify with them. Victim-blaming often distorts this sympathetic identification, but the sentiment derives in part from an understanding that “the victim could just as easily have been someone I love — or me.”

Referring to the victim as the “accuser” reverses this process. She is no longer the victim of his (alleged) attack. She is the one doing something — to him. She is accusing him. In other words, she is now the perpetrator of an accusation against him. At the same time, he is transformed from the alleged perpetrator of sexual assault to the actual victim of her accusation. The public is thus positioned to identify sympathetically with him — to feel sorry for him – as the true victim.

Every time a well-meaning journalist or commentator refers to sexual assault victims as “accusers” they contribute to this dynamic. They tilt the scales of justice away from victims and toward alleged perpetrators. The presumption of innocence for accused men — and women — is a critical feature of our judicial system. It represents a basic commitment to equal justice and fairness that is well worth fighting to preserve.

But this presumption of innocence for defendants in the court of public opinion — if not always in the formal legal system — should not come at the expense of the rights of victims. In media coverage of these cases it should be possible to respect both the presumption of innocence for the accused and the integrity of victims. This is a standard to which we should hold ourselves — as well as the media we consume and help to sustain.

Finally, the sad events unfolding at Penn State demonstrate clearly that the tide is turning. The voices of sexual abuse victims — girls and boys, women and men — are breaking through the walls of silence that powerful men have built to advance their interests and protect their privilege. Look at the institutions that have been rocked to their core in just the past decade. The Catholic Church. The U.S. military. And now Joe Paterno and Penn State football.

The redemptive potential of these sad scandals is that because they are so high-profile, they have provided an opening for men to talk about their experiences of sexual violence, a subject long shrouded in secrecy and shame. They have also created an opportunity for powerful, male-dominated institutions finally to live up to their stated values. Maybe then, when the dust of the current debacle settles, the Nittany Lions of Penn State and their legions of fans will be able to say with integrity that they truly aspire to “success with honor.”

659 thoughts on “There Are Victims in the Penn State Tragedy, Not “Accusers””

  1. Pingback: Sample viagra
  2. Pingback: how to get cialis
  3. Pingback: Female viagra
  4. Pingback: buy naltrexone
  5. Pingback: is cialis generic
  6. Pingback: how to get cialis
  7. Pingback: cialis 5mg price
  8. Pingback: tylenol walmart
  9. Pingback: female viagra
  10. Pingback: cheap viagra
  11. Pingback: viagra for sale
  12. Pingback: top ed pills
  13. Pingback: male ed pills
  14. Pingback: mens ed pills
  15. Pingback: cvs pharmacy
  16. Pingback: levitra
  17. Pingback: gambling games
  18. Pingback: buy cialis
  19. Pingback: casino
  20. Pingback: slot games
  21. Pingback: slot games
  22. Pingback: payday advance
  23. Pingback: instant loans
  24. Pingback: instant loans
  25. Pingback: viagra cost
  26. Pingback: real online casino
  27. Pingback: buy cialis
  28. Pingback: CafeCasino
  29. Pingback: buy cialis
  30. Pingback: sale viagra
  31. Pingback: cialis internet
  32. Pingback: cialis 5 mg
  33. Pingback: cialis internet
  34. Pingback: rivers casino
  35. Pingback: casino world
  36. Pingback: real online casino
  37. Pingback: viagra for sale
  38. Pingback: sildenafil price
  39. Pingback: brand viagra
  40. Pingback: tadalafil 20mg
  41. Pingback: generic for viagra
  42. Pingback: 100mg sildenafil
  43. Pingback: online viagra
  44. Pingback: tadalafil cost
  45. Pingback: buy viagra india
  46. Pingback: cheap propecia
  47. Pingback: viagra pills
  48. Pingback: cheap viagra
  49. Pingback: Viagra 100mg pills
  50. Pingback: buy viagra online
  51. Pingback: Viagra 120mg price
  52. Pingback: cialiss
  53. Pingback: viagra
  54. Pingback: Cialis 80 mg cheap
  55. Pingback: buy generic cialis
  56. Pingback: cialis generic
  57. Pingback: buy sildenafil
  58. Pingback: Cialis 60 mg otc
  59. Pingback: tadalafil 10mg usa
  60. Pingback: lasix 40 mg otc
  61. Pingback: buy viagra
  62. Pingback: cheap viagra
  63. Pingback: generic viagra
  64. Pingback: abilify 15mg nz
  65. Pingback: aricept 5mg tablet
  66. Pingback: arimidex 1 mg uk
  67. Pingback: order cialis
  68. Pingback: levitra cialis
  69. Pingback: viagra ontario
  70. Pingback: viagra pills
  71. Pingback: order Biaxin 250mg
  72. Pingback: cardizem for sale
  73. Pingback: tadalafil
  74. Pingback: generic viagra
  75. Pingback: cipro 750 mg otc
  76. Pingback: stendra vs viagra
  77. Pingback: gambling casino
  78. Pingback: casino world
  79. Pingback: generic cialis
  80. Pingback: hollywood casino
  81. Pingback: buy tadalafil
  82. Pingback: buy cialis usa
  83. Pingback: quick payday loans
  84. Pingback: best viagra online
  85. Pingback: quick loans
  86. Pingback: cialis miami
  87. Pingback: cbd oil sale
  88. Pingback: best otc viagra
  89. Pingback: cbd oil arthritis
  90. Pingback: buy custom essays
  91. Pingback: buy an essay paper
  92. Pingback: cleocin generic
  93. Pingback: clomid 25 mg uk
  94. Pingback: cialis generic uk
  95. Pingback: buy custom essay
  96. Pingback: coreg usa
  97. Pingback: cialis
  98. Pingback: how to buy cozaar
  99. Pingback: thesis help
  100. Pingback: cymbalta online
  101. Pingback: viagra
  102. Pingback: dapsone caps pills
  103. Pingback: diamox medication
  104. Pingback: doxycycline canada
  105. Pingback: cost of dramamine
  106. Pingback: cost of elavil
  107. Pingback: etodolac nz
  108. Pingback: flomax uk
  109. Pingback: geodon 80mg cost
  110. Pingback: hyzaar 12,5mg usa
  111. Pingback: online cialis
  112. Pingback: daily cialis
  113. Pingback: viagra discount
  114. Pingback: how much is viagra
  115. Pingback: canadian viagra
  116. Pingback: click this
  117. Pingback: how to get viagra
  118. Pingback: order indocin
  119. Pingback: lamisil for sale
  120. Pingback: levaquin purchase
  121. Pingback: lopid purchase
  122. Pingback: how to buy luvox
  123. Pingback: viagra in canada
  124. Pingback: mobic purchase
  125. Pingback: buy motrin 600 mg
  126. Pingback: Cialis Soft Tabs
  127. Pingback: periactin canada
  128. Pingback: generic viagra
  129. Pingback: cost of proscar
  130. Pingback: protonix nz
  131. Pingback: provigil tablet
  132. Pingback: reglan 10mg price
  133. Pingback: remeron 30 mg otc
  134. Pingback: benadryl 5 mg
  135. Pingback: retin-a cream nz
  136. Pingback: robaxin usa
  137. Pingback: buy rogaine
  138. Pingback: singulair pills
  139. Pingback: spiriva medication
  140. Pingback: tricor online
  141. Pingback: viagra in canada
  142. Pingback: zanaflex nz
  143. Pingback: cialis 5 mg daily
  144. Pingback: useful content
  145. Pingback: zyloprim 100 mg uk
  146. Pingback: sildenafil usa
  147. Pingback: viagra sister
  148. Pingback: buy pioglitazone
  149. Pingback: spironolactone nz
  150. Pingback: buy fexofenadine
  151. Pingback: atomoxetine pills
  152. Pingback: buy viagra online
  153. Pingback: cefuroxime coupon
  154. Pingback: citalopram tablet
  155. Pingback: cephalexin pills
  156. Pingback: tadalafil 20 mg
  157. Pingback: clindamycin prices
  158. Pingback: clozapine tablet
  159. Pingback: carvedilol canada
  160. Pingback: rosuvastatin cost
  161. Pingback: 36 hour cialis
  162. Pingback: trazodone price
  163. Pingback: tolterodine pills
  164. Pingback: celebrex dosing
  165. Pingback: bisacodyl 5mg otc
  166. Pingback: genericVGR
  167. Pingback: cialis 20 mg cost
  168. Pingback: permethrin nz
  169. Pingback: 141genericExare
  170. Pingback: generic tadalafil
  171. Pingback: cialis alcohol
  172. Pingback: nspkcmqi
  173. Pingback: estradiol otc
  174. Pingback: buy cialis 36 hour
  175. Pingback: ed pills otc
  176. Pingback: best ed drugs
  177. Pingback: xviheipe
  178. Pingback: cephalexin generic
  179. Pingback: goodrx viagra
  180. Pingback: cheapest glipizide
  181. Pingback: lasix generic name
  182. Pingback: viagra history
  183. Pingback: buy cipro
  184. Pingback: keflex online
  185. Pingback: buy cialis ebay
  186. Pingback: buy generic cialis
  187. Pingback: buy viagra
  188. Pingback: online cialis
  189. Pingback: buy cialis
  190. Pingback: essay writing help
  191. Pingback: buy cialis ebay
  192. Pingback: viagra ispot
  193. Pingback: cialis 5mg tablet
  194. Pingback: buy cialis ebay
  195. Pingback: brand amoxil
  196. Pingback: zithromax z pak
  197. Pingback: cost of ivermectin
  198. Pingback: albuterol 990 mcg
  199. Pingback: sildenafil
  200. Pingback: cialis dosages
  201. Pingback: viagra
  202. Pingback: cialis vs viagra
  203. Pingback: sildenafil 100mg
  204. Pingback: discount viagra
  205. Pingback: cialis pills
  206. Pingback: cheap levitra
  207. Pingback: cialis tolerance
  208. Pingback: viagra on line
  209. Pingback: dapoxetine hc
  210. Pingback: how to take cialis
  211. Pingback: viagra cock
  212. Pingback: cialis tadalafil
  213. Pingback: viagra wiki
  214. Pingback: viagra vs levitra
  215. Pingback: levitra 20mg
  216. Pingback: thesis support
  217. Pingback: arghentina cialis
  218. Pingback: cialis dose reddi
  219. Pingback: generic cialis
  220. Pingback: dose of sildenafil
  221. Pingback: cialis directions
  222. Pingback: cialis 80mg
  223. Pingback: neurontin epilepsy
  224. Pingback: ivy secret viagra
  225. Pingback: amoxicillin 775 mg
  226. Pingback: propecia hair loss
  227. Pingback: viagra 20 mg cost
  228. Pingback: viagra 75 mg price
  229. Pingback: cures for ed
  230. Pingback: Terramycin
  231. Pingback: furosemide 80 mg
  232. Pingback: Danazol
  233. Pingback: Zakhar Berkut hd
  234. Pingback: viagra cialis meds
  235. Pingback: 4569987
  236. Pingback: cialis viagra
  237. Pingback: news news news
  238. Pingback: psy
  239. Pingback: psy2022
  240. Pingback: projectio-freid
  241. Pingback: kinoteatrzarya.ru

Comments are closed.