In recent years, the backlash against feminism has made significant ground — as evidenced by the resurgence of blatantly sexist advertising, government cuts to child care funding, and the propensity of morally conservative ideas fed to us in films and television. So it should come as no surprise that the arena of sexual assault is suffering a similar fate.
Second-wave feminism fought and won new laws prohibiting and punishing sexual assault. Just as important, if not more, were the gains made by feminists in making sexual assault a public, legal issue. Women's liberation marches used the slogan, "the personal is political", and feminists argued that women making claims of sexual assault should — first and foremost — be believed.
In the past month the NSW Parliament has been embroiled in a sexual assault "scandal". Claims emerged in October that a female office holder of the Young Democrats was sexually assaulted by a Labor Party backbencher during a party held at Parliament House the night before the Olympics opening ceremony. The woman reported the assault to police detectives, and said she wanted the matter on the record but did not want to pursue a complaint.
Most claims of sexual assault are not pursued through the police and the courts. This is because even when they are pursued, prosecutions are rarely successful, and because there is little evidence. The nature of sexual assault crimes are that they raise the feminist demand that victims' voices be both heard and believed.
Shortly after this sexual assault complaint was made public in the NSW media, ALP backbencher Joe Tripodi publicly admitted being the man accused of the assault.
On October 30 it was reported in the Sydney Morning Herald that Tripodi would name himself as the accused assailant and deny any wrong-doing. Included in this report was mention of a statutory declaration made by another Labor MP who attended the Parliament House party that night. In this declaration, it was suggested that the woman's "behaviour" on the evening (including drinking alcohol) might discredit her claims.
On November 1 Tripodi made a statement to parliament, saying there are "two sides to every story" and denying he had acted improperly.
On November 1, November 2 (in two separate articles), November 3, November 6, and November 11 coverage of the case in the Sydney Morning Herald referred to the statement criticising the woman's "behaviour" at the party.
Notably absent from any of the coverage of the issue thus far have been any comments from women in the Labor Party critical of these references to the woman's behaviour.
The NSW premier, Bob Carr, has refused to discuss the issue, saying it is a matter for a police investigation.
The SMH's coverage of Tripodi's denial, and of the woman's "behaviour" at the party, reflects the usual assumptions applied to cases of sexual harassment or assault against women. That is, she "asked for it". This woman is alleged to have behaved in such a way as to have provoked the assault.
It remains sad but true that, despite years of feminist activism and consciousness-raising around sexual assault, little has changed. The onus for prevention of sexual assault is still placed on the woman, not on male offenders. If only the woman behaves "properly" she won't be assaulted.
The victim is being blamed. And Labor Party women are silent.
The matter should be investigated by police. But more importantly, this case demonstrates how attitudes toward sexual assault still have a long way to go. Victims should not be blamed, they should be believed. Women should not fear making official complaints because the repercussions are too dreadful for their privacy and their self-esteem.
No one asks to be assaulted. No one asks to be harassed. The onus should be on the perpetrators to change their behaviour — not on the victims.
BY KATH GELBER