Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?
I think I get what you are trying to say but I can't say I agree. If a person is traumatized by the actions then they don't get a second chance to unlive what has changed them forever simply because the guy never did it before or he is sorry. This is one of the things I hear that sends me. Telling them Franken isn't as bad as Moore does what exactly? Are they supposed to feel better because it could have been worse? The perpetrators aren't little kids. They are grown ups. Most people, when asked, can figure out you shouldn't behave like this and will tell you so. When you put a name to the 'guilty party and they become a face then we hear all the mitigating factors we should consider to minimize what happened. Do I feel bad when someone screwed up and the consequence changes their life in a way they can't recover from? Actually I do. And I wish there was some way they could undo it. And I wish they didn't need to suffer the consequences. But having taken care of the survivors I can't forget they deserve justice. Justice doesn't include worrying about how the earned consequences will affect the perpetrator.
What if there are large numbers of men who are 'guilty' of transgressions? Do we say- oh, well, if we were to act on everyone who did that half of them would be in trouble so we should reconsider what we want to do?
I think this post asks some important questions. I don't think it necessarily answers those questions, but I'm not sure we have the answers yet.
Do I think something happened between Ford and Kavanaugh? I do. I don't know what. I have a hunch. My hunch is that we had a high school boy attending an all boys school who found himself at a party in mixed company, consumed more alcohol than he was capable of handling, with the assistance of a friend got Ford into a room and he physically groped her. She was undoubtedly was very frightened and probably thought she was about to be raped. He probably thought he was wowing her with his prowess as a lover.
Was his conduct wrong? Absolutely.
But here is a concern I've had for some time. We are moving to a place in society where degrees and context and nuance don't matter in these events. Furthermore, we are moving in the direction that says that because the victim has to live with the trauma of the events for the rest of his or her life, the perpetrator must also receive a life sentence. Finally, there is even a backlash against those who are open to listening to the perpetrator's story or giving the perp a chance at rehabilitation.
I saw that one of the top editors at
The New York Review of Books was recently bounced from his job because he had the temerity to publish an essay by a man who had been charged with assaulting one or more women. The media backlash to the publication basically took the form that the perpetrator's voice should not be heard, that the perpetrator has no right to try to address the context of the events or to try to rehabilitate himself.
One of the things that has struck me about the Kavanaugh case is this. No one has even asked the question, "What if Kavanaugh, thirty years ago as a drunken high school student at a party, did physically grope and frighten Ford? Does that automatically disqualify him from this position?"
I mean, probably? But no one has even asked that question. If it disqualifies him from this position, what other positions does it disqualify him from? Too often I think the response to these events, regardless of degree, is burn them at the stake. And they need to stay burned.
The problem with that is twofold. First, I believe that while punishment must be leveled for wrongs, that punishment has to be appropriate both in terms of length and degree. Second, if our response is to tar every perpetrator with the scarlet letter for life, you are going to see events like we see now where the automatic response to a charge is denial, not acknowledgment and contrition. You have to deny, because the consequences are too great if you don't.
