Shift the Focus

“You know she wanted it!”

This statement is not only a common sentiment used to rationalize the abuse Ines Sainz was forced to endure in the New York Jets locker room on Saturday, September 11, it is also a familiar justification attackers use in defending rape.

Shortly after Kobe Bryant was accused of sexual assault in Denver in the summer of 2003, the conversation turned to how crazy the victim was, how she was acting solely for fame and fortune and how it was all probably consensual, or in other words, that she wanted it. In the case of Sainz and the New York Jets, little in this discussion has changed.

It seems as if in today’s world that a woman is targeted when the victim of harassment or a crime perpetrated on or because of her body. And instead of focusing on those who, regardless of guilt or context, actually did the acting in a situation, we chose to find something in the sufferer that must have warranted an onslaught. Media members are just as much at fault, if not more so, of making the victim of all types of sexual misconduct the center point of the argument.

Let us take for example a different crime: murder. When someone is murdered, rarely do you hear comments from the media questioning the actions of the deceased in provoking the killer to commit the crime.

Even though media outlets use terms like “alleged perpetrator” and “defendant” instead of “crazed maniac who hacked up a defenseless mother,” the conversation is nevertheless focused on the murderer.

Books have been printed, movies have been made and songs written about the likes of Ted Bundy, Charles Manson, Jeffrey Dahmer, Karla Homolka, Ed Gein and the multitude of other serial killers immortalized by their crimes.

Often, these forms of media look through a psychological lens in an attempt to “get in the head” of the assailant. For instance, you have the case of the Sufjan Stevens song entitled "John Wayne Gacy Jr." (about the serial killer of the same name) where the details of the perpetrator’s life are used to explain their actions.

The song includes the lyrics: “His father was a drinker and his mother cried in bed; folding John Wayne's T-shirts when the swingset hit his head.” Although the song goes on to express shock at the deaths of Gacy Jr.’s victims, the clear focus of the song is Gacy himself, not the unnamed victims.

In fact, when journalists do talk about the victims, it is usually done with a respectful, oftentimes sorrowful, tone. The respect and admiration given to famous people who were murdered (such as John and Robert Kennedy, or even less prolific ones like Phil Hartman) is but a mirror of how society views the victims in cases of murder.

But switch the crime discussed to that of rape, sexual assault or sexual harassment, and the conversation changes immensely.

All of a sudden we are talking about whether jeans are acceptable attire for a woman in a locker room (Jeans – a long , completely covering type of pants that nearly everyone in the U.S. owns multiple pairs of) or whether Sainz’ top was too low-cut instead of talking about the rationale or systems in place that allow individuals to make sexist comments and make those around them fear.

We allow (and report on) Washington Redskins’ running back Clinton Portis to make comments assuming that all women want men, especially those in the locker room. And we do it without lambasting him for having a completely heterosexually sexist standpoint.

Sure, some called him insensitive and he gave the ever-meaningless NFL forced apology, but was never required to account for what he said.

In fact, according to an article by Gary Graves in USA Today, Portis was allowed to turn it all into a show. He “talked” to the media with black tape covering his mouth with written out statements like “Have a good day” and “God Bless You.”

He even had teammate Albert Haynesworth put more pieces of black tape over his mouth whenever a reporter asked him another question. If that is not someone being allowed to get away with insensitive statements, I don’t know what is.

We even tolerate Jets lineman Kris Jenkins’ statements objectifying women. According to an article written by Christine Brennan in USA Today, when a fellow reporter went to see if Sainz was OK after a stream of catcalls and hooting, Jenkins said: “This is our locker room.”

Call me super sensitive, but I felt that Jenkins was insinuating that since Sainz was in the Jets’ locker room, that she was now subject to them. This objectifies her in the sense that his words were being used to treat Sainz as a possession and not a person. Her being in their locker room means that she was also theirs.

It starts with Jenkins and ends with a bigger story. Society might allow football players to get away with comments in that setting, but no one is forcing media members (or even regular folks like you and me) to explore guilt in the victim.

The dichotomy is a funny one. If I kill you, it’s my fault. If I rape you, well, you probably looked too good.