What I am going to touch on though are some ruminations that I've had as I've watched the nomination circus take place, as well as things I pondered before the circus even came to town. I can't even pretend to imagine that I am an expert on the topic, but here are some strategies that I try to incorporate into my approach to dealing with the topic of sexual harassment and assault, and some things I hope to do as my kids get older. As with everything I write about, take it or leave it for what it's worth.
1. Not Sexually Harassing or Assaulting anyone, regardless of their gender. This is obviously the most important, and should seem to be the easiest, but as I mentioned in my previous post, we're not always aware, especially us guys, of what constitutes harassment or assault. We can take Peter White's advice, but sometimes we get tunnel vision - especially if we're sporting beer goggles. Which is why number 2 is essentially just as important.
2. Calling out harassment and assault when you see it and intervening when necessary. Again, should seem obvious, as long as we know how to identify it when it is taking place. When talking about our dress code at work with my old employees, I used to suggest that if they weren't sure if something was appropriate to wear to work, it probably wasn't. I think the same can be true with harassment and assault - if it looks like it might be, it probably is. Once you identify that certain rhetoric or actions are unwelcome, calling it out and stepping in to stop it is certainly a whole other process.
After watching Burger King's surprisingly good PSA on bullying, I think my new approach to intervening with any type of altercation is to assume that what is taking place is actually staged for research purposes, with hidden cameras planted to watch my response, or lack thereof. Odds are it likely won't be, but it could be, and nobody really wants to be caught on camera being the complicit bystander. If anything, I figure my annoying curiosity of where the hidden cameras are placed could hopefully put a halt to any unwanted harassment or potential assault.
3. Talk to your kids. I'm definitely not looking forward to the sex talk with my kids. But it's an inevitable part of parenthood. I think you can start discussing adult topics in non-adult ways to introduce the idea at a young age, and hopefully make it easier to bring up later. While I was finishing up my previous piece on the topic, and my kids were yelling at me to get them a snack, I mentioned that I was writing something about being respectful to people (it was a subtle jab that they obviously didn't get). I then told my almost three year old son that he especially had to be respectful of girls. And I left it at that. Of course he didn't get it, but I figure the sooner I can start driving that point home, the sooner we can discuss the bigger issue. It may not be a fun topic to discuss with your kids, but it is incredibly important. As Peggy Orenstein elaborates on in her book, Girls and Sex, if parents aren't having those conversations with their kids, then they will turn to their peers and the media, not the best places you want teenagers learning about sexuality in my opinion.
4. Allow/Encourage your kids to have friends of the opposite gender. Studies have shown that kids who have opposite gender friends learn better problem solving and communication. Having opposite gender friends also helps develop more empathy and respect for the other gender. According to Tony Porter, co-founder of a Call to Men, boys are less likely to see women as sexual conquests when they have friends who are girls.
5. Be in charge of what they are exposed to. You are the parent, and you have the right to make decisions of what your kids are exposed to. If you think something advances stereotypical gender roles, and you don't feel comfortable with your kid being exposed to it, then don't expose them to it. Whether that be; Disney Movies, NFL Football Cheerleaders, Victoria Secret magazines*, whatever. It's obviously not feasible to keep them in a bubble, and you wouldn't want to do it anyway, but there is little incentive to actively exposing them to it. They will see it sooner or later anyway, but you don't have to force feed it to them. Just make sure you are ready to have the conversation about it when they ultimately do get exposed to it.
6. Let them play with, and how, they want to play, but encourage them to have diverse experiences. If my son wants to play with dolls, paint his nails, take a dance class, I will be more than happy to let him. Likewise, if either of my daughters want to operate power tools, go hunting or play football, I will let them. Well, okay, not the latter two, some of you may know my opinion on guns and football. But you get my point. I'm not going to chastise my kids for playing with, or playing in a way that is typically affiliated with the opposite gender. I would rather allow them to embrace what their passion is, than try to stifle that passion by sending the message that "boys/girls don't do this/that". While letting them embrace their interests and passions, I would also encourage them to develop understanding of other's passions.
The Hjalli nursery schools in Iceland have been getting some press recently for their radical ways of educating boys and girls by compensating for gender differences - naturally some negative and some positive. Opponents tend to argue that separating genders and forcing them to work on developing skills that are typically more dominant in the opposite gender are unnatural. But having two young kids that are learning to read, that process seems pretty unnatural as well, and I don't think we'd want to go back to world with excessive illiteracy. If we view empathy and respect as skills worth learning, then they need to be cultivated and honed through practice. We can let our kids play with what they want, but we should also show them that there are other things that they can play with, and maybe they might really like playing with those things if they tried. I think this is especially true when it comes to items that tend to fit our current gender stereotypes. Which segues nicely to the next point.
7. Let them wear what they want (for the most part). I've commented before that I'm usually just happy when my kids are dressed. Period. Preferably plus or minus one season. If what they are wearing matches, or makes them look "cute" by the Gap Baby standard, fine. But honestly, my main concern is mostly clothed kids. Our 3 y/o son used to wear pink crocs. They were his sisters' old shoes and he could put them on himself. That was what matter most to me, not that they were a color that was typically associated with girls clothing. As I've mentioned before, our kids are going to find out, sooner rather than later (they already are starting to) what constitutes "stylish" as defined by our society, and how what we wear projects our status, or lack thereof.
I'm not interested in telling my kids what goes and what looks cute (primarily because I have no fashion sense myself) and what are boys clothes and what are girls clothes. Especially not if they are already dressed, and any attempt to get them into something that is more "social acceptable" requires hostage-like negotiations or a Greco-Roman wrestling match. Of course there are times to deviate from this principle, and you have the authority to exercise parental veto over what they are wearing (or not wearing) based on appropriateness. I'm also not suggesting that you force your son to wear pink tutus, or your daughter for that matter if she doesn't want to. But the point being to avoid trying to label clothing and styles and colors in gendered ways and projecting definitions of beauty and social acceptability that are typically rather arbitrary.
8. Show affection to my kids, and especially my son. I've commented to people before that one benefit of having daughters first was that I think it has helped me become a more affectionate father, especially when it comes to interacting with my son. Having had four years to cuddle little baby and toddler girls, it didn't feel any different to cuddle our son, even though he was a boy. Even now that he's approaching his fourth birthday, I'm just as likely to give him a hug and a kiss on the check as I am our older two girls. He maybe even appreciates the affection more than his almost 8 going on 18 oldest sister does. I recently read that no amount of affection that your show your newborn can be considered too much. As they get older, this obviously wanes with their general attitude toward your outward displays of affection to them becoming less enthusiastic. But it's important to set that base, as I think that models healthy and beneficial affection.
Human beings are social animals, and we crave that affection, and may even need it for our survival. As the Boss suggests, "just a little of that human touch." If we don't show healthy affection to our kids, and especially our sons, at a young age, can we expect them to reciprocate that healthy affection to others as they get older. Does it seem disturbingly correlative that we have a tendency to see boys as "tougher" and in need of less affection, when they also commit violence, especially sexual violence, at much higher rates than girls? While any excessive awkward hugs and "I love yous" I give to my son might not prevent him from ever committing an act of sexual violence, I'm guessing it probably won't increase the risk.
So those are just a few of my strategies for how I've going to try and raise my kids and approach the topic of sexual harassment and violence. I'm certain they are not fail-safe ideas, and there are likely other strategies that can be used as well. As I mentioned in my piece on firearms, I hope my kids are never victims of gun violence, but if I had to choose, I'd rather have them be victims than perpetrators. I think the same can be true when it comes to sexual harassment and violence. And unfortunately, at some point, given that 25-30% of women report being victims of sexual assault or attempted assault and 80% of women report having been sexually harassed, my daughters will likely be affected by this first hand. But for only as much as I can do to try and ensure that might kids are never the victims, there is much more that I can do to try and ensure that they are never the perpetrators. And if we all took that approach as parents, then maybe we could be less worried about our kids becoming the victims.
Since Kavanaugh
During the confirmation hearings for Judge Brett Kavanaugh, Senator Lindsay Graham (a conservative who I have actually found myself admiring from time to time) stated that he thought the Supreme Court Nomination process would be drastically different after this most recent nominating process. He said history would look at things before Kavanaugh and after Kavanaugh given how divisive the process was. Most of my thoughts above were ideas that have been in my head before it was even know that President Trump would have another Supreme Court vacancy to fill. But since that process started, some additional things have come to mind as I've followed the events and discourse of various people. Things below might take on a little more of a political bent, so you are welcome to tune out if you'd like. But I do think they merit some airing, so if you want to read on, please do so by all means.During the nomination process, and following the allegations of sexual assault toward Judge Kavanaugh, the President often made the claim that Kavanaugh was considered, "guilty until proven innocent." Presumably this meant in the court of public opinion, which tends to be the case when high profile claims like these are made. I thought about this notion of "guilty until proven innocent" and decided this couldn't possibly be the case, as Kavanaugh was never charged with any crime or incarcerated without an opportunity to post any bond. His case may have been litigated in the public sphere, and in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee, but he was never handcuffed and forced to wear prison issued clothing (like Paul Manafort was) and appear before a judge and jury. This is what typically happens when people are charged of crimes, and seems to challenge our judicial standard that someone is actually "innocent until proven guilty."
The other claim often made by the President, other Republican lawmakers and conservative commentators is that Judge Kavanaugh's "life has been ruined and reputation tarnished" by these allegations, which they believe to false (or mostly false). But as the lawyer for one of Kavanaugh's accusers, Christine Blasey Ford, pointed out, her allegations were made to inform the nominating process, not stop it. And ultimately Judge Kavanaugh was appointed to the Supreme Court, so he got what he wanted. Yes, it maybe took more convincing and combativeness, but to say that his life is ruined or that his reputation is tarnished seems a little drastic. As far as I can tell, his family still loves him, and the President that appointed him and the Senators who confirmed him still seem to have confidence in his judicial ability.
Of course, Saturday Night Life addressed the topic of the Kavanaugh confirmation in its Saturday night episode. One thing that caught me from the satirical recreation of the Senate Republican's locker room victory party was Cecily Strong's portrayal of Maine Senator Susan Collins, and her comment that "It's important to believe women, until it's time to stop." Strong's portrayal of Collins underscored a sentiment I've developed since the Me Too movement started but without the comma. Every time I hear of an accusation of sexual assault or harassment, especially toward women, I find myself believe the accuser, whether those allegations turn out to be factual or not. We've become so accustom to hearing about sexual assault and harassment, and given the fact that about 90% of sexual assault claims end up being true, I've found I have little reason to doubt a woman who claims she was sexually harassed or assaulted.
Yes, there are certainly false allegations, and I'm not trying to make a judgement on who I think is telling the truth between Judge Kavanaugh and his accusers. What I am saying is that based on statistics and societal precedent, I have little reason to doubt his accusers. Thus I am going to believe the women until it's time to stop. Until our society alters its behavior and attitude toward sexual violence in way that doesn't make it seem like sexual assault and harassment is the norm, since it currently is for the vast majority of women. And maybe that is part of the reason Judge Kavanaugh has defended his innocence so vigorously, because despite none of us being there in those moments, history has shown us that it is very plausible that he did sexually assault his accusers. It would be great if we didn't have that conception, but until sexual assault and harassment becomes considerably less prevalent, a notion of "guilty until proven innocent", especially in the court of public opinion will likely prevail, and may not be such a bad thing.
One more comment that caught my attention in the past week was Donald Trump Jr.'s remark that in the current environment he is more worried about sons than he is his daughters. At first I found his statement to be rather preposterous, but then I realized that his sentiment is completely understandable given his life experience. I suppose he could be worried that his sons would be victims of sexual violence, as males can certainly be victims as well. Or maybe he is worried that his sons will someday commit an act of sexual harassment or violence, and he will have to reckon with that as a father. I'm guessing though that his worry is rooted in the notion that his sons might be falsely accused of sexual assault or violence (which we've already established happens in approximately 10% of cases).
I can certainly understand his worry. He's worried that his sons won't be able to grow up in the patriarchal society that he's lived in, where men can objectify, harass and assault women with little recourse. He's worried that his sons will grow up in a world where its not acceptable to speak openly about being able to sexually assault women just because you are famous (I can see why he would be particularly concerned about this, as he's probably certain his sons are going to be famous). And maybe it's okay for us to be worried about our sons at this point, seeing as we've been worried about our daughters since the beginning of time. The Hebrews, the Greeks, the Romans - sexual assault, especially toward women (but they certainly liked their young boys too), has been a part of world history basically since evolution or creation or whatever you want to identify as the start of mankind. Maybe it is finally time for us to worry about our sons, since we've always worried about our daughters. We've told our daughters, and other females who are not our daughters; to never leave your drink unattended, carry mace and a rape whistle, dress less provocatively, go to the bathroom in groups, be vigilant because any man could be a rapist. We've told our sons to be nice to others, and maybe girls in particular, and just hoped for the best. Not considering that those rapists are someone's sons, if not our own.
So while Donald Jr. is worrying about his sons, I'll worry about his daughters, and my daughters, and his fiancee and his ex-wife^; along with every other female I consider a friend or family member. I'll worry about them until we become a society that gives me reason to not have to worry about them. Of course I'll worry about my son too. Doing everything I can to ensure that he develops respect for all humans, and especially women, won't guarantee that he never become a perpetrator of sexual violence. But while rates of sexual violence have fallen by nearly 50% in the last 15 years, I think we can all agree that it is still too prevalent. Especially when we hear Me Too stories from our family and friends. We can worry all we want, but worrying about it won't fix it, and it certainly won't make it go away, which is another thing I think we can all agree would be a good thing.
*I've never quite understood the rationale of why Victoria Secret models seductively pose in attempt to sell women's undergarments to women. Oh wait, are they trying to create a standard of what constitutes a sexy woman, which I suppose would typically be defined by male standards, so women will purchase their product so they can also be sexy, in the eyes of men? I guess I do get it now, thanks for letting me think that through.
^I do genuinely believe that Donald Trump Jr. is worried for his daughters and the other women in his life, if his comment seemed to suggest otherwise.
