What follows was written by my daughter Kelly on her blog One of These Days Every Day. She is a social worker with special interest in and experience with sex offenders. Her words are exactly how I feel about the outrageous things said about Brock Turner. I want to add at the start that we have swung from winking at rape to wanting any man convicted of a sexual offense to be castrated, put in prison for life and tortured there. That is not right or fair. It is not just. Like so much of our society today, over-reaction and homage to gut feelings rule over intellect, justice and mercy.
Ted
Here is Kelly's post-
I’m sitting here in front of a blank word document, terrified to write about the subject everyone’s been talking about. In fact, I do not know if this will ever see the light of day. The Internet, while it is a wonderful thing in so many aspects, has taken away many individuals’ ability to communicate in a civilized way. We have degraded ourselves to attacking and name calling and passively aggressively liking comments from others of the same opinion that make aggressive comments when we ourselves don’t want to be the scapegoat.
I’m shaking a bit as I begin to write this paragraph, out of fear of how these attackers and passive aggressive likers will react to my words should I choose to publish them. Despite my best efforts, I have a thin skin, and while I am passionately opinionated, I would rather have a calm conversation about two sides of an issue than throw something in your face and be attacked for it.
#BrockTurnerIsARapist
“This is what a rapist looks like”
“He is…not even a human at this point. He is a rapist.”
“I hope someone gets him while he’s in there.”
You all know what we’re talking about. These are only a very few of the numerous posts and comments I have seen regarding the “Stanford Rape Case.” The vast majority of comments and posts have been of a similar nature to the above quotes. I have spent several years providing therapy to and interacting with individuals with sex offenses, so I have a unique point of view on this topic that I feel needs to be heard.
Let’s look at some background.
Firstly, we must understand the subtlety of sexual offense charges. Brock Turner is in fact not, technically, a “rapist.” Rape involves penetration of a vagina by a penis. Turner was convicted of sexual assault, which can encompass a great many things, but in his case, it means that foreign objects and fingers were forcibly inserted into the victim’s vagina. They are both sex offenses, but they are not the same. In the same way, child molestation is not rape; possession of child pornography is not rape. All of these sexual offense charges have specific definitions.
“So what’s the difference?” You might think. “He still penetrated her, so I’m going to call him a rapist.”
The difference is in manner of thinking and risk level. In sex offender therapy, we refer to “thinking errors.” These are ingrained anti-social ways of thinking that deviate strongly from the norm and are indicative of criminal behavior. What type of sexual offender exhibits the most thinking errors? It varies, but typically we see the highest rate of thinking errors in sexual psychopaths (e.g., Ted Bundy) and pedophiles. These individuals are also at the highest risk level when assessing for actuarial risk. They are the most threatening to society as a whole because their ways of thinking are so pervasive and not at all amenable to change. Read: they are most likely to commit another sex offense.
“But wait a minute,” you may say, “These are sex offenders we’re talking about here. Anyone with a sex offense is a threat to society and should be locked up for good. They are a threat to our children and our loved ones.”
Sex offenders are the most stigmatized criminal population by far, somewhat deservingly so when considering the nature of the crime. But the data show us that sexual offenders are, in fact, NOT likely to commit another sex crime. The national recidivism rate for all criminals is between 65 and 75 percent, depending on the crime. That means that 65-75 percent of people who commit a crime will commit another crime in their lifetime. Sex offenders have a recidivism rate of between 35 and 45 percent, all the way down to less than 10 percent for juveniles and some first-time or lesser offenders. Interestingly enough, sex offenders are, generally speaking, not a threat to society.
Thirty-five to 45 percent is nothing to sneeze at, but when considering data across all types of crimes, it is important to keep this in mind. It is also to important to consider that, despite what most people think, sex offenders are among the most easily rehabilitated criminal populations. Cognitive-behavioral treatments have a huge success rate.
So who has the lowest recidivism rates out of all criminals? Sex offenders. Second lowest? Murderers. Who has the highest rate? Property criminals and drug offenders. Turns out, the worse the crime is, the less likely it is to happen again. Thank goodness.
So why are people so up in arms about the Brock Turner case? From what I can glean, there are four major reasons. Firstly, his own and his loved ones’ testimonies to keep him from a lengthy prison sentence were conceived as ridiculous by many. Secondly, his victim wrote a touching and heartfelt letter that went viral. Thirdly, the man didn’t receive any type of prison sentence – At. All. Finally, race and class of course confound all of these issues.
I will gloss over the first two, because to me they are not indicative of the larger issue at hand. I am of the opinion that testimonies from friends and family were weighted too strongly during this trial. While these individuals know Turner as a person, they are not knowledgeable about sex offenders and their patterns and therefore their information is largely irrelevant, I think, to the criminal issue at hand.
Unfortunately—and I think I’ll get a lot of shit for this—I feel the same way about the victim’s letter. Both sides were making emotionally-based arguments that, in my opinion, have little relevance a court room. Do victims need a voice? Let me not stutter when I say this: ABSO-FUCKING-LUTELY.
BUT.
The victim’s subjective view of his/her perpetrator does not take into account the objective risk of the perpetrator. We must consider what is best for society as a whole, especially when prisons and jails are so expensive (another issue for another time, but still relevant).
According to the family/friends, Turner is an otherwise perfect dude who is amazing at all he does. According to the victim, he is a piece of shit that should never see the light of day again and he is wholly a villain.
Most people agree with the second assessment, but in fact, like most things in life, he falls somewhere in between.
Moving on. Although it was not explicitly stated (I don’t think, but correct me if I’m wrong), the judge is using what I would call “shock incarceration” or “shock treatment,” which is an entirely ridiculous way to address the issue. Turner appears to be of a mid-level risk (it could be mid-low or mid-high depending on variables of which I am unaware). I cannot say this for certain, as I know very little about Turner’s ways of thinking and personality, but this is based on risk factors that are observable.
In my opinion, Turner should have received a prison sentence with required sex offender therapy where he could address any thinking errors or other issues that did not arise in court. Do I think he is of imminent risk to society? I don’t think so, but I don’t know. Should he still have been sentenced despite his possible low risk? Duh. It’s a fucking felony.
Finally, let’s talk about how this dude is rich and white and talented. It’s common knowledge that the justice system is biased against African Americans, especially males. It’s disgusting and hateful, and it has made me very sad throughout all the years that I have worked in corrections. How about poverty or wealth? You bet it plays a part. His swimming scores don’t make a damn bit of difference to me, and I don’t think they did to the courts either, but people keep bringing it up as another reason why he got off….so, there you go.
But here the thing: Brock Turner still a person. In social work, we like to talk about “person first” language (e.g., an individual with schizophrenia as opposed to a schizophrenic). Were his crimes heinous? Absolutely. Is he a disgusting person? It’s very possible. Is he no longer human because of what he did? No. He is a human who needs some help, and a human who got a bullshit non-sentence, but he is a human nonetheless. He is a human who committed a sex crime.
Here’s the other thing: Brock Turner not the reason the justice system is failing. He is a scapegoat. Is the justice system shitty? In some ways, yes. Is it biased? YES. YES YES YES. Is it Turner’s fault that the justice system is this way? No. Let’s choose to fight for African American males as opposed to against white males. It will be much more productive.
Here’s the final thing, and perhaps more of a personal grievance: Wishing ill on Brock Turner because of his crimes is unproductive and disrespectful. I feel many will disagree with me on this, because again, the stigmatization and fear surrounding sex offenders is high, but hoping that he will get raped in jail just because he didn’t get a sentence that is satisfying to you makes no sense. If you’re pissed off about the sentence (or lack thereof), GOOD. I agree. Let’s search for change at a higher level and make a difference for all offenders as opposed to choosing one to defame. Let’s ensure that all individuals get appropriate sentences, black or white, rich or poor.
There are so many issues in this case that I could go on and on for days. Race, class, location, type of crime, stigma, labeling, misunderstanding, myths, fears. I feel I am only scratching the surface here, but I wanted to give a more fully rounded view of this case instead of merely smearing Turner’s picture all over the Internet.
As a woman, despite my knowledge and experience in this arena, cases like this make me a little bit more scared to live in this world. As a social worker and sex offender therapist…I would fucking KILL to work with this dude. And that would make me a human with a murder charge.
Ted
Here is Kelly's post-
I’m sitting here in front of a blank word document, terrified to write about the subject everyone’s been talking about. In fact, I do not know if this will ever see the light of day. The Internet, while it is a wonderful thing in so many aspects, has taken away many individuals’ ability to communicate in a civilized way. We have degraded ourselves to attacking and name calling and passively aggressively liking comments from others of the same opinion that make aggressive comments when we ourselves don’t want to be the scapegoat.
I’m shaking a bit as I begin to write this paragraph, out of fear of how these attackers and passive aggressive likers will react to my words should I choose to publish them. Despite my best efforts, I have a thin skin, and while I am passionately opinionated, I would rather have a calm conversation about two sides of an issue than throw something in your face and be attacked for it.
#BrockTurnerIsARapist
“This is what a rapist looks like”
“He is…not even a human at this point. He is a rapist.”
“I hope someone gets him while he’s in there.”
You all know what we’re talking about. These are only a very few of the numerous posts and comments I have seen regarding the “Stanford Rape Case.” The vast majority of comments and posts have been of a similar nature to the above quotes. I have spent several years providing therapy to and interacting with individuals with sex offenses, so I have a unique point of view on this topic that I feel needs to be heard.
Let’s look at some background.
Firstly, we must understand the subtlety of sexual offense charges. Brock Turner is in fact not, technically, a “rapist.” Rape involves penetration of a vagina by a penis. Turner was convicted of sexual assault, which can encompass a great many things, but in his case, it means that foreign objects and fingers were forcibly inserted into the victim’s vagina. They are both sex offenses, but they are not the same. In the same way, child molestation is not rape; possession of child pornography is not rape. All of these sexual offense charges have specific definitions.
“So what’s the difference?” You might think. “He still penetrated her, so I’m going to call him a rapist.”
The difference is in manner of thinking and risk level. In sex offender therapy, we refer to “thinking errors.” These are ingrained anti-social ways of thinking that deviate strongly from the norm and are indicative of criminal behavior. What type of sexual offender exhibits the most thinking errors? It varies, but typically we see the highest rate of thinking errors in sexual psychopaths (e.g., Ted Bundy) and pedophiles. These individuals are also at the highest risk level when assessing for actuarial risk. They are the most threatening to society as a whole because their ways of thinking are so pervasive and not at all amenable to change. Read: they are most likely to commit another sex offense.
“But wait a minute,” you may say, “These are sex offenders we’re talking about here. Anyone with a sex offense is a threat to society and should be locked up for good. They are a threat to our children and our loved ones.”
Sex offenders are the most stigmatized criminal population by far, somewhat deservingly so when considering the nature of the crime. But the data show us that sexual offenders are, in fact, NOT likely to commit another sex crime. The national recidivism rate for all criminals is between 65 and 75 percent, depending on the crime. That means that 65-75 percent of people who commit a crime will commit another crime in their lifetime. Sex offenders have a recidivism rate of between 35 and 45 percent, all the way down to less than 10 percent for juveniles and some first-time or lesser offenders. Interestingly enough, sex offenders are, generally speaking, not a threat to society.
Thirty-five to 45 percent is nothing to sneeze at, but when considering data across all types of crimes, it is important to keep this in mind. It is also to important to consider that, despite what most people think, sex offenders are among the most easily rehabilitated criminal populations. Cognitive-behavioral treatments have a huge success rate.
So who has the lowest recidivism rates out of all criminals? Sex offenders. Second lowest? Murderers. Who has the highest rate? Property criminals and drug offenders. Turns out, the worse the crime is, the less likely it is to happen again. Thank goodness.
So why are people so up in arms about the Brock Turner case? From what I can glean, there are four major reasons. Firstly, his own and his loved ones’ testimonies to keep him from a lengthy prison sentence were conceived as ridiculous by many. Secondly, his victim wrote a touching and heartfelt letter that went viral. Thirdly, the man didn’t receive any type of prison sentence – At. All. Finally, race and class of course confound all of these issues.
I will gloss over the first two, because to me they are not indicative of the larger issue at hand. I am of the opinion that testimonies from friends and family were weighted too strongly during this trial. While these individuals know Turner as a person, they are not knowledgeable about sex offenders and their patterns and therefore their information is largely irrelevant, I think, to the criminal issue at hand.
Unfortunately—and I think I’ll get a lot of shit for this—I feel the same way about the victim’s letter. Both sides were making emotionally-based arguments that, in my opinion, have little relevance a court room. Do victims need a voice? Let me not stutter when I say this: ABSO-FUCKING-LUTELY.
BUT.
The victim’s subjective view of his/her perpetrator does not take into account the objective risk of the perpetrator. We must consider what is best for society as a whole, especially when prisons and jails are so expensive (another issue for another time, but still relevant).
According to the family/friends, Turner is an otherwise perfect dude who is amazing at all he does. According to the victim, he is a piece of shit that should never see the light of day again and he is wholly a villain.
Most people agree with the second assessment, but in fact, like most things in life, he falls somewhere in between.
Moving on. Although it was not explicitly stated (I don’t think, but correct me if I’m wrong), the judge is using what I would call “shock incarceration” or “shock treatment,” which is an entirely ridiculous way to address the issue. Turner appears to be of a mid-level risk (it could be mid-low or mid-high depending on variables of which I am unaware). I cannot say this for certain, as I know very little about Turner’s ways of thinking and personality, but this is based on risk factors that are observable.
In my opinion, Turner should have received a prison sentence with required sex offender therapy where he could address any thinking errors or other issues that did not arise in court. Do I think he is of imminent risk to society? I don’t think so, but I don’t know. Should he still have been sentenced despite his possible low risk? Duh. It’s a fucking felony.
Finally, let’s talk about how this dude is rich and white and talented. It’s common knowledge that the justice system is biased against African Americans, especially males. It’s disgusting and hateful, and it has made me very sad throughout all the years that I have worked in corrections. How about poverty or wealth? You bet it plays a part. His swimming scores don’t make a damn bit of difference to me, and I don’t think they did to the courts either, but people keep bringing it up as another reason why he got off….so, there you go.
But here the thing: Brock Turner still a person. In social work, we like to talk about “person first” language (e.g., an individual with schizophrenia as opposed to a schizophrenic). Were his crimes heinous? Absolutely. Is he a disgusting person? It’s very possible. Is he no longer human because of what he did? No. He is a human who needs some help, and a human who got a bullshit non-sentence, but he is a human nonetheless. He is a human who committed a sex crime.
Here’s the other thing: Brock Turner not the reason the justice system is failing. He is a scapegoat. Is the justice system shitty? In some ways, yes. Is it biased? YES. YES YES YES. Is it Turner’s fault that the justice system is this way? No. Let’s choose to fight for African American males as opposed to against white males. It will be much more productive.
Here’s the final thing, and perhaps more of a personal grievance: Wishing ill on Brock Turner because of his crimes is unproductive and disrespectful. I feel many will disagree with me on this, because again, the stigmatization and fear surrounding sex offenders is high, but hoping that he will get raped in jail just because he didn’t get a sentence that is satisfying to you makes no sense. If you’re pissed off about the sentence (or lack thereof), GOOD. I agree. Let’s search for change at a higher level and make a difference for all offenders as opposed to choosing one to defame. Let’s ensure that all individuals get appropriate sentences, black or white, rich or poor.
There are so many issues in this case that I could go on and on for days. Race, class, location, type of crime, stigma, labeling, misunderstanding, myths, fears. I feel I am only scratching the surface here, but I wanted to give a more fully rounded view of this case instead of merely smearing Turner’s picture all over the Internet.
As a woman, despite my knowledge and experience in this arena, cases like this make me a little bit more scared to live in this world. As a social worker and sex offender therapist…I would fucking KILL to work with this dude. And that would make me a human with a murder charge.
Indeed, there are many issues in this case that could be discussed. I will venture to comment on two.
ReplyDeleteOne, historically speaking, the injustice of the sentence here is quite small, considering that the vast majority of rapists have gotten no prison sentence whatsoever. (e.g., cases of mass rape, such as Nanjing 1938, Russians post WW 2, Bangladesh 1971, etc.)
Second, had this case occurred in Israel three millennia ago, the punishment would have been death...for BOTH the man and woman.
In the book of Deuteronomy (cf. Deut 22:22-27), if a man and woman who is not his wife are caught in the sexual act, they were to both be sentenced to death by stoning... unless the woman had cried out for help, in which case only the man was to be executed, while the woman would be declared innocent. (Aside: how do you know if a woman really cried out for help or not? You have to take her word for it...and maybe she's lying...but I digress.)
We moderns tend to view this ancient near eastern judicial approach of execution as being overly harsh (perhaps even barbaric). But it does honor to the woman by implying that she has free will, that she is not a puppet, and therefore bears some responsibility for her (re)actions: if she screamed, then she was being raped; if she didn't, then the implication is that she was party to the coitus. (Aside #2: And if the man had a knife to her throat and threatened to kill her if she screamed?)
In the Brock Turner case, the rape victim was tested and found to have an alcohol level of 0.24% - three times the legal limit if she had been driving. She was unconscious from alcohol intoxication.
So, who is more likely to be placed in harm's way: a college student asleep in her own bed at 1:00 A.M, or one who is falling down drunk out in public after leaving a party of young, horny, alchohol-charged men at that hour?
Rape of a woman is always wrong. If she is passed out, rape is still wrong.
Period.
But does that therefore mean that women get a free pass for any kind of behavior they exhibit? If so, then women are free as birds, since they are as pure as the wind-driven snow, and bear no responsibility whatsoever for any ill that befalls them...
As I started off saying, these are just a couple of points for pondering...
-D-