Scandal: Hillary Clinton, known for standing up against gendered violence, caught in cover-up

I encountered these articles upon my father’s suggestion. I was drawn to it because Hillary Clinton’s ability to maintain credibility as a strong female leader despite her husband’s indiscretions has always fascinated me. What happened was that Juanita Broaddrick, a player in Bill Clinton’s presidential campaign, recently came out saying that the former president raped her 38 years ago, with particular mention of Hillary Clinton “strong-arming” her into keeping quiet about it. As a result, both Hillary and Lena Dunham, a public supporter of Clinton’s campaign, are being discredited. The quote by Broaddrick of what Clinton said was “She said, “I just want to tell you how much Bill and I appreciate the things you do for him,’ … She looked at me real stern. Then she took my hand and held on to it and she said, ‘Do you understand? Everything you do,’”.

From what we’ve been taught of rape myth and its prominence, shouldn’t Broaddrick’s accusations be being refuted? By what we’ve learned, the public tends to think critically of rape victims, especially those with little evidence and information about the occurrence. I mean, even the article on the 11-year-old girl with video evidence of gang rape held stipulation. So why is it then, that in this instance the journalists are questioning the integrity of Hillary Clinton and Lena Dunham rather than Broaddrick? The focus in all of the articles I could find circulating the issue is entirely detached from both the victim and the perpetrator, but rather redirected toward his wife and Dunham.

I found this whole situation to be frustrating, although I can see that it was probably because media tends toward the most profitable story. Given Hillary Clinton’s campaign for the upcoming presidential elections with heavy emphasis on the strength of women and Dunham’s identification as a strong feminist, the controversy involved made for more interesting articles than “yet another Bill Clinton scandal”. I do, however, see this as being a fault in journalism. As discussed in class and one of the readings, in order to provide better media we need balance and unbiased diction --- two things that are poorly executed in all three of these articles.

How do you think the journalists could have improved their reported so as to fairly report on the issue in all aspects, rather than focusing on the discrediting of Hillary Clinton and Lena Dunham?

Article 1

Article 2

Article 3

Image

Florida State University Rape Case Settlement

Today I came across a news article discussing the Florida State University rape case involving Jameis Winston. Yesterday, Florida State came to a settlement with the former student who reported that she was raped by quarterback Winston back in 2012. Winston claimed that the sex was consensual. He then went on to win the Heisman Trophy, lead FSU to a national championship, and play in the NFL. The former student sued Winston personally, as well as Florida State, for not investigating the situation to the best of their abilities. While the case against Winston is still pending, the school has agreed to pay the victim $950,000, as well as implement five years of sexual assault awareness programs at the university. 

Within the article, the headline states, "Florida State reaches settlement with Jameis Winston's accuser." As we have seen within our current readings, utilizing words such as, "accuser" blames the victim of accusing his/her perpetrator and makes her/him appear at fault for something. Right away, victim blaming occurs with the journalist's choice of language in the headline.

Also within the article, Florida State president John Thrasher stated that, "the reason for the settlement is to avoid continuing litigation expenses" (Shanker, Jared). Personally, I feel as though his response could not put it into more simple terms; the university is basically paying her off because they do not want the expenses of legal bills anymore. While the sexual awareness programs implemented by the school are an important gesture, I feel as though no sum of money could make up for the damage that the victim experienced regarding her personal life, as well as in her academic career, "She left the university after the allegation became public in November 2013." The victim states, "I will always be disappointed that I had to leave the school I dreamed of attending since I was little" (Shanker).

Aside from the article, within the documentary called, The Hunting Ground, the victim speaks out about her experience and the impact that the assault had on her life. The film discusses the fact that Winston was such a valuable player for the school and brought so much victory for their team. As a result, the victim received death threats from her peers because she was interfering with Winston's success. 

Personally, I feel that this story exemplifies how powerful systems within our societal structures defy victims of sexual assault the justice that they deserve. Florida State, a powerful university, choose to settle this rape case with money in order to protect the school's reputation, as well as the image of one of their most successful football players. Money will never solve the complex problems behind rape culture that exists so predominantly on college campuses. 

Below is a photo of Jameis Winston: 







Photo: https://www.google.com/search?q=jameis+winston+with+trophy&biw=1085&bih=594&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj3rcfqlsjKAhVBFiwKHdD9CR0Q_AUIBigB#imgrc=r_5QRrkP8Ze2IM%3A

Article:
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/14644864/florida-state-settling-lawsuit-jameis-winston-accuser

Dick, Kirby. The Hunting Ground. Weinstein Company, 2015.

Heather Marlowe and the Rape Kit Backlog

Today, I read a Buzzfeed article about Heather Marlowe, a San Francisco resident and rape victim who recently filed suit against the city of San Francisco and its police department over its failure to test her rape kit and their conduct during investigation of her case. 

To provide background, after waking up in an unidentified home (with no memory of how she got there, where she was, or who her assailant was), Marlowe immediately sought treatment and a rape kit at San Francisco General Hospital. She was told by authorities her results would take one to two months. In the meantime, she cooperated on investigative work with an officer, who encouraged her (among other things) to create a fake identity, lure the suspect into a date, and attempt to obtain a confession as to where he was on the day of the attack. Beyond the absurdity of encouraging a rape victim to enter into an alone, face-to-face situation with their potential rapist, Marlowe reported her assault in 2010. To this day, she has yet to receive results on her rape kit. 

Marlowe’s experience is not unique. There is a national backlog on rape kits, estimated to be as high as 100,000 total. The federal government has taken steps to allocate millions towards reducing the backlog, although reports indicate much of that money has gone elsewhere (e.g. improving lab equipment or testing evidence for other crimes). I don’t mean to denigrate the importance of up-to-date supplies or solving other crimes; however, as she mentions in her suit, when Marlowe asked why her kit had yet to be processed, the response she received was that “more important crimes” took priority. 

As we’ve discussed in class, sexual assault is a life-altering crime - it is traumatizing and dehumanizing and the fear of it informs daily life as a woman, but somehow the severity and impact of such a crime fails to stick. I understand murder is a more important crime. But what about sexual assault is unimportant? It is well-documented that victims regularly struggle with PTSD, and while it’s certainly not true for every case, some men are serial rapists; thus, leaving kits untested leaves women as vulnerable as the average individual if a serial murderer remained on the loose. The first 1000 backlogged rape kits tested resulted in 100 cases of serial rapists, and surely more will appear. I find it unbelievable and disheartening that if I (hypothetically) were to file a case of sexual assault, it could take me years to get closure and involve an investigative process that could put me in further danger. I comprehend why many victims of rape do not deal with law enforcement - it doesn’t seem worth the effort.

If you care to read more, here is the article on Heather Marlowe, and a New York Times report on the national backlog: 

http://www.buzzfeed.com/maryanngeorgantopoulos/woman-sues-over-rape-kit-testing-confirmation#.ulDBEBNnV

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/29/opinion/sunday/rape-evidence-backlog.html?_r=0