Young female victims of gangs don’t ‘allow’ themselves to be used We expect girls to be good, to know better and to stay out of trouble. Why don’t we question the self-esteem of those committing the crimes?

My 11 year old neighbour just acquired a smartphone. Instantly Instagram-savvy, posting awkward selfies and pictures of cupcakes and animals, dutifully liked by a gaggle of friends identified by their love of Justin, Union J, Jessie J, anyone with a J. Her self-esteem appears bullish, thus rendering her free of the threat of gang-rape by her contemporaries, as apparently only girls suffering lack of self-respect are at risk of being sexually terrorised by their peers.

This week’s OCC report highlighted sexual violence among children, and showed girls as young as 11 are victims of ‘punishment rape’ by gangs. Alison Philips, commenting on ITV This Morning on Tuesday, had a theory: we need to teach girls to have more self-worth. “We are talking about girls here who are involved with gangs,” she said of the victims, “so we’ve got to get it into some kind of perspective.” Perspective consisted of the assumption they were girls “probably already in some kind of trouble”, though to me, this infers that increased self-esteem instantly provides a force-field against all that is bad and wrong.

Such views are far from unique: these are ‘those’ sorts of girls. They’ve put themselves at risk, allowed themselves to be used. Remember 15-year-old ‘Suzie’ in Rochdale, forced to have nightly sex with a gang of men yet dismissed for her ‘lifestyle choice’ by agencies unwilling to intervene? Do we really believe the girls the OCC report describes stepped willingly from a life of opportunity, stability and protection into the clutches of nameless, uncontrollable boys to whom they are in thrall? That they are complicit?

The report describes a culture of fear, exploitation, degradation, humiliation and abuse, children exposed to cultural messages perpetuating sexual aggression and ownership.  It talks about groups of friends, not only gangs, among whom attacks are happening all over the UK, and about children with “limited availability of choice resulting from their social/economic and/or emotional vulnerability.”

Rather than placing the responsibility on the perpetrators, from whom there may be no escape, the report highlights child protection agencies continuing to describe children as “putting themselves at risk”. This allows us to blame the girls, tut that they should know better and avoid tricky questions, such as why do we express horror but not surprise that boys act this way? If girls don’t have satisfactory levels of self-esteem, why might that be? Do we tell girls who were coerced, threatened or ambushed into unwanted sex how they could have avoided it or do we look at their attackers’ attitudes, motives and access?

Culturally and systemically we lay the blame with the most vulnerable: the girls, especially ‘those’ kinds of girls. We expect girls to be good, to know better and to stay out of trouble, no matter how challenging their circumstances, or we will hold them responsible. Adult responses to sexual crime perpetuate this view, despite almost 10 per cent of women identifying as victims of non-consensual sex in the recent Natsal report, with perpetrators often found close to home.

The boys’ self-esteem isn’t questioned, yet I wonder how many of those boys hate themselves for what they’ve done. Who, children themselves, wish life could have been different, not bought into a system which says brutality rules, sex is a right and a weapon, and girls are there to be used. I’m going into a primary school soon to talk to children of 10 and 11. Apparently I’m there to inspire them (no pressure). I can talk about their value as individuals and how they can learn to express themselves confidently. Is there anything I can say that could stop a gang rape, knowing some there may soon experience it and some perpetrate it, maybe already have? I can try – building self-esteem can apparently make all the difference – but until we start addressing the root issues of culture, lack of options and violence against women and girls I suspect little will change.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/young-female-victims-of-gangs-dont-allow-themselves-to-be-used-8972940.html

The Tarun Tejpal case shows sexual harassment is a problem India has to face up to

There has been plenty of anguished debate in India lately about rapes by strangers. Now, the country is riveted by a case that has revealed the sordid reality of workplace harassment, not by slum dwellers, but by a suave darling of the New Delhi elite.

Indian women offer prayers for a gang rape victim New Delhi in January. ‘Following the Delhi gang rape and murder case, parliament passed The Sexual Harassment of Women in Workplace Act. But the law is yet to be enforced.’ Photograph: AP

Tarun Tejpal, editor of the investigative journalism magazine Tehelka, has been accused of attempting to rape a young female colleague. Tehelka specialises in sting operations, exposing corrupt politicians and writing against sexual violence. While the magazine has lost some of its sheen in recent years, a generation of journalists thought of Tejpal as a crusader for the underdog. No more. In a graphic email leaked to the media, the victim accused Tejpal of assaulting her in a hotel lift during a festival in Goa.

The whole case might have been swept under the carpet if Tejpal had not written a series of emails, to try to justify his behaviour. Initially, he admitted a “bad lapse of judgment” and “recused” himself from the editorship of Tehelka for six months. Meanwhile, managing editor Shoma Chaudhury downplayed the alleged rape in an email to staff, calling it an “untoward incident” to be dealt with internally. Then a further email of “unconditional apology” from Tejpal to the victim emerged, in which hespoke of attempting a “sexual liaison” despite her “clear reluctance”. Faced with a barrage of criticism, Chaudhury also quit, along with six other Tehelka staffers. In the latest development, Tejpal was this week summoned to Goa for questioning by police and is on bail until Saturday morning.

There has been much introspection about how a man like Tejpal could have assaulted a young woman. There has been even more angst about how a respected female journalist, and feminist, could argue that sexual assault was simply an internal matter.

This kind of behaviour happens not just at Tehelka; most Indian workplaces are completely ill-equipped to deal with working women. Often a culture of omerta prevails, and powerful men escape punishment. Recently, a supreme court judge has been accused of sexual assault by a young female intern, who allegedly remains too intimidated to file a case. And IT honcho Phaneesh Murthy has been involved in three sexual harassment claims, yet continues to find employers. On the other hand, victims often find it difficult to be hired once they speak up, and are viewed as troublemakers.

In 1997, in the landmark Vishakha case, India’s supreme court ruled that freedom from sexual harassment was a fundamental right, and stipulated that every workplace should have a committee to deal with such complaints. Yet, when the Tejpal furore broke out, it became clear that very few people even know what Vishakha is. Chaudhury admitted that Tehelka did not have a committee to deal with sexual harassment, but this is hardly unusual. No one does.

Following the Delhi gang rape and murder case, parliament passed the grandly titled Sexual Harassment of Women in Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition, Redressal) Act. But the law is yet to be enforced. Some say that the delay is because companies are secretly against stronger laws requiring workplaces to report harassment and men are uncertain about how to behave with female colleagues. This is not as ludicrous as it may seem: because Indian society often segregates boys and girls in childhood, the sexes only mingle freely once in the workplace. While it’s too early to tell what long-term impacts this may have, it is a concern that managers may become more reluctant to hire women. Alarmingly, some judges are now apparently refusing to hire female interns.

India already has one of the lowest ratios of working women in the world. It would be disastrous if companies, unclear about sexual harassment, take the easy way out by simply rejecting women in favour of men.

We need a better law that defines harassment properly and makes every workplace obligated to deal with it. We need to speak out and call it assault, as the Tehelka journalist has done. And, most importantly, we need more women in the workplace, so they don’t feel the need to be part of an old boys’ club to get ahead.

Working women aren’t going anywhere. India had better deal with it.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/29/india-sexual-harassment-women-workplace