What You’re Up Against When You Claim: Sexual Harassment

The psychiatric community “explains away” accusations of sexual harassment. How so? 

Harassment claims are explained away, sometimes, by exposing the plaintiff’s psychological defense mechanisms. Most mental health professionals, no matter their particular discipline — psychology, counseling, social work, psychiatry, etc., have been introduced, if not buried, in psychodynamic theory. The theory is based upon Freud’s brilliant observations about the human psyche.

We’re all familiar with some of it. When we don’t want to see something about ourselves (or someone we love), because it hurts too much, most of us have the ability to simply not see it — classic denial. A supervisor tells us that our work isn’t what it should be, and we immediately reject the assessment, think it as biased or to his benefit. It might be, but it might not. Pretty normal denial.

Displacement is another defense. If we have been treated poorly in the past, either as a child or an adult, but were powerless at the time to do anything about it, we might want to unleash that unresolved trauma to another available target, at a more opportune time, under safer, more socially accepting circumstances. Children do this when they are bullied. They can’t push back against an older sibling or a parent, but they can displace anger to a more vulnerable peer.

Denial (not me) and misattribution or displacement (you) are said to be primitive psychological defenses, and yet we all have them, we’re all children at times. But most of us won’t push back to the degree that we’ll deliberately retaliate with a claim of sexual harassment.

If we do, we better be ready to defend our very lives, our histories. Somehow they will be transparent.

When allegations are driven by a plaintiff’s unresolved psychological history, they are referred to as “factitious claims,” a psychiatric forensic phrase coined in 1996 by Sara Feldman-Schorrig. Factitious claims serve as a means of gaining validation and recognition for being in a sick role, playing the victim. Psychiatrists Alicia Bales and James Spar see factitious claims as a means of seeking social support, but also a way to express anger for a previous victimization. The gain is all psychological; it isn’t about making money.

Bales and Spar refer to other defenses, beyond denial and displacement. A “repetition compulsion,” for example, is a psychological need to attribute the features of someone from the past to someone in the present in order to “master” old trauma. A pattern is established in relationships to work out earlier abuse or neglect by finding other people with similar qualities. If my father is a stern, distant fellow, and my boss is as well, then I might perceive my boss to be something of a monster. Rational or not, I feel compelled to bring him down. The defendant’s counsel will be sure to seek that out, the father projection, and bring it forward. Another win for forensic psychiatry and for the employer, most likely.

“Reaction formation” is the tendency to have an exaggerated response to an insult or a rejection. A person might respond to a flirtation initially, might even like the flattery, and the co-worker or boss who flatters her. If it is cut off, however, for whatever reason, the abandonment could hit hard, become a psychological trigger. An abandoned, enraged, scorned employee may choose to file a suit. This makes a very good case to discourage romance in the workplace. People don’t like rejection, and some will respond vengefully.

Bales and Spar call for a fair look at all sexual harassment claims, never an assumption that reports are based upon the plaintiffs fantasies, but a close examination of the context. Nevertheless, to ignore the plaintiff’s motives is short-sighted. Each false allegation has the potential to harm an innocent defendant financially, socially, and psychologically.

It is hard to hear all of this, for in the end it comes across as victim-blaming, the patriarchal profession of psychiatry wielding the same anti-feminist sword about neuroses, traditionally female neuroses. But the authors of these psychiatric opinions are gender neutral, cite references to males who have filed suit, too, and lost.

The coming avalanche of sexual harassment claims will be vetted, to be sure, for psychological issues, and they may be won or lost based upon the plaintiff’s past, among other things. A deep-seated motivation driving a need for justice may provide grounds to dismiss the case.

With each case, too, both the defense and the plaintiff have exhausted considerable emotional and financial reserves. The plaintiff suffers yet another blow, hasn’t resolved the repeated compulsion, hasn’t worked out any of the past. The defendant, who should walk away happy, is likely to have suffered social and economic consequences in the waiting, perhaps demotion, dismissal, social ostracism, or marital discord.

These cases are good for no one. The company should either prevent these cases (optimal solution) or bring in a professional team to work with both plaintiff and defendant. Will everyone need therapy, otherwise, in the end?

Guaranteed.

What Parents Need to Tell Their Kids so that They Report Sexual Assault to THEM

Elizabeth Bernstein’s piece in the Wall Street Journal about the reasons women do not report sexual assault answers the President’s query that if the accusations against Judge Kavanaugh are true, then his accusers would have said something way back then. Or sometime since then.

It isn't a new subject. An abundance of cultural, sociological, psychological, structural, and economic literature (you need academic access to the data bases) links under-reporting with sexual assault and harassment. 

But even as this psycho-education seeps into the national consciousness, skeptics still ask the President's question and another: 

If these rapes are unreported, then how do they (the experts) really know? Where do they get their numbers?

The answer is that agencies sponsor studies and collect statistics about crime. The Center for Disease Prevention, for one, reporting annually, finds that one in five women are violently raped each year. Another, the Bureau of Justice's National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), is an annual survey of a representative sample of households that asks about reported and unreported violent crimes, including rape and attempted sexual assault. In one such study, teenagers 16-19 years of age have been found to be 3.5 times more likely to experience sexual assault than the general population.

And they don’t all tell their parents.

The consequences of not telling—years of psychological haunting, shame, self-blame for drinking, for simply being there, social withdrawal, academic failure, depression, anxiety, relationship fears—the manifestations of post-traumatic stress— are founded in the professional literature, as well.   

Parents wanting to change that, wanting to help, who wish their children to confide in them, should this type of violence ever happen (and it might), will need to be nonjudgmental and unconditionally supportive. They'll need to bring the conversation to the dinner table, ready with not statistics, but with the reasons men rape—primary among them the pressure to be male, to prove it in this perverse way. They should be armed with a list of the 20 rape myths, such as women (girls) dress a certain way, or drink because they want to be raped.* 

To gain the confidence of their children, parents will have to assure confidentiality, and they may need to let go the idea of reporting if their child is against it, if she or he opts out. It isn’t the craziest thing, the decision not to report—as Ms. Bernstein’s article makes abundantly clear.

*A link to sexual harassment myths. Rape-myths pre-date them and I'll post those another time, along with the many reasons men rape.  

P.S. Looking for a picture of a girl torn to pieces about a rape (it's on that mac somewhere), I found these notes for an article I presented to the Council for Social Work Education about what social workers can do about on-campus sexual violence (2006).

20-59% of all college women suffer sexual assault between 16-24, 87-95% acquaintances

higher incidence with athletics, beliefs in myths and sex roles

why victims don’t report

Don’t think campus police will be helpful, they blame the victim

Too long a wait in the ER

Fear of reprisal by a stalkinga assailant

feeling overwhelmed, ashamed, or too humiliated to face others

fear they won’t be believed or taken seriously and secondary retraumatization

not knowing it was rape

not wanting family or significant others to find out

not wanting to hurt an acquaintance rapist’s chance for a better future

fear of getting in trouble for underaged drinking

But add these, too: 

• People think, not everyone needs to know. Anything sexual is personal.
• There’s dread, embarrassment, and humiliation regarding reporting and the whole event.
• Targets and actors believe bad things don’t happen unless it is deserved, the just world philosophy. Somehow, they think, the target is responsible. Both players find reasons, which diminishes the actor’s (or bystanders/friends) guilt/anxiety/compassion, worsening the consequences for the target.
• Targets of sexual harassment fear being perceived as weak, dependent, vulnerable, or incapable of handling their lives on their own— all the things women tell men that they are not in the feminist paradigm.
• Fear of inviting more negative attention, comments, jokes, behavior, retaliation, both during and after the report. 
• The expectation that the story will be minimized or worse, not believed.
• Telling over the story has been compared to a “second rape” if it isn’t received in an empathetic, supportive way. “Just world” thinking would contribute to that (you must have deserved it).
• Guilt and avoidance, not wanting to see the perpetrator dismissed. Targets of sexual harassment often tolerate abuse, protect the very person who is making them miserable, will even make excuses for him.

Linda Freedman, PhD

Chicago, Illinois

Sexual Harassment Myths

The great thing about a blog is that you don't have to cite the source. So for lazy academics in a hurry to get stuff out to the masses, that works!  I'm in the middle of an article about Why Men Rape (will post some of the reasons here, probably one at a time), but as soon as I can will post the source for these.

Meanwhile, you get a screenshot of one of my powerpoint slides.

Here you go.

Sexual harassment myths

Linda Freedman, PhD
Institute for Clinical Social Work

What Susan Collins Could Have Said

Susan Collins on her vote to confirm Kavanaugh

Those who believe in social justice and equality, equal treatment under law, are very upset about the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh.  It is a step backward socially and politically for this country.

Why say that? Socially, sure. But politically?

The Supreme Court is the very court that defined sexual harassment at a propitious point in our political history. The rape of employees — sex against their will— involuntary sexual relations, became a type of sex discrimination, one of the three types of sexual harassment. Sexual discrimination in employment had been illegal as far back as the Civil Rights Act of 1964. But harassing on the basis of sex in the workplace became a criminal act following the High Court's hearing of Vinson v Meritor Bank in 1986.

Mechelle Vinson put up with demands for sex, pawing, public humiliation, and rape, from her boss fearing dismissal otherwise—until she could no longer take it anymore, quit, and sued Meritor Bank. This became the first "hostile environment" case to come before the Supreme Court. The judges found it despicable and ruled that the hostile environment based upon sex to be a type of sex discrimination.

The Supreme Court has heard many other cases since then, many quid pro quo, many about gender harassment (a second type of hostile environment), others about unwanted sexual attention. Women have been protected to the extent that their resources, evidence, and energy hold up during litigation.

Now what will happen?  Will employment decisions, definitions, roll back to the States? How did a man accused of attempted rape become an appointee to the Supreme Court, anyway?

Let's answer just that question because it is easy.  He's brilliant and accomplished, and has a majority — only because a woman (who shouldn't have) Susan Collins, voted for him, as did a male Democrat (who shouldn't have) Joe Manchin III (struggling to keep his democratic seat in West Virginia — a red state).  Manchin could have, should have, voted like his fellow Democrats, but decided to stick with his own best interests. This is the answer to the question, self-interest.

Politics is a selfish business. Stay in office, forget your own personal scruples.

So Manchin, we understand, almost. But Susan Collins truly failed us. A Republican, but a woman, too, a traitor, so to speak, who deciding the evidence too weak against Kavanaugh, who wondered perhaps, if Christine Blasey Ford was assaulted by someone else.

This conclusion leads some of us to be believe Collins surely is not one of the one in five who have suffered a rape, nor is she a one in four who beat off an attempted rape.  Because the face of the person who holds you down is not a face that you ever forget.

She had the opportunity to change history, to change a process, and she blew it. She could have said something that would truly change history. She could have, in the process, depoliticized the Supreme Court:

Judge Kavanaugh may be innocent, he may be guilty; his guilt is unclear. But that there is even a suspicion of doubt about his character as a High Court Justice of these United States, I am compelled to say NO to his appointment.

This country needs men and women with no history as a possible perpetrator of exploitation or abuse. For this position, especially, the country needs independent, fair-minded men and women who do not, have never, succumbed to group think, who do not do what the other boys do, will not merely vote a certain way because it is expected, by a group, to do so. This is the Supreme Court. The judges need to be that, supreme, the cream of the crop, individuated and fair, inscrutable.

So NO, Mr. Chairman. I vote no.

The confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh in the highest echelons of American power and politics tells us that the majority of the powerful have not learned anything about the essence and perversion of power, and closed their eyes to the prevalence, the classlessness of exploitation. It is confirmation that women are still a minority. Tell your daughters, friends, that they MUST run for positions of power to turn that around, and tell your sons-- be individuated, fair, and always, kind.

At some point, people like Susan Collins will age out.

Linda Freedman, PhD

General Welsh and the Reason for Sexual Assault

I wrote this on Medium.com, about how the General didn't get it, did not understand rape myths and basically blamed the victim, or our "permissive society." There are so many untruths about relationships, and men in particular are socialized in ways that empower them to aggress in sexual ways.

So read this one for more on that. The General and Rape Myths

Informed Consent

About informed consent for sex. This is a clean video. I like it.



To review the main points, which go beyond No Means No:

1. People need to be "of age" or sex is a crime. The age differs from state to state

2. If either or both individuals are impaired by alcohol, even if they are of an age to consent, they can't-- they're impaired, should talk about it before they become impaired, or not at all.

3. Consent should be given given freely, with enthusiasm, not be coaxed or coerced in anyway. 

4. Even if a person says Yes in one moment, consent can be taken back, reconsidered, denied, and that's as it should be. The new "No" needs to be respected, not the old "Yes". 

5. Consent is about specific behaviors, it is not global. So someone might not mind doing one thing, but does mind doing another, and that's the way it should go. Force and assumptions in sex are against the law, even if a couple are married or in a committed partnership.

6.  Consent on one day does not mean consent on another, or in the future. 

7.  Silence, sleep, is not consent.

Linda Freedman, PhD, founder of Relationship-Wise.

Military Leaders Wrong-headed Victim Blaming

Unwanted sexual contact, sometimes merely an intentional physical brushing up against another soldier, is up 35% in the military over the past two years. It has always been a problem, as is more obvious sexual assault, and top brass have always known about it.

Case in point, the forty year plus tradition of the Naval Association Tailhook convention. The purpose of the annual convention turned "party/drunken brawl" is to learn new aviation techniques. But it becomes a morass of drunken aviators and naval officers, and the worst, in 1991, in the Las Vegas Hilton, saw scores of male naval officers convicted for the sexual assault of 26 women, 21 of whom were officers.

The Tailhook Scandal

Following that convention, Naval Admiral Frank Kelso (who was there) did his best to suggest zero tolerance for sexual assault in the military, and at the same time squelch the investigation.  George Bush accepted the Secretary of the Navy H. Lawrence Garrett III's resignation without regret for mishandling the affair. The story, The Mother of All Hooks: The Story of the US Navy's Tailhook Scandal is about 500 pages of testimony and tale, perfect documentary Oscar-award winning material.

Now we hear from Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Welsh at the Senate Armed Services Committee mistakenly associating consensual teenage sexual behavior with the rise in sexual assault in the military. Welsh failed to communicate that sexual assault is a failure to ask permission for the favor of sexual contact. Communication is everything, especially when we speak of sensitive topics like this.

Here's what he said. Parenthetic italics, our additions:

“It’s a big problem for our nation. It may be as big or bigger elsewhere. . . . Roughly 20 percent of the young women who come into the Department of Defense and the Air Force report that they were sexually assaulted in some way before they came into the military (consistent with the general population) . So they come in from a society where this occurs (he is talking about sexual assault). Some of it is the hook-up mentality of junior high, even, and high school students now. . . . (This is only correct in that there is pervasive acquaintance rape, and his use of "hook up" is a mis-use of the term that implies consensual sex.) The same demographic group moves into the military.

“We have got to change the culture once they arrive. The way they behave, the way they treat each other cannot be outside the bounds of what we consider inclusive and respectful.”

 He has it right, the military has to foster an inclusive and respectful culture. At the same time, that the object of his speech is that 20 percent of young women who bring to their adult lives in the military a history of sexual abuse, indicates he blames them in some way. They somehow encourage it. After all, they "hook up."

Language is everything. And when you are top brass, what you say is representative of the thinking of the entire military, the country. A blooper like this, and we wonder if the lessons of Tailhook were lost, need revisiting. 

Sexual assault, sexual harassment, make up a continuum of violence. None of it has to do with sexual history of the victim, or the permissive culture of our high schools, or the culture of a traditionally drunken convention. It is all about consent--the lack thereof. 

What we have now, what is happening internationally, finally, is a revolt against the tolerance of sexual assault. In India the rape of a 5-year old girl, a gang rape of a student on a bus, and another of a 23-year-old woman dragged from her home, jarred the country as women take to the streets in protest. This is a revolt against the cover-up of sexual assault, even in political arenas and countries that once overlooked it, subtly even condoned the sexploitation of women, children, and even men. 

So General Welsh, time to revise your statement, if you haven't yet. Women who want to enlist in the United States Armed Forces need to know that you know that they are not to blame when they are over-powered, when they are hurt. 

It is ironic that the media glorifies these same women in uniform when they return from their tours of duty. The hearts of women in a country at war, fighting, side by side with other soldiers.

You bet.

Linda Freedman, MSW, PhD, LCSW, LMFT

Intimidation and High School Kids

Adolescents are sometimes thought to be exaggerations of petulant children who may have deep thoughts but are driven, for the most part, by hormones--a dangerous combination.

In Columbus, Ohio, a jury is reviewing evidence to see if two teens broke laws by tweeting intimidating threats after the Steubenville football players, Ma'Lik Richmond and Trent Mays were charged with raping a 16 year old girl.

After Ma'Lik's conviction and two year sentence in juvenile prison, his cousin tweeted:  You ripped my family apart!

The other threatened the victim with bodily harm.

Charges of intimidation of a witness and aggravated menacing were dropped and the two 16-year-olds admitted to a single misdemeanor charge of telecommunications harassment and received six months' probation, said Sara Gasser, an attorney for one of the girls.

Worse, the investigators have to determine if coaches and teachers covered up the rape.

What are we to make of this?  Depends who you ask.

Some would say that teens are learning to value winning more than justice.
We could also say that persons of influence, coaches, teachers, parents, should be more involved with what is going on in the heads (and on the phones) of their kids.
Psychologically oriented types might say that intimidation is one way of making us feel more powerful, putting someone down to feel bigger.
We would also suggest that when there is violence in the family it will likely bleed to the world beyond, to the school, to the workplace. Not that we're casting aspersions here. But it happens. Respect for women, respect for men, respect for one's self is learned in the home, first and foremost.

That would be a good start.

Linda Freedman, MSW, PhD, LCSW, LMFT

Key Words

Glossary

© like everything else on this website, definitions are copyright 2011- Linda Freedman, PhD

Anonymity—the omniscience associated with Internet relationships; the opportunity to mask one’s identity or impersonate.  Anonymity emboldens predators who seek personal gain or sexual relationships via electronic communication. 

Behaviorally green®—a work or school environment free from relationship-violence.

Bullying—a type of relationship abuse characterized by exclusion, physical attacks, and/or  name-calling.  On-line, it is called Cyber Bullying.  Adults are victims of Cyber Stalking. 

Coercion—by virtue of authority, one person is able to convince, persuade, or blackmail another into behaving in ways that hurt or shame, an abuse of power.  Coercion is associated with holding rewards in abeyance for lack of compliance to morally disagreeable acts, firing, hiring, withholding wages or advancement, and negative evaluations, grades, or job reviews. 

Empathy— having the ability to feel the feelings of others, or at least recognizing the feelings of others intellectually.

Gaming, media, and social network addictions— addiction is implied when productivity or learning is impaired, and when other relationships outside the social network or game suffer.  Research that grades and work performance is impaired by the compulsion to play or to network indicates developmental delay associated with withdrawal from the “real world” and responsibility.

Hazing-- a form of bullying and harassment, often an initiation rite for a fraternity or a sports team. Being able to tolerate hazing signifies worthiness for acceptance into the club. 

Hostile environment—a work, school, or play atmosphere characterized by threats and disrespect, fear of retaliation for refusing to participate in sexual demands.  A hostile environment can be defined by upsetting sexual or racial/ethnic communication.  The Civil Rights Act of 1964 entitles workers and student to emotional safety at school and work, a respectful environment. (read more)  MAG,add the rest of the definitions any way you want, obviously.  I threw in Read More because that’s what I see everywhere.

Informed consent—sexual relationships, even some those that may seem consensual, are not always legal.   Informed consent , a legal term, implies that the persons who agree to relations are not impaired by substances, are not impaired mentally, and are of majority age.

Internet predators—thought to be individuals who troll (search) the Internet for psychologically vulnerable people, maybe children, but also trusting people who need friends.  The predator develops a relationship, usually through a social networking site, and grooms it to obtain sexual favors or financial gain, i.e., money or pornography.

Litigation — the threat of law suits and damages is always inherent when corporate, team, civil, or school social rules, rules that are not work related are scoffed, when individuals cross psychological, sexual, or physical boundaries.

Pedophilia—a mental disorder, a paraphilia, according to the Diagnostic Statistical Manual of Mental and Behavioral Disorders-IV-TR (DSM-IV-TR, 2000).  Pedophilia is defined as having a sexual preference for prepubescent children.  That preference is manifested in persistent and recurrent thoughts, fantasies, urges, sexual arousal, or behavior.

Pornography and sexual exploitation—Internet predators seek out and groom teenagers, but also children and adults to supply an ever-growing demand for media and photographs with sexual content.  Because some targets are not old enough to provide informed consent, teens and prepubescent children are vulnerable to sexual exploitation, and ultimately, even sex addictions.

Position of authority – anyone who has the power to influence decisions by virtue of age, position, or rank.  Being in a position of authority enables people to exert unfair influence, to exploit those who are in subdominant roles, breaching what should be trust.  

Protected classes — legal designated “classes” include biological sex, age, ethnicity, race, disability, religion, national origin, or sexual identification.   The spirit behind the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is that everyone should be treated the same at work and at school.  The protected classes also include other groups, i.e., veterans.  Amendments that vary from state to state.

Relationship system— we start with one system, ourselves (made of many biological systems) and add family, partners, friends, people and institutions in the community, work colleagues and administrators, and find that we are a part of several of networks, or systems of relationships.

Sensitivity- being aware that others may not have your sense of humor and might feel badly about what you say to them and refraining from it. We are sometimes wired this way, to be sensitive but sometimes we become this way because of the context of our families. This is about being sensitive to the sensitivities of others.

Sex addiction— an obsession with sexual gratification or sexual behavior.  Exposure to pornography at a young age seems to be associated with obsessive thoughts about sex that don’t disappear with growth and development.  Many think that sex addictions begin very young, probably due to experience with sexual abuse, or exposure to pornography.

Sexting—sending photographs or videos with sexual content over electronic media, i.e., cell phones and computers.  These are easily copied and disseminated, causing shame, embarrassment, and psychological distress for victims.  

Sexual harassment – (also see unwanted sexual communication and hostile environment)  On the scale of sexual assault, sexual harassment is often less physical, more often with words and pictures.  It is always emotionally upsetting and psychologically invasive if not physically aggressive.  The mere suggestion of desired sexual behavior or a body part might be sexual harassment, especially if it is repeated and disturbing.   Examples:
A sexual joke about someone’s sexual behavior, perhaps where that person slept the night before.  Patting someone, touching, even gently, and saying something about a body part, when the touch and the comment are unwanted.  Publicly saying things like:

I really put it to her! 

Even privately saying:  I want some of what you’ve got. 

Suggesting:  Go out with me, or you might just lose your job.

Social Intelligence  —knowing when behavior or words will stress someone or will make them happy.  It is also referred to as a social or emotional IQ, and having empathy, feeling the feelings of others.

Social skill—a having a behavioral repertoire that makes others comfortable in social situations.  Socially skilled individuals usually have the ability to feel the feelings of others, but don’t always.

Unwelcome sexual communication— a wide spectrum of undesired communication, i.e., sharing and sending unsolicited pornography, leering, stalking, coercion for sex, threatening job loss, unwanted touch, making offensive jokes. 

Verbal abuse – more than a spouse calling another spouse a bad name, or making a sarcastic comment.  It is more than calling an employee stupid or incompetent.  It is even more than calling a player a disgrace.  (link “player a disgrace” to Team Wise). 

 It is also verbal abuse to threaten, to intimidate, scare, or coerce.  Whenever words convey something negative, whenever they directly insult or imply someone is deficient in a mean way, the interaction might be considered verbally abusive, a form or relationship violence.  These are allbuzz words for harassment litigation.  

Linda Freedman, MSW, PhD, LCSW, LMFT

Sensitivity

It is assumed that corporations considered work-friendly have trained managers about sexual harassment, and that schools provide workshops for teachers.

Workshops tend to be about the law, which can be harsh, and employee handbooks, how to communicate the wisdom behind the laws to employees so that they don't cross them.

The active ingredient in the workshops that work is engaging participants, somehow making it so interesting, so accessible, that they want to talk. But who is willing to talk about harassing anyone?  Or having been harassed?  Work isn't an encounter group. It isn't where we need to go to get therapy.

So the better workshop is about every day situations, what we might call, every day miss-steps. Because like those statistics, every five minutes someone is being raped, every ten seconds someone is being beat, probably every day people somebody is putting a foot in a mouth.

Call it sensitivity training, call it empathy training. Whatever you call it, it is about watching what we say.  SO not easy.

Ethnic Slurs

It is astounding how many there are, and we considered sharing them here but all anyone has to do to find an exhaustive list is google it. Or look here

The only reason we bring it up is that people inadvertently use ethnic slurs and upset other people. They may seem funny, but seeming isn't believing. So sometimes it is worth it to go over the list, discuss words with friends, and make a point to tell others, especially kids-- hey, this is not cool.

Linda Freedman, MSW, PhD, LCSW, LMFT

James Eganl Holmes, aka the Joker

That a brilliant student would make a dramatic shift, amass weapons and perpetrate a massacre at a movie theater-- sounds much too much like the plot of an adventure film.  But we know it is the truth, the scientist seemingly turned mad.

Or is he a criminal?  The media certainly seems ready to execute him.  Yet we know that Student Services at the university he attended flagged him as a potential danger.  A psychiatrist treated him and he sent her a present, a package with drawings of a shooter and his victims. Perhaps the doctor asked him to draw out the things going on in his head.

He might have been hospitalized, had he not dropped out of school, fallen between the cracks.  It shouldn't have happened, and yet, probably others, not only his psychiatrist knew that he had violent thoughts.  Why didn't anyone stop him?

That's a very good question.  Clearly the answer is mandatory psycho-education about violence and mental illness.

Read this blogger's take on it for more.  James Egan Holmes


Linda Freedman, MSW, PhD, LCSW, LMFT

Another shooting at school

First day!  Not what we expect to hear, that a teenager brings a gun to school and a bottle of vodka and opens fire in the school cafeteria.

But it is happening, and it did happen in Perry Hall, Maryland.

Robert Wayne Gladden Jr. was being held without bail on charges of attempted first-degree murder and first-degree assault, Baltimore County police said. A preliminary hearing was scheduled for Sept. 7. The state's attorney's office did not know if he had a lawyer.Gladden's last status update on his Facebook page, posted the morning of the shooting, read: "First day of school, last day of my life. ... f--- the world."

What can we do about it?  The young man had warned his friends on Facebook, and yet, nobody called his parents.  Not one "friend" stopped him from his rampage.  His father tells us that he was bullied.

Anti-bullying workshops are popping up everywhere, but clearly are not universal.  Nor are psycho-educational efforts like those that Relationship-Wise, Inc. puts out, School Wise division.  We're hoping to see more of these, and less violence.

Linda Freedman

Jerry Sandusky and His Family

It has to be an oversight that Penn State missed a pedophile among the hundreds, no thousands of people working for the school.  On the other hand, he had a supervisor.  Everyone has one in a sprawling state school, someone is responsible for the actions of someone else in that tier below.

Penn fired beloved coach Joe Paterno, and others, too, for failing to stop Jerry Sandusky.  Mr. Paterno passed away, a nation grieved (certainly a state and a university), and the rest of us are left wondering how the winning head coach could not have known, and if he did, why didn't he send his friend to the locker room for good. (Perhaps a bad choice of words).

We would have preferred that someone sent Jerry Sandusky for help, but help becomes a criminal investigation when it comes to pedophilia. This is the terrible double-bind that loved ones face.  Blow the whistle and the head of the family, sometimes the sole support, is sending a perpetrator to trial.

So no, of course Mrs. Sandusky kept it quiet, refused to expose Jerry as a rapist of children, assuming she knew about her husband's unpleasant, disturbing sexual habits, and how could she not?  She didn't talk because she knew that he will likely either kill himself in prison or be killed.  And yet, it caught up with him, her denial, his denial, the denial of a university.

He should have been evaluated so many years ago, even if he did spend time in prison, and it is possible he would have avoided that, working for a prestigious school under prestigious coaches.  He could have been  treated, watched by authorities, denied access to working with children. He had a charity called The Second Mile.  He could have started a Second Life.

Now we'll just wait for the next episode, some new scandal or new information about Sandusky.  Hopefully a movie, maybe one about the Sandusky family.  That's the kind of exposure that exposes this problem, encourages people to report early, as soon as there's suspicion.

Do schools need a better understanding of this problem?  As the kids like to say, "Do ya' think?"


Linda Freedman, PhD, LCSW, LMFT

The Secret Service and the Prostitutes

Mark Sullivan, Director of the United States Secret Service, believes that what happened in Cartagen (Columbia) last April, twelve secret service agents caught with their pants down, is an isolated event.  He insists it is not a systematic, cultural issue. Dumbfounded is the word he uses about hearing the story for the first time.


For us, that he would be dumbfounded, is the hardest part to believe.

What's that mean, anyway, a systematic, cultural issue?

Systematic, in research, indicates that an event repeats, often, under predictable circumstances.  Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, noted the agents used their own names when signing in prostitutes as overnight guests in their hotel rooms. Senator Collins thought that had this been an isolated event, then the agents would have feared exposure, would never have used their own names registering at the hotel.

But they didn't seem to worry about a thing, visited several night clubs and strip bars, and brought home the known prostitutes, who registered under their own names, too.

That they feared nothing is an indication that they had done this so many times before, they learned there was nothing to fear.  They knew there would be no discipline.  There's that repetition thing.

The cultural issue would be a description of how a system responds to variants of behavioral norms.  No discipline, laxity, tolerance of behavior unbecoming to the protectors of the President of the United States, should be a variant of executive branch culture.  But since such behavior is tolerated, it is the cultural norm.

What is egregious about this lack of discipline, tolerance of sexual promiscuity and alcohol indulgence to the degree that it impairs decision-making, is that as sworn public servants, these men should know the circumstances that contribute to compromising the success of their mission in foreign lands.

This is why so many are upset with a culture tolerant of systematic promiscuous behavior.  It isn't because we're such prudes.

Collins noted that "it is basic 'counterintelligence 101' that Secret Service personnel and others holding sensitive positions of trust in the U.S. government should avoid any situation that could provide a foreign intelligence or security service or criminal gangs with the means of exerting coercion or blackmail. Yet two of the primary means of entrapment -- sexual lures and alcohol -- were both present here in abundance."

While preliminary findings are that no weapons or classified material was in the agents' rooms, those involved "could easily have been drugged or kidnapped, or had their liaisons with these foreign national used to blackmail them," she said. "They willingly made themselves potential targets not only for intelligence or security services, but also for groups like" drug cartels.

Step down, Mr. Sullivan.  The job market isn't that tight that the country can't replace you. As should the twelve agents implicated in the scandal.

And the new hires?  Something tells us they won't repeat the mistakes of their predecessors.

We'll be glad to discuss the science of systems and dysfunctional culture with members of the Executive Branch, and the Legislative and Judicial branches, as well.  The objective of our workshops (Safe Service division of Relationship-Wise, Inc.) is clarity of thinking, and the essence of representation-- even on road trips.  It is not as easy as people might think.  Just ask Mr. Sullivan.

Linda Freedman, PhD

Pedophilia and Sandusky

There will inevitably be accusations that Jerry Sandusky is a pedophile.  But being a pedophile isn't a crime.  Sexually offending against children-- molesting, fondling, any form of sexual touch, intercourse, child pornography, the range is vast-- is criminal, all over the world.  Sexually desiring children is not.

A sexual preference for children, pedophilia is a disorder, according to the Diagnostic Statistical Manual of Mental and Behavioral Disorders-IV-TR (DSM-IV-TR, 2000).  Pedophilia is defined as having a sexual preference for prepubescent children.  That preference is manifested in persistent and recurrent thoughts, fantasies, urges, sexual arousal, or behavior.

The DSM is a manual of the mental and behavioral disorders, not crimes.

Probably because we are so afraid of people being turned on by our children, and we're terrified of childhood sexual abuse, the association of desire and criminal behavior has become a foregone conclusion in the minds of the American people.  And because of this naive conclusion, it is hard to find those with sexual desires for children who never act upon them.  The actual epidemiology of pedophilia, the prevalence, is total guess work.  We can't find those afflicted by it who have never acted upon their desires.  But we know they are out there because they respond, anonymously, in empirical research investigations, surveys.  Not knowing who they are, it is hard to study them.*

We can find sex offenders, of course, people who have been arrested for having sexual contact with children. It is estimated that only 30-50% of sexual crimes against children are committed by pedophiles.  The rest of these sexual offenders have other issues, perhaps anger, sociopathy, or sexual disinhibition under the influence of alcohol and other substances.

Pedophilia is a sexual orientation, like heterosexuality or homosexuality.  The difference is having more or less mature sexual preferences.  Heterosexuality indicates a sexual preference for members of the opposite biological sex. Homosexuality indicates a sexual preference for members of the same biological sex. Neither is associated with predominant sexual desire for children, and neither is pathological or illegal.

But pedophilia, having persistent sexual desires, preferences for children, is considered a disorder. And like homosexuality and homosexuality, it is not a crime.

Because Mr. Sandusky can't say loudly enough how much he loves children, how much he adores them and loves being with them, even wishes he never had to leave childhood (see reference to his biography in the post below), having the context of sex abuse allegation, it is hard to see him as normal, not a pedophile. Whether or not that's true will come out in psychiatric examination, we hope. If the accusations against him are validated, he will be considered a child sex offender, if not a pedophile.Or both.

The point of differentiating, even with Jerry Sandusky, is that it isn't fair, lumping the two together, child sex offender and pedophile.  Having persistent desires for children, yet refraining from acting upon them is praise-worthy, extremely laudable.  We need to hear from people who don't act out their sexual desire for children, they need to be teaching others, telling it like it is, that sexual contact with children isn't right, and it doesn't have to happen.

It is when one has desires and can't refrain from acting upon them that societal controls, social sanctions, punitive measures, are needed.  And yes, public humiliation, inevitable.  Even, we think, appropriate.

Linda Freedman, PhD, LCSW, LMFT

My thanks to Michael C. Seto (Pedophilia and Sexual Offending Against Children, 2008) who worked for 15 years to sort through, analyze, and disseminate what we know about pedophilia and sexual offending against children today. 

Penn State and the Privilege of Being an Athlete

It's not at all a new story.  We've been talking about it for over over a decade, the privilege of being an athlete.  When an ordinary student on campus brawls anywhere-- on campus or off-- breaks a bar stool over a head, perhaps,  that student is suspended or disciplined, maybe expelled.  There might even be civil charges.

To meet the same disciplinary standards, an athlete on campus, a hero, has to kill someone. Think University of Virginia lacrosse star George Huguely,  who is accused of shaking his girlfriend Yeardley Love, bashing her head against the wall.  Yeardley, a young woman with so much goodness, so much potential, died in an early morning conflict in her apartment; it's been said to have been a quarrel about breaking up. 

Huguely had been disciplined previously by the school, and ordered to alcohol rehab, but none of it sunk in, and he kept playing, we're pretty sure. He's in jail now, awaiting trial for beating Yeardley, for leaving her to die.

That story, and many stories about interpersonal violence, is very much about alcohol abuse, a transgenerational problem.  George Huguely's father, George Wesley Huguely IV, is currently charged with a DUI.  Alcohol abuse is the enemy when it comes to relationship violence, it's worth noting.  It is invariably associated with accidental death in group statistics.

The latest is that Joe Paterno protected his ball players from academic disciplinary measures and suspension. In 2007, two dozen football players broke into an apartment and violently bashed heads with broken bottles.  Dr. Triponi, Vice President of Student Affairs, complained that the players weren't cooperating in the investigation. In a meeting with Paterno, University President Spanier, and others, she was told that it would ruin team cohesion if the players testified against each other.

No one missed a game.  Paterno's version of discipline for head bashing? The team takes responsibility for cleaning the football stadium after a game.

Any one of us would be tried, fined, jailed. Something. Accused of other campus rule infractions in the past, Mr. Paterno forced players to train to exhaustion, run.  It is a military model.  A hundred and fifty pushups for scowling, more for smarting off.

Ms. Triponey resigned, couldn't be a part of an institution that relegated privilege to student athletes.

Obviously the sex abuse scandal that put Penn in the spot light, the cover-up, the very thought of Jerry Sandusky raping young children in campus locker rooms, disgusts and appalls.  That investigation will go back to 1975, as it should. Assuming Sandusky is found guilty, the 1.7 billion dollar Penn State endowment, a haul to the credit of football supportive alumni, will feel the pinch, much as the Catholic church is feeling the pinch for sexual assaulting clergy.

But it is just a pinch.  The only good thing about the scandal is that the other issues, this one about privilege, are in the public consciousness.

It is a privilege to represent a university or a college in any capacity.  Despite the thinking, each and everyone of us is replaceable.  When the behavior of one, especially the behavior many, demeans the honor of an institution, it can't be tolerated, can't be swept under the rug. One thing about the Internet. There are no rugs big enough anymore.

We impeach presidents in this country for lesser crimes. Let's see if team cohesiveness, if team performance, actually does suffer when teammates, even coaches, are held accountable for breaking the law. It's not a proven hypothesis by any means.

Linda Freedman, PhD, LCSW, LMFT

Sexual Abuse of Olympic Athletes: Under 18

Gymnastics is a sexy sport.  But they all are.  Every sport is sexy.  Rigorous study of Canadian Olympic athletes reveals that children are easy to exploit.  They are handed over to charismatic coaches-- willingly-- by their parents to train for the gold.

Now, apparently, we have this here in the United States.   This game is as old as the sport, unfortunately, no matter which one.

Don Peters, a U.S. gymnastics coach, resigned Tuesday following allegations of sexual and physical abuse of minors dating as far back as the 1980's.  The statute of limitations has run out for Mr. Peters, but now, you can be sure, other stories, more crimes like his will surface.  Already two other Olympic gymnastics coaches have been dismissed from their positions, Doug Boger and Michael Zapp.  We shudder to think about it.

Team Wise, a division of Relationship-Wise, Inc., launched in 2009 with this in mind, that children are vulnerable, as are women in sports, and men, too.  Athletes are often perpetrators of sexual assault (studies on college campuses find their acquaintance rape statistics higher than any other group, except, perhaps fraternity men).  But young athletes are vulnerable to that assault.  Players grow up to be coaches, and coaches are in positions of authority, power.  They coerce, seduce, and they have time.

It is up to parents to communicate well with their children about dangers facing them in their chosen avocation and profession.  Losing is the least of a child's worries when he or she leaves home to become a hero, a competitor.  Athletes are attractive.

And it is surely up to the institution that hires, be it a corporation, a club, a school, a not-for-profit, a team, whoever is in that position, to be sure that excellence in athletics doesn't compromise ethics off the field, outside the gymnasium, in the locker room.  Young people who compete travel.  They live in hotels.

How it happens isn't a mystery.  That it still happens, systematically, all over the world and in America, in our enlightened era, 2011, when the rights of animals, even whales are protected, is the travesty.  It has to stop.

Linda Freedman, PhD

Imposter Scams Women Out of Money

Stephan Pittman (33) is charged with first degree fraud, for impersonating a football star, Vince Young.  He told people that he played for the Philadelphia Eagles.

Pittman is a registered sex offender.

He conned at least one Washington, D.C. woman into giving him$2500 dollars.  He told her the money goes to buying things like hoola hoops and bikes for D.C. kids.  Young's real agent spotted Pittman doing this at charity events and exposed him. 

Vince Young is thrilled about the arrest.  The men are the same height and weight. 

The lesson to be learned might be, even the stars can be victims.

But consumers, especially, need to beware of con artists.  Pittman's neighbors were shocked.  He apparently conned them, too.

Porchlight Counseling Services

Porchlight Counseling Services is one of the better kept secrets in Evanston, Illinois, a social service agency for college students who have suffered sexual assault.

The mission? Turn victims into survivors.

 

WGN-TV is airing the story at 9 p.m.

Sept. 7.

 

The agency is tucked in a little house in a bucolic suburb.  You would never know there is healing and wholeness going on inside.

Tonight WGN will interview Anne Bent,  founder and board president, an inspiration to all who know her.  Anne has been working for years for the successful fruition of this project.

The story also features Amy, a Porchlight client assaulted after being drugged (fairly standard) in college.  Her story is powerful.

Watch the video below for more on Porchlight, or visit their website.



For more about Porchlight Counseling Services, click here.

The Prosecution of Dominique Strauss-Kahn and Therapy

A grand jury indicted Dominique Strauss-Kahn last May over allegations that he had sexually assaulted a Sofital Hotel housekeeper.  Few people doubt that Nafissatou Diallo performed some kind of sexual act in the guest's hotel room that evening in New York.

A judge has finally dismissed the charges. Rape charges, you should know, rarely hold up in court.

Cyrus Vance Jr., the Manhattan district attorney, made the move to dismiss the case because he believed his client, Ms. Diallo could not be trusted as a witness.  She had lied about so many things that it was difficult to believe anything she said, hard to tell fact from fiction. She reported, for example, being gang-raped by soldiers in her native country, then, recanted. Never mind.  We would call one of those a whoppers.

Mr. Vance is saying that his client is devastated, has been crying all night, and that it is only because Mr. Strauss-Kahn is rich and powerful that the charges had to be dropped. If Strauss-Kahn drove a bus, Diallo would have a fair trial. 

We disagree, not with that history of deception, but nobody asked us.  And in this country, the rich and powerful do go to jail.  Sometimes. Illinois has incarcerated three ex-governors: Otto Kerner, Dan Walker, and George Ryan.  Governors swing some power, but not enough when they break the law to escape successful proscecution.

Strauss-Kahn is the former head of the International Monetary Fund and is known in France as a womanizer.  It is easy to see how he might be easily framed for rape.

The story about a sexual attack, Nafissatou Diallois accusing  the head of International Monetary Fund, is really about proof, not truth, according to Jeffrey Toobin, senior CNN legal analyst. 

Nafissatou Diallois's lawyer, Cyrus Vance, believes she was raped, but that her credibility has been compromised.  Too many mistakes under pressure, too many mis-truths about the chronology of events, and then, those whoppers.   Vance believes that in a jury trial, Benjamin Brafman, Strauss-Kahn's defense attorney, will tear his client apart. 

Legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin reminds us that the object of the defense is just that, to poke holes in the prosecution's case.  It is the task of the prosecutor to build that case.  Journalists, he suggests, get at the truth.  Lawyers are there to poke the holes, discredit witnesses.

In other words, it is up to Ms. Diallo's lawyer to present her story, to make her narrative sing, to make it believable.  It is what therapists accomplish every day, with every patient, encourage an honest narrative.  Patients tell a story, their life story, and it unfolds slowly, over days, sometimes weeks, in a context that is quiet, accepting, and free of judgement.  Telling the story is liberating, takes away the pain, at least some of it, anesthetizes.  Leave it here, with me, we say.  We take raw material, what hurts, and add oil.

Very few people ever lie in good therapy. 

Maybe before anyone interviews a victim of a felony, or a crime, certainly one that is high profile, surely every one of them that involves an alleged sexual assault, the precinct psychiatrist should do the questioning first.  Reduce the anxiety, eliminate the lies.  Sort out the truth before it goes public and discredits the victim.

Linda Freedman, PhD, LCSW, LMFT

College Rape Accusations and the Presumption of Male Guilt

About this time of year many educators are encouraging new students to please, please, go to student orientation on campus. Skip the bars for a couple of hours and learn something that will matter.  Attend a sexual assault workshop.  Know the definition of informed consent. Don't take it for granted that what you do on a date won't come back to haunt you.

And then there are people like Peter Berkowitz bemoaning that schools literally legislate what students should think and say. These rules, originally there to combat sex discrimination, are direct from the federal government. Schools that benefit from federal funding (i.e., almost all of them) must comply to the statutes and amendments of Title IX of the Civil Rights Act. Institutions receiving federal funding must: (1) educate both students and teachers about the law;
(2) report all incidences of known sexual assault on campus to the U.S. Department of Education; and (3) adjudicate complaints.

Mr. Berkowitz believes that the campus adjudication process unfairly favors the victim, unjustly leads to the expulsion of the perpetrator. Ruins his life.

Interesting to those of us who see the victims in therapy, when they should be in school. They are young men and women who have dropped out, who never even thought to tell over their experiences as rape victims, not to the schools, certainly, not even to parents or friends. They dropped out, dropped off the map. Just couldn't concentrate, you know.

But unfair, unjust things happen to young perpetrators of acquaintance rape, don't you know, because, according to Mr. Berkowitz,

On campus, where casual sex is celebrated and is frequently fueled by alcohol, the ambiguity that often attends sexual encounters is heightened and the risk of error in rape cases is increased.

Well yes, if they're not up to speed. Getting there is the point of the workshops Berkowitz feels are so intrusive, so likely to hamstring free thought, this illiberal education the kids are getting these days, the one about sexual violence. Oh, dear. Perhaps we shouldn't teach them to look both ways crossing the streets, either, or not to shoot people, to obey walk signs. All restrictions of freedoms.

Mr. Berkowitz believes that when schools try the accused, that guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, the standard of civil jurisprudence, is diluted, replaced by the preponderance of evidence standard.

That may be true. But my understanding is different (the picture above with all those book, represents some of my understanding).

Procedures vary from school to school. In many schools the jury is a board composed of peers, or students who are impartial, and the accused and the one accusing, have a say in its composition. Rarely is a young man who has committed acquaintance rape and been through the process expelled. Rather, he learns definitions, laws. He is changed for the better, more empathetic. He has had a little sorely needed psychotherapy, and found that it didn't hurt, and to preserve his future and his self-respect, is sure to restrain himself the next time.

Poor guy. Doesn't even realize he's suffered an illiberal education!

Well before school begins, to add insult to injury, all incoming students receive student handbooks in the mail, or are encouraged to read them online. Their parents are encouraged, even psychologically pressured, to read the handbook (talk about riling up our founding fathers), as well. And these very same parents are encouraged to reinforce the rules of the institution. Should students break certain rules, i.e., commit felonies, they might be asked to leave.

Sexual assault orientation is generally conducted by students, themselves young people familiar with the matter. They reinforce awareness, recognition and treatment, what to do when someone you know has confided a rape. The engaging programs educate about the other Title IX laws that protect against ethnic harassment, racial and gender discrimination. The protected classes keep growing, dependent upon jurisdiction.

When it comes to sex, however, it is all about informed consent. It isn't that one cannot have sex while under the influence of alcohol or drugs, which precludes informed consent. Most everyone's judgement is compromised under the influence. To be sure that sex is what both partners want, that both will be happy with the decision the morning after, the question of whether or not we'll have sex tonight is something that might be discussed before the real partying begins, before one loses one faculties. (Uh, oh, there goes that free will.)

Speaking of faculties, Mr. Berkowitz wants to know,

Where are the professors of literature who will patiently point out that, particularly when erotic desire is involved, intentions can be obscure, passions conflicting, the heart murky and the soul divided?

Where are the professors of science . . .the professors of political science . . . law, . . .

They're writing books, sir, like the ones above. And they have spent a good deal of time at work, on campus, and have already attended a workshop.

Or perhaps they know someone who has been raped. Maybe a sister, a niece, a daughter. Most of us know someone.

Linda Freedman, LCSW, LMFT, PhD