By Fe Bongolan
Taking a look at the full scope of, for lack of a better name, the “Strauss-Kahn scandal,” one can’t help but acknowledge what a strange legal, social, cultural and political minefield the entire situation is. The accused is a rich, powerful and afflicted man from Europe, while the victim is a poor African immigrant widow with a child. The American legal system through which Strauss-Kahn is being charged has a history of vilifying the rape victim. Then there are the conflicting values and attitudes of French and American societies towards what is regarded as consensual sex. Finally there is the atmosphere where men of power like Strauss-Kahn are forgiven their “indiscretions” because their worldly achievements far exceed their human faults.
Under those circumstances, men of power like Strauss-Kahn are perceived like Michael Jackson was here in America — as ‘sacred monsters’ — terrible, yet inviolate because of their importance on the world stage. On websites and editorials from various European news agencies and political blogs, the events leading up to Strauss-Kahn’s arrest are frequently described using the words “set-up” and “sting operation.”
Since the news broke, Europe’s leftists and Socialists (there is actually a Socialist party, of which Strauss-Kahn is part) have been up in arms. Strauss-Kahn was the first head of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) whose leadership had actually helped stabilize vulnerable member nations of the IMF during the global financial meltdown that started in September 2008, specifically countries in the eurozone: Greece, Portugal and Ireland. As a potential candidate for the Socialist Party of France, he looked like the serious contender to unseat current President Nikolas Sarkozy, a member of France’s Conservative Party and product of the Neocon movement.
For those of us who need to know about the IMF and why Strauss-Kahn was important, let’s break this down. There are two major financial institutions governing the world’s economy: the World Bank and the IMF.
Both formed in 1945, these two institutions were charged with the responsibility to stabilize, rebuild and develop nations decimated by World War II. Wikipedia’s editors write: “While both the IMF and World Bank loan to depressed and developing countries, their loans are intended to address different problems. The International Monetary Fund mainly lends to countries that have balance of payment problems (they can not pay their international debts), while the World Bank offers loans to fund particular development projects.”
The IMF’s principal responsibility has been to provide loans to help finance struggling nations, stabilize exchange rates and “assist the reconstruction of the world’s international payment system.” Yet, it has had a checkered past involving its Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPs), and was involved in the privatization of water in Bolivia, killing subsistence farming in rural areas in the developing world and making water accessible primarily to larger agribusinesses. As of 2010, under Strauss-Kahn, the IMF described itself as an organization of 187 countries, working “to foster global monetary cooperation, secure financial stability, facilitate international trade, promote high employment and sustainable economic growth, and reduce poverty.” The loss of Strauss-Kahn’s leadership, particularly at this fragile moment in global economic recovery, leaves many in Europe uncertain as to the future of the eurozone’s finances, and for that matter the state of finances in the world.
By the time Dominique Strauss-Kahn enters court for a bail hearing, we will have heard more speculation from both sides of the Atlantic about the incidents leading up to his arrest and arraignment in New York than maybe is fair — for both him and the victim. Strauss-Kahn’s legal team is headed by Benjamin Brafman, an attorney with the reputation of being very successful in getting high-profile clients such as Sean Combs, Jay-Z and, oddly enough, Michael Jackson out of trouble.
Mr. Strauss-Kahn joins a community of other flawed and powerful men who are successfully functional in vaunted halls of power, yet have private lives that are a personal hell for themselves and others, and who suffer in silence and secrecy because of it. Yet, regardless of how flawed the men, the arenas of power they exist in allow them a zone of ‘No Rules’. The roles they play require freedom of movement to make decisions necessary for millions of lives, billions of dollars and the state of the world and all that spins in it. This is neither right nor just, but is what it is.
Had Dominique Strauss-Kahn been a simple private citizen, would having to live under rules that govern behavior made a difference in his demeanor? Would it have forced him to seek help because his behavior was intolerable? If he was not a brilliant economist would society go easy on him?
With all these forces coming to bear, it’s no wonder the victim is terrified. It’s not just the legal circus that she will have to endure because of her accusation, but the world of power that is about to pound mercilessly at her front door. Ironically, it was Strauss-Kahn who said “At the end of the day, the poorest — as always — pay the most.”
Both she and Strauss-Kahn are symbols and victims of the institutions and societies and their lack of rules which protect one group at the expense of the other. Cynical as we can all be about Strauss-Kahn’s circumstances, and given our jadedness about financial and judicial institutions and what they do particularly to the poor, if it goes to trial, this case is very much about who and what we value and why. Are we ready to look at both defendant and plaintiff in the eye and be ready to judge?
Yeah, as far as frat boys.. or any other boy that exists in this world.. I’ve played the ‘boyfriend’ role to many young women, in clubs, parties, festivals, general outings.., these folk have been my friends, and I don’t let my friends get hurt. Even with long hair and a sleight physique, a deep voice can throw a perp off.. (..of course, I always have decades of pent up shit to let loose if need be.) 😉 (..luckily, people reckognize that, and leave me alone). I really don’t want to fight. It just plain sucks.
..but this shit is real.. There are a lot of screwballs out there waiting to take advantage of situations.. I can’t stop them all, but I can help boost the awareness level.
Jere
Thanks for clarifying, Jere. And I smile as well when I think about him. I do feel incredibly lucky to have him in my life.
..Damned pirate signals that sketch out!! I had a response, lost to the computer gods.
Basically, in a round about way it was about the experience that one has, opening them up to the experiences they will have, (it was worded a bit more off the cuff, wich for me is more exciting..).
In my perspective, you’ve travelled pretty deep, it’s only cosmically balanced that you should find the depth in your present circumstance.
(I’ve always smiled when you’ve spoken of your husband.. you have a great Love.),
Jere
“ANY GAL! Don’t go to a frat party, it’s bad news! (There’s the public service announcement).
Another PSA: Don’t EVER be the last female at a party. The last female is the one that ends up getting gang raped sometimes.
This almost happened to me. I was the last girl at a party (I was the driver for one of the guys who was gay but not “out”) and one of the other guys and I went into one of the bedrooms to fuck. Little did I know the other guys were deciding who would get “sloppy seconds” and they were going to line up and “take turns.” My gay friend told them he was my date and that I was driving him home so the rest weren’t getting any. Lucky for me, he was a big guy and they didn’t argue with him. When we got in the car, he told me what they had been planning and to his surprise, I said I would have been perfectly happy to do all of them. Even so, I was glad he told me so I would know in the future because I was not always in the mood to have that much sex at one time.
Another PSA: if you are at a bar or party, keep your drink with you at ALL times. Take it with you to the bathroom and set it on the back of the toilet when you go so no one can drug you insensible and rape you. After all, if you are going to have sex, might as well be able to choose who to have it with and then be able to enjoy the doing of it.
“Hey, Carrie, how would you feel about your immediate husband, had you not experienced the range of experiences with your prior? Would Newton’s third law translate differently?”
Jere,
There was not only my first husband, there was also the guy I lived with for almost 3 years….the alcoholic drug abuser. I cannot honestly say how I would have been different had I not been with these two guys before meeting my husband (not to mention the many one-night-stands in between). I also had a lot of history of family abuse (who hasn’t), was molested twice (once at 6 yrs old in my own home and once at 13 yrs old in a public bathroom), therapy (from several therapists over the years), and training while working at a guidance clinic and my own studies in psychology and transpersonal psychology.
I really cannot say how I would have been but what I do know is that this husband and I started out as neither of us wanting to be anything more than friends (well…he did want to get into my pants before I wanted him but he was wise enough to keep that to himself until much later). Because we were not thinking of one another as potential “date” material, we talked about everything; revealed things we would never have done had we been thinking of having an intimate relationship (much less a marriage) and as such, had no secrets (well almost no secrets; he had one which I found out after we were married with three kids).
What do you really want to know, Jere? Ask away and if I can, I will answer. Or if you prefer, we can take it to e-mail so as not to disrupt the comment flow here. carecare7atmsndotcom.
Yeah Carrie, I’ve stayed away from frats my whole life, due to psychotic tendencies, and the knowlege of ‘frat boys’. ..I’m not so sure on the banning them, but the illumination is welcomed.
ANY GAL! Don’t go to a frat party, it’s bad news! (There’s the public service announcement).
Dude, if I catch you in a back alley, you will know rapture.
Hey, Carrie, how would you feel about your immediate husband, had you not experienced the range of experiences with your prior? Would Newton’s third law translate differently?
..some thoughts to siphon off the top..
Jere
Here we go: Yale Bans “No-Means-Yes” Fraternity
http://msmagazine.com/blog/blog/2011/05/18/yale-bans-no-means-yes-fraternity-for-five-years/
Thanks for your Shock Doctrine take on this Eric. I always see boogey men in every corner at least for a while. And also, thank you for your great expounding of “sex” and “rape”. Especially that so much in a marriage truly qualifies as rape-or rape-lite, or modified and genetically engineered rape. BTW Yes and Please sincerely said and body given have backfired on more women, including myself, than really want to remember it. Sticky sticky sticky today. A septic emvironment, as yoiu astutely point out–but–we are charged with detoxifying ourselves and it, and I appreciate the help I receive from PWers and you. HUG PLEASE
See I don’t know if “make him work for it” is always the rule. I can only speak for myself here but for me, sometimes it is about needing to feel his desire and the powerful maleness in him that my feminine, submissive body responds to. I am so masculine in my own self (rational, logical, assertive) and in touch with it that there is a deeply rooted, female side of me that wants to feel and experience his superior strength and the power of his lust for me; that’s a huge turn on for me. It also lets me feel just how much he wants me and that is also a huge turn on.
This is especially because I have been treated badly by both men and women for saying “yes, please.” Surrendering to my own desire was not rewarded very often. To this day, I still fear my own sexual response because like men say so often, I fear rejection. It hurts so badly to offer something so deeply personal (I really get into it on a deep level) and have that rejected. It is especially hard on women to be rejected by a male; we have been raised to believe that men “always want it” to the point that they will do it to women they feel are unattractive just in order to “score.” So with that scenario pre-set up, a woman desires a man, she openly says so, and he rejects her and says she “wants it too much” because perhaps he has performance anxiety (but won’t say so) and she takes it as a direct slur against her personal sexuality. What a mess. So in order to make sure he wants it, she sends out signals and then says maybe so she is sure he really wants it before she succumbs. So in that way, yes, she does make him “work for it” but it isn’t for negative reasons but emotional self preservation ones.
Oh, one problem is that about half the time, no means maybe.
“The Rules” say, make him work for it.
Here’s your NoMeansNo
As for YesMeansYes, still holding out for that good conversation..
BTW I never used bin Laden’s appearance to say he was not a terrorist — only that he didn’t look like he was crazy. That doesn’t mean he wasn’t crazy, but that’s a mostly matter of what reference point you would use. If bin Laden is/was crazy, then so is the president (whoever he is) and so is the entire United States congress and so is every governor who signs a death warrant. Welcome to the catch-22.
Yes — it’s all sticky and we need to acknowledge the septic environment in which we live and in which all of these ideas are transacted. So much of what we think of as sex is actually rape. There are scads of exceptions to the supposed rules, such as what sometimes happens within marriage.
So many of the causes of rape are directly contained in “normal” relationships: that whole world of Nessus, of cycles, of betrayal, of control, of ancestral shadow material.
Generally, rape is something that happens to women. It is perpetrated by men, usually. The distinctions would be clearer if the conditions of what we consider “normal sex” did not so often run parallel to what we think of as rape. We all agree that rape is bad; that it is sex without consent. So, how many women want to open up and say to a man’s face, “Yes,” or “Please”?
We have all been trained, conditioned and bullied with No Means No.
It’s time for Yes to mean Yes.
a commenter on the PW FB page expressed surprise by the comment here asking, “does he look like a rapist.” and mystes, while i know where you’re coming from and i know eric used a similar technique in his assessment of bin laden, i for one do not feel qualified to look at DSK and determine if he has the bearing of a rapist. after all, how many of those catholic priests guilty of raping little boys were genial, fatherly men?
and heck, even if bin laden was a soulful guy & not a raving demon — which is an idea i can accept — he did still organize a violent attack or two, even if sept 11 was not one of them.
man, this stuff gets sticky.
just as for that FB commenter, for me one of the biggest questions is, “will we ever know the truth as a consequence of legal process?”
and what happens if we’re predisposed to disbelieve it even if ‘the truth’ does in fact emerge?
Eric:
There is the court and the court of public opinion, and the history of both can be spotty, especially given the classes and race of the accused and accuser and the nature of the crime.
Let the evidence provide the story. Hopefully it is so compelling that the verdict comes swiftly. There is reason people who side with the defendant don’t have faith that everything will turn out so well.
As to the IMF and what’s going on, I am happy to do a follow up investigation on what DSK worked on and where he was headed while chief of IMF. There’s plenty of background in the French, Irish and Greek press to look at now.
The reason we don’t make the assumption that DSK was framed is that MLK always gets shot and Dick Cheney almost never gets shot, much less killed. Who exactly would be able to set up someone so powerful? We would need the highest level, planned and premeditated setup, and for that we would need a motive. Wouldn’t it be easier to roll out all his old scandals? Were this a setup, then the woman who was allegedly attacked would be an asset of the organization she was being set up by; she could not be a random or hapless person.
It’s also not about looking them in the eye and being ready to judge; it’s a matter of what they say, of what the other evidence says — there are almost always cameras in the corridors of hotels, particularly of that value where security is paramount.
It’s now, in part, a matter of whose version of events has more credibility. As I understand it, his attorneys are claiming that this was consensual sex.
I would reckon that the two most important issues to come out of this are: what is the IMF? What is it really? What does it do? What incidents can we discover about what it does?
And what is the public perception and media spin about this issue, and what does it tell us about ourselves? That’s about a lot more than having an opinion.
Interpersonal satisfaction or dissatisfaction is innate in defining ourselves. Feels like Eris’s relationship with a consensual planet.
Make that a “q” and not a “g.” That’s quote. Geez.
More and more these days I’m reminded of Yoko’s guote (and the subsequent song) “Woman is the Nigger of the World.”
This dynamic has got to change.
Baycyn:
Appreciate your thoughts. I can subscribe to using the term “accuser” in this instance. As to naming the accused publicly, that has always been the function of the fourth estate whose “business” is news. OJ comes to mind. So does Dan White. Naming them publicly as suspects did not hurt their defense. It may have improved it.
Many things to consider in this situation.
But one that keeps nagging at me (and has done so for many years) is that our justice/legal system allows the publication of the name of the accused. I find this contrary to the “presumption of innocence” idea.
Once the name is out in the public sphere, judgment is passed by some. Once a person’s name is linked to a crime — even if it turns out that the person had nothing to do with it — it’s mighty difficult to break that connection completely. There likely will always be someone who hears the name and automatically thinks of the person as a criminal, even if s/he isn’t.
How would you feel if your name were published when you were arrested for something you didn’t do? For how long would you have to explain it, and how many people might you meet who know of the incident & believe you guilty (while you never know of their judgment)?
Now, there may be some good arguments on the side of releasing the name. I’d like to hear those to decide if they outweigh the disadvantages.
And in keeping with this idea, I prefer to refer to the woman in the DSK case as the accuser (maybe there’s a better word) rather than victim. “Victim” presupposes guilt. She may very well be a victim. I don’t know. The only information I have is what I’ve read and heard in the media.
Am interested in what you all think.
Oy, “had seen” his picture… 😮
Fe –
Brafman makes me want to puke, and I felt that way when I seen only his picture. When I heard he was in on Michael Jackson’s payroll, my opinion was only solidified.
That poor woman needs some anonymous, rich benefactors to help get her through this. It seems that people in this country are overwhelmingly on her side too, I thought I read that her lawyer is doing this pro bono so far. Far too many people are recalling Polanski, and don’t want a repeat.
What if this is another shock doctrine crisis that is getting our eyes off of what is REALLY important (Carre mentioned this) that we end up giving away or losing due to confusion, wrong understanding and negligence. Fe did mention how many conservatives in France will be benefited by this financially. That seems to be the last thing this world needs right now. There is a “Schiff Report” tht is really freaking people out (conservative people) right now. Got two emails about it today. Whippoing up more fear. Just throwing it out there.
Mysti:
We agree on the premise of the argument of innocent until proven guilty. But it’s the inequality of circumstances that lead me to believe this woman will not know what’s going to hit her.
I have to comment here. On one hand, I Love to see men of power drop (it’s a prejudice I am constantly aware of, and adjusting), and, I absolutely loathe what the IMF has become. So in all honesty, I snickered at the thought of this dude going to prison.
On the second, more steady, reserved hand, I see the possibility of really in depth scary dynamics. What if (and it pisses me off that we view ‘victims’ as fucking imbeciles) this gal knows what she is doing, in a very strategic, artful way? So she was poor. Does that make her dumb? He was rich and powerful, does that make him a predator?
I can’t bring it within myself to ‘judge’ this situation without detailed facts. Even then, sorting through facts is a tricky game..
The spin cycle was created to capture our minds, and decisions thereof. Reality is here to shake us up with what truly takes place in this world.
..this hits way (as has lately come through P.W.) on the dynamics of ‘adults’ being cast as children, and requiring a mediating (psychology) body to rework the impressioned dynamics of passive and aggressive.
This was my response to the jury commission years ago that got me out of any service, “My god does not allow me to pass judgement of condemnation upon any soul.” Seriously, her eyes spun like blank slot machines, and when she finally registered what I had said, “You can go.” was her response.
I say bring it all to the light. Justice is always suited best in honesty.
Jere
Fe, and PWveens,
While I see and respect your alarm and ire in the event that this woman *was* in fact raped, I see many more reasons for the gentleman to have been framed, and for his potential-framers to understand just how the Puritan mentality works here.
There is still a Constitutional presumption of innocence until *proven* guilty. If the young woman in question has been bribed or threatened into this attack, she is nonetheless an innocent in this situation.
While we made the presumption that Julian Assange was being framed, why wouldn’t we apply the same reasoning to DSK? Because he is moneyed, with power? Weird. He is, but on the political side of the aisle that has diminished room to operate on this poisoned planet.
I would wait and see. Then apply the skepticism that we reserve for our other heroes.
And look *at* the man, his face, demeanor, carriage and ask:: is this a rapist?
M
Brendan:
This is why DSK’s hiring Brafman makes me ill. He will do everything to get his client free by casting a shadow of a doubt on the woman, who in my mind, I believe, is innocently relying on American justice to give her a fair shake. She has no access to the kind of capital it will take to mount a defense like Brafman will for DSK.
I fear that this case will not be a slam dunk. I can only hope our justice system will do right by her.
Fe – powerful, thoughtful, and as always, spot on.
As a man, I feel almost nothing at all for DSK. For his victim, almost everything applies to me: anger at him, fear for her and her child, outrage that this guy has been allowed to keep doing ‘it.’ Therapy? Sure, even if he’s not convicted, it’s painfully obvious he needs it no matter what.
I feel differently about this though: upon first hearing the news of his quick arrest, I felt that the NYPD had overwhelming evidence against him right away and chose to apprehend him before any possible flight/extradition issues arose. They may not have known exactly who the perp was, they just knew his name and flight number, and acted accordingly. Are they handling this differently than they would if he were Jean Schmoe? Probably: every possible i is being dotted, every possible t is being crossed as they exactly need to be in order to seem impartial and fair, to us and the French.
One thing the French do not seem to be aware of is that if convicted, he will be at least a Level 2 or 3 sex offender (forever), and unable to ever set foot in the US again as a convicted felon. Tough.
I found this at European tribune, Jerome a Paris’ blog:
Code of Silence Protected IMF Chief
The gaping cultural divide between France’s Latin tolerance towards the “dalliances” of powerful male politicians and the rush to moral judgments over philandering public figures chiefly among Americans, but also Australians and British, with our more transparent adversarial political and legal systems, has never been so powerfully displayed.
(…)
Apart from a societal attitude that sometimes means a Don Juan politician boasting of his conquests (such as Jacques Chirac’s admission he was a “chaud lapin” or rabbit on heat) is more admired than disapproved of, there is one key explanation for the code of silence.
France is a nation where politicians and journalists are literally in bed with one another. This erotically charged conflict of interest could explain what journalist and novelist Tristane Banon, who plans to take legal action against Strauss-Kahn for attempted sexual assault, says is a hushing up of Strauss-Kahn’s violent past.
The number of politician-journalist couples in France are legion, beginning with the accused himself and his third wife, broadcast journalist Anne Sinclair, who used to interview her future hubby on her excellent evening political program.
(…)
Beyond the compromised couplings, a French reporter commented that French journalists have much reverence for politicians which is “part laziness, part respect for hierarchy we are a Mediterranean country and part old boys network”. She says the power for change lies with with the most senior staff and media owners who “are all guys and want to protect one another and feel that powerful men should be left alone”.
Of course the French are horrified when a powerful man rapes a poor woman. Contrary to the commentaries of US writers such as Philip Gourevitch in The New Yorker, the National Front’s Marine Le Pen is not the only female politician to remind commentators that the accuser’s dignity must also be taken into account amid calls for the presumption of innocence for the IMF boss.
Burning,
“openness about men’s need for care and treatment and healing of their emotions and sexuality, and have assistance for them easily accessible”
I love this goal and the other one as well. This is something I am feeling more and more driven toward doing.
His release was posted while I was typing out my first thoughts. So now I add; ok, ladies, get ready to start making some noise. We do not have to be against him to be for her. I so agree with you, Fe, about her safety with her child.
“Its the rules, or lack of evenly applying them across the social scale,”
Thank you FE for such a thorough presentation of what we are looking at in the S-K tempest. Thank you all bloggers for your perspectives. When I finished readng your article, Fe, all I could think of was “oh, shit.” Meaning what the HELL can be done with this and have any outcome that would uplift humanity and increase our social justice quotient.
Complex, and testing.
I loved your sentence that I quoted above but know that it is too idealistic at this point, probably, but it would be one of my goals, along with openess about men’s need for care and treatment and healing of their emotions and sexuality, and have assistance for them easily accessible , as well as encouraging women to stand together, as you suggest, and speak up when one of us is victimized but called the instigator consensual or an offender. Thanks every one for stretching my brain and heart a little more today. HUG.
BREAKING (from Reuters): Former IMF chief Strauss-Kahn gets bail in sex assault case
Dominique Strauss-Kahn was granted bail by a New York judge on Thursday, but the former IMF chief accused of trying to rape a hotel maid will spend one more night in jail before being released.
The judge set $1 million cash bail and required 24-hour home detention with electronic monitoring for the Frenchman, who resigned as head of the international lender but has vowed to fight the sex assault charges that led to his arrest.
Be:
To me, Pluto is the micron thin scalpel that cuts to the heart and bone of the issue. Its a rape and assault case that reverberates across the lines of class, race and culture. Its a mighty flaming fall from a very high place for Strauss-Kahn.
I pray for the safety of the young woman and her child.
I’m not sure whether Assange is innocent or guilty. My initial instinct on the DSK case is that for whatever reason, the act was coerced, not consensual. There are lots of differences in this situation that we have long taken for granted in other similar situations.
What came to my mind when this story broke was how it reminded me of the Julian Assange brou-haha last summer; two men too powerful to be controlled by the rules that apply to most of us, and brought “under control” by the lascivious nature of the general public, and each with a large number of supporters who fear they have much to lose if their man is brought down. Each man was imprisoned in a country not his own and held on charges that would not warrant the extreme legal measures used against him. I use to think that Mercury and Jupiter ruled the “news” media. Now I think it’s Pluto.
be
Let me add:
The minute Brafman pulls out the “consensual” defense, women everywhere should rise and raise their voice.
Oh and Amanda? I disagree…I think you ARE as evolved as others here and I base that on what you write.
Amanda:
You and I agree.
And the rules of the game are stacked in favor of Strauss Kahn, and perhaps have allowed him to be who and what he is. Should he be running the IMF? Should he be president of France? Not by a long shot. Should he be undergoing treatment? Absolutely.
Its the rules, or lack of evenly applying them across the social scale, that remains the larger issue, and to me in the scale of blame for this situation remains the largest indictment. As written in the article, “this is neither right nor just, but is what it is.” And that’s what needs to change.
Amanda,
Ah but what two cents they are! Excellent points but especially this one, “preferably in way that allows for introspection, awareness and evolution rather than sensationalism and desensitization.” Spot on, Amanda.
perhaps i am not as evolved as some here, but i have to say that while i recognize the alleged perp must live in a painful psychological landscape i cannot fathom, and while i too agree there are too many “sex scandals” in the media, i find myself mostly feeling empathy for the alleged victim, the hotel maid.
perhaps their pain should be equally valued, but i’m not sure i’m quite there yet. and as regard to “sex scandals” in general, i am more frustrated by the ones that involve, say, a pious public figure who espouses one value and demonstrates another — as in, the senator who condemns adulterers and yet is himself one. incidents of genuine violence by one against another — sexual and otherwise — i think *do* need to be brought to light and consciousness. just preferably in way that allows for introspection, awareness and evolution rather than sensationalism and desensitization.
just my two cents for now.
Carrie-Len:
Thanks. This situation really feels like a test, doesn’t it?
Oh and thanks, Fe. Wonderful writing with compassion and intellect all together.
I don’t know if I can judge because no one is just a monster or just a victim no matter how much we wish it so for ease of thinking. This is way bigger than just these two people and will have ripple effects for some time.
My suspicious, not-trusting-government-or-powerful-institutions mind asks what it benefits the conservatives in France to see this man brought down? Who else benefits in this loss?
I also ask myself, what we are missing in the world doings because of the focus on yet another sex scandal? Who benefits in having this splashed all over the media? Who loses?
What values will come into scrutiny by this trial? How will we see ourselves as the mirror is held up to us in this? For in both the victim and the alleged perp there are parts of all of us, interconnected. What price are we willing to pay to see a Big Man either fall or get out of these charges? What does either answer say about us as a society?
This issue is a canary in the coal mine; a symptom of greater issues about what we all value, how we think of ourselves and others, how we deal with and handle sex and power.
With the amount of emotions swirling around me today about other more personal issues, that’s all I can think of at the moment.
Fe,
Thank you. You are a gentle and compassionate teacher of wisdom. This piece and its author are a treasure of perception with value beyond money and power.