What I have to say does not apply only to sexual assault; the principles apply more widely than that. But it is the focus.
Filing a complaint about sexual assault is scary; as making noise about any way you have been offended against can also be. At best it is a nuisance; at worst, you get to go on trial, in a sense, as if the whole thing was your fault. Actually it can get worse than that. You can get hostile questions and then have to go out into a world that feels perfectly free to intimidate and threaten you because you opened your mouth instead of keeping it shut.
I wish it was easier, because way too often the onus is on the wrong party. But it’s not. Reality steps in, in the sense that we have to live in this world the way it is, not the way we want it to be. (We can work to change it, though; that is an option.)
You have no doubt already said “Stop that” or “That’s not okay” to the offender, as well as attempting to physically fight that person off. Maybe you bargained with them to get them to leave you alone. Now it is time to bring in backup in a sense, to decide whether to involve someone else, someone with a bit more authority.
Law enforcement is frequently involved. Unless you are dealing with an exceptionally astute officer, there is a very good chance they will just sit on the report unless the offender has a record of convictions, or unless you can present some physical or witness evidence,
At this point, please do not give up. Please be aware that you may well be the first person to complain about this particular offender. But guess what: If you don’t report an offense, then it legally never took place. So please consider reporting it anyway. If you can bring yourself to. Because people seldom offend only once. There will likely be another victim, and another…And sooner or later, someone with enforcement powers will have to pay attention, someone will have to realize that two or three or 20 people are unlikely to maliciously concoct the same story about the same person.
If you can find the courage, think seriously about making sure there is a paper trail. It took decades with Bill Cosby and Harvey Weinstein, but the attention those cases eventually garnered will likely make future reports more likely to be attended to. Hopefully.
I’m not crazy; I am joyous, and different
Since I don’t know you, or at least I don’t know everyone reading this page, maybe I should qualify that. Because yes, some people are truly crazy. But not most. And my office sees absolutely its fair share of patently not-crazy people, who just need a chance to spout off. It is not unusual for me to hear “If my favorite uncle was still alive…” or a cousin, or a grandparent, or a best friend. Often, people come into my office just wanting that chance to spout off. Or to tell their story. Frequently they are in no need whatever of advice. And they are definitely not crazy, by any definition.
This really needs emphasized from time to time, because there is still sometimes a stigma attached to seeing a counselor.
Some people use the barstool method of telling their story, which is not totally awful, so long as they don’t have so many drinks on that barstool that they forget everything that transpired. Bartenders do tend to be good listeners, though they are not necessarily trained to recognize when problems might require actual intervention. If their therapy does not involve some drinks, those bartenders may have difficulty meeting their monthly rent. And if it involves too many drinks, they need to cut someone off and hire a cab to get them home safely.
My own counseling, obviously, does not involve any drinks, and you pay a set fee. Which helps take care of ambiguity.
There is also the friend method of storytelling. Good friends listen, and they don’t judge you. For a huge number of issues, that is all you will ever need. Here’s the catch, though: Sometimes a problem is so huge, or there are so many of them, that you need to talk more than a good friend is interested in listening. It can damage a friendship when the demands get too extensive.
Counselors? They are your professional friends in the office, and they will ignore you outside the office (though if you speak to them first, they will be glad to respond.)
Most diagnoses in this field are a reflection of a normal response to an abnormal situation: Your best friend has been spreading rumors about you and/or a neighbor has threatened your family? Anxiety sounds like a pretty normal response to that. Your dearest friend was killed recently in an accident? Bereavement. You were setting out on what was supposed to be a nice vacation and wound up witnessing a murder? Posttraumatic Stress Disorder.
Do you see a pattern here? Diagnoses make the insurance companies happy. And they do create categories that help make it easier to formulate a plan. But none of these situations in any way implies a client is crazy. And neither are you. At least I highly doubt it.
Decisions: Yes or No
Way back in my much-younger, dating years, I received a rather strange lecture. I had accepted a date with a nice enough young man, who invited me to dinner at his house. My thought: “How nice, he will cook for me.” His? “I’m getting laid.” Mind you, he never in any way acted aggressively toward me. Since it was instantly clear that our agendas didn’t match, he made no attempt to physically push my boundaries.
He did, however, surprise me with what he said: “I don’t understand why you didn’t assume that if I asked you to dinner at my place, you wouldn’t accept the invitation unless you were interested in a sexual involvement.” He was flat-out confused that I had not jumped to that conclusion the minute the invitation was issued.
Now let’s view a similar (but nonsexual) situation, through a similar lens. Suppose you promised your best friend a ride to a football game, and they just assumed that included a hamburger and drinks after. You would hopefully not feel guilty saying No, even though this friend might say you were obligated. That thing you initially promised—that is all anyone had a right to assume.
Now suppose you or someone you know simply changes their mind at the last minute. Should they be expected to follow through with a bad idea? It is fine to change your mind, whether sex is involved or it is as simple as not wanting to spend so much time with this person. Please feel free to say No whenever the situation warrants. When it is sexual, however, there is a whole new dimension to deal with
Suddenly you have to consider all kinds of peripheral factors: Is this person dangerous? Are you risking injury when you change your mind? Or are you dealing with a true gentleman, or lady, who will respect your wishes? Changing your mind, even at the last possible minute, should not be dangerous. But this is the world many women live in, where they have to weigh potential consequences, even in situations that initially appeared innocuous.
Wouldn’t it be a wonderful world if no one was interested in a sexual relationship that wasn’t truly desired by both partners, if the immediate response to sensing hesitation was “It looks like you are having doubts. I don’t want this if you don’t, so please take some time to think it over first.” And then maybe propose a game of cards, or Jinga.
This whole issue is way too complex to cover in a short blog such as this one. But there are a few things I would hope people consider: 1) “No” is a complete sentence. If you care about someone as a human being, you will respect that. 2) It is wise to be mindful of your surroundings, to try to avoid situations that leave you feeling cornered. That does not make it your fault if someone takes unfair advantage, but it is certainly easier on anyone to not have to navigate dangerous situations. 3) How are we raising our children? Hopefully we teach them mutual respect as opposed to entitlement. Our children need to learn early on to honor the boundaries of others, and to expect their own boundaries to be honored as well.
The #MeToo movement started with some real horror stories, and some abuses are blatant. But it is important to realize that the spectrum is very nuanced. There is a lot to navigate, and no one should be criticized for being victimized. That is simply not fair.
The novel Beartown by Fredrik Backman was a most pleasant surprise for me. I picked it out because I had read a couple of his less recent novels, with lighter subject matter. Fredrick Backman does not stick to one formula in his writing; he is consistent in developing his characters for a deeper understanding of his story line.
Beartown features a small lakeside town that has been losing businesses and population, and feels its best hope for the future is its excellent hockey team. Which of course gives rise to a culture where talented hockey players, especially the best players among them, are neither held to the rules of the rest of society, nor able to function so well there if they do not succeed in making a career of this sport.
As we are led through the psyches and backstories of the various characters, we gain an understanding from several viewpoints, of the type of culture that can turn talented athletes into dangerous narcissists, a culture that will support that person and destroy victims mercilessly. Facts cease to have any importance in the face of expediency. While the bulk of the town turns viciously on the victim in this saga— support does have a way of coming from some very unexpected sources. Not because anyone is acting out of character, but because individual people are far more complex than we often give them credit for.
Aside from the fact that he resides in Stockholm, Sweden with his family, I know nothing of the professional background of Fredrick Backman. What is evident throughout the pages of this novel, however, is his clear understanding of the psychology involved as well as the repercussions that extend throughout the town.
Despite the far-ranging and permanent impacts, healing also emerges from more than one unexpected source. Again, because people are complex creatures. The reservoir of our character will be both exposed and intensified in the wake of tragedy. We all decide for ourselves whether this will be a good thing.
Meantime, I highly recommend this book—or any book by Fredrick Backman.
I once knew someone who thought any type of enabling was such an evil, that he would openly criticize people for using walking aids: Canes, crutches, walkers…True, these can be regarded as enabling, but only because they enable people to get around without injury. You know, without breaking every bone in their face because they left the cane behind even though they knew their balance was poor. So on that note, I will tackle the topic, to the degree that I can in 500 words or less.
My own first introduction to the term enabling regarded to covering for the alcoholic behavior of a loved one—spouses calling in sick for their hungover spouses, parents covering for their children’s drinking and/or drug use. In this context, the term involved taking on responsibilities that truly belong to someone else. Here’s the thing, though. I am a firm believer that enabling is not always a bad thing. As in walking aids—I know. But there are other situations.
Suppose your grown child has started down a treacherous life path, and suppose this grown child has children who will wind up in foster care if you don’t step up to the plate. Are you going to suggest that you are enabling your child’s unfortunate choices? Of course you are. But, far more importantly, you are providing a secure home for your grandchildren. That, to me, is a far higher value.
Not all grandparents are in a position to raise yet another generation of children, and I want to make very clear that it is a choice, not an obligation. But there are far more important factors in that decision than whether you might be encouraging naughty behavior on the part of that child’s irresponsible parent.
There are plenty of times values come into conflict: Your child was injured as a result of taking a stupid risk. Will you refuse to get them to the medical care they need? From that viewpoint, medical people enable on a daily basis; to refuse to do so would be a violation of their hippocratic oath. Suppose a child has simply put off till the last minute studying for a critical exam? Will you refuse to tutor them, or is it more important that you provide them the assistance they need, to ensure their best education? People devote entire careers to providing food, clothing and other services to those who are in need—and some of that need stems from bad choices. Surely goodness no one reading this will suggest that we have an obligation to turn our backs on needy people. A higher value would be to meet them where they are.
So, let us just give some thought to what is most important. If enabling is the only problem, maybe it is a good time to stop. But whenever anything else is in play, let’s consider the whole picture. Let’s try to not get totally hung up on that one aspect.
Me with my husband, who is also my best friend
I have found that people with a good support system tend to resolve their problems more quickly. Which of course makes perfect sense, because—well, it is important to be able to “run things up the flagpole” with someone you trust, to be free to spout off a certain amount and to obtain their sage opinions, all with the security of knowing that having a problem will not cost you this person as an ally. But what to do if these wonderful people do not inhabit your world?
A lot of people rely on family and extended family members for support, and this is about as good or bad as your own individual family system. Others create their own family-type systems, their own communities. And it is not some instantaneous process; it requires time and attention.
The word “frenemy” comes to mind. The biggest drawback to a “frenemy,” as I see it, is the lack of dependability. But there are times that these very same people can be an asset: Maybe one of these people is a lot of fun to go hiking with, or you like the same music, or you like doing yoga together. But you have little to nothing in common when it comes time to share your feelings. So long as you are aware of the limitations, these people can fill a role in your life as well as you filling a role in theirs.
Then there are those you would treasure as your closest friends. You don’t know who they are when you first meet them; this builds over time. What you do need to know is, what qualities are you looking for? What would be a deal breaker? As you build trust with this person, gradually at first, are you being respected? Does this person treat you and others with courtesy and kindness? Are they thoughtful? Dependable?
Here’s the rub: If you are feeling alone in the world, you will need to stand on your own for just a little longer, long enough to nourish each friendship. And you will need to do your share too. Is this someone you would want to call on you when they are in the hospital, when they have argued with their siblings, when they are going through a breakup?
Friends are so precious. They have your back, and you have theirs. And it will break your heart when they move away or worse—when they die. If you have both chosen well and been fortunate, you will not regret having let these people into your world. Your world will be a richer place for their having stopped by, and you will feel the better person for having nurtured the treasure of their friendship.
Reality is an interesting thing. Some of it is great, some not so much, and someof it is downright awful. The awful parts are what lead to denial.
It’s true, we need to live in this world the way it is instead of the way we want it to be. And I am a big believer in facing problems head-on. But denial does have its place.
I know, I know, lots of people are constantly saying denial is awful. And sometimes it is. Sometimes people stay in dangerous situations, to the point where their denial of that reality winds up getting them killed. They stay in loveless relationships, whittling away the time they could have spent seeking joy, instead making excuses to avoid facing change or facing reality. They ignore overwhelming debt till they wind up with no resources whatever.
But there are times when denial is not so bad. When you first get a piece of awful news: a close friend has died, you have just been diagnosed with a serious illness, you are being sued…of course you need to deal with those realities. But you are likely to deny them first, and that is your mind’s way of protecting you from the initial horror.
Any major tragic news will have repercussions; there will be numerous aspects to confront. If your friend has died, there is the funeral service to deal with, as well as offering sympathy to others in his or her circle. Should you send flowers or a donation and if so, where? Can you face removing your friend’s phone number from your contacts? (I often take years to do that last bit. It feels so cold to just hit “delete.”) Who will you talk to when it’s your friend you really wanted? How many days will you wake up having to remind yourself that person is no longer a part of this world? How will you find comfort in the midst of the sorrow?
Initial denial, though it may be for as little as a few seconds, can buy you the time to start considering and dealing with the various aspects of your tragedy. Then you can take a deep breath, seek out your best support, and start facing whatever awful blow you have been dealt.
For the love of a dog
Even in my early years, I used to love reading the newspaper’s advice columns, not so much for the answers as for the questions. Every time a teenager was featured complaining about life, my mother would say “That child needs a pet.” She was a big proponent of the idea that if children could get outside of themselves by caring for an animal (or a number of them), they would be more compassionate people, that pet ownership was therapeutic. I of course tended to not listen to my mother, but I did take advantage of her tendency to allow various animals to reside in and around our home. I am told a cat even crawled into my bed one night to deliver kittens—though I have no memory of the event.
One of my very favorite stories involves a family friend who did research at The Ohio State University, involving dogs who he insisted be treated well. His boss wanted him to have the dogs de-barked and our friend adamantly refused. The office was located directly above a residential unit for disturbed children. One day, while the dog was barking above the unit, a child who had not spoken for six months said “Can I play with the doggie?” I love that story— this child hadn’t even seen the dog!
Animal lovers are getting more of these critters placed than ever before, despite the facts that living space is becoming more limited for many. And professionals are realizing their therapeutic value. Therapy dogs are not just German Shepherds for blind people any more; many are used to help with panic attacks, or to alert owners to impending seizures, to let diabetics know when their blood sugar has taken a dangerous dive…the benefits are extensive, as are the types of dogs utilized.
Then there is just plain ordinary pet ownership. You love your pet; your pet “gets” you. We can all benefit from that comfort.
(About the picture I selected: That is my young friend Gerard, who has recently started training dogs and appears to have quite a gift for it. Don’t you just love the look in that dog’s eyes? I know I do.)
“If you think education is expensive, try ignorance.” Having taken what might be referred to as “the scenic route” to finish college, I kept a sign with this motto in my hallway. Fortunately, I had the advantage of a supportive environment. And I was never subjected to events that can ruin the educational experience and make it nearly impossible to graduate, in the way that sexual assault frequently does. I was always cognizant that good luck had followed me.
When I first started college in the late 1960s, I was aware that some of my classmates had been sexually assaulted. I don’t know how I knew; it was just a sense I had. I also had a strong sense that there was no point in reporting this to school authorities because the female would be blamed, for things like being out past the authorized hours.
Yes, we actually had curfews back then, when we were expected to be back in our dorms. And no, the males did not have those same restrictions. Mercifully, this practice died out shortly afterward. Apparently the theory was that if the women were dorm-bound by a certain time, no one could get hurt. In the realm of rape prevention, that is what took the place of Title IX, which was enacted later, in 1972.
Thanks to people speaking out in numerous ways, attention has been drawn to the high number of campus rapes that, once reported, have gone un-investigated, as well as high-profile cases like that of Brock Turner receiving a minuscule sentence despite DNA evidence because the judge didn’t want to interfere with Turner’s precious career plans. Never mind the extreme damage done to the victim.
This is one thing Title IX enforcement is supposed to prevent: A culture in which convicted rapists are treated like “good old boys” with their rights being protected more than those of their victims. So I am really curious, or more like furious, that Betsey DeVos has taken it upon herself to discount the long-ignored victims in favor of those who have been accused. While a proper investigation is always in order, we need to remember that for pretty much as long as our history goes back, the rights of sexual assault victims have been so thoroughly trampled on, that the majority never report the crime. (As I sit here trying to recall the people in my personal life—not clients—who have told me they have been raped, I cannot think of a single one who pressed charges.)
I would love to embrace an era in which everyone understands and honors the concept of consent. Since that is unlikely to actually occur, can we at least have a culture where this crime is investigated and prosecuted like any other?
“You need to learn to trust.” “I have difficulty trusting.” “Why should I trust you?” You have likely heard, or said, every one of these things at some time or another.
Trust is an important element in all types of relationships, business as well as personal, and to some extent it does need to be earned. It is seldom so simple as trusting or not trusting.
Suppose I have a plumbing problem in my house, and I am new in town. I’ll look for a licensed plumber, and I may even check a few references to ensure they don’t have a string of horrid reviews. But to a certain extent I am basing the professional relationship on trust. These people do have a license they can produce, though likely few of us actually ask to see it. We assume they know what they are doing, we pay their fee, and we work on the assumption that if any problems arise, they can be called back to remedy them.
It gets more complicated in interpersonal relationships. Many people justifiably feel burned when they have trusted someone with their darkest secrets and then been betrayed. Often these same people are afraid to trust anyone for a while. Over time, they may learn to open up a bit at a time, learning through early disclosures who they will feel comfortable with if they decide to take that trusting relationship to another level.
There are several types and levels of trust: some people may be trusted with money but not secrets; others may be trusted to always tell you the truth but not to have your best interests at heart. It is not a simple matter of trusting or not, but more a matter of deciding when and whether to take it to a higher level.
As a therapist, it is important for me to be aware that clients may not always feel comfortable opening up at first; some trust right away while others take longer. Even in a position where we are required to maintain professional ethics including confidentiality, we still need to be mindful of the client’s need for comfort, and to respect their own timetable regarding trust.