Karen Weiss’s piece on “Male
Sexual Victimization” is by far the most positivistic piece we have analyzed so
far in this course. I question the cause and causation that has led the piece
to acknowledge men’s victimization in sexual assault to rely so heavily on a
positivistic model. Is there a demand that men’s plight in this system have
statistical backing to be held relevant? Or is the article parsed this way so
it can be made more relevant to a hegemonic patriarchal society?
I also question if these American
statistics hold true across the borders. Too often is American society
conflated with Canadian. In Canada we have a different form of masculinity
which is far more influenced by our frontier environment than the heavily
militarized masculinity that is dispensed in America.
Furthermore, the article fails to
address the long lasting psychological effects that these events have on male
victims. Where Campbell’s “Thinking To Feeling” creates a strong visceral
reaction in the readers to the victims tragedies Weiss’s piece glosses these
trauma’s in its positivistic reporting to mere sentences. I appreciate the
nuances Weiss offers us in understanding barriers created by constructs of
masculinity identifying and reporting sexual assault, such as pride and shame,
but the article fails to identify the importance of her study.
The study fails to acknowledge
the lasting traumatic effects of male victimization and how they differ from a
woman’s experience. In doing so it also fails to acknowledge if current post
trauma support systems are able to provide support to these victims.
Weiss’s article also has some serious
racial suggestions which are glossed over. The article suggests that roughly
82% of rape victims are white, regardless of gender. Is the research and
reporting only interested in this race? Or is there under-reporting in
different socio-racial-economic brackets? Or is this simply a problem of access
for study? In the Canadian context, explicitly because of the legacy of
residential schools and colonialism, sexual assault against first nation’s
people alone would clearly problematize these American statistics.
There is a certain irony that the
highly factual account of male victimization is itself alienating to the
experience and lasting effects of these victims.
I definitely agree with what you bring up in this post, and I think it’s important to highlight the problematic areas of Weiss’s piece. As you said, “I appreciate the nuances Weiss offers us in understanding barriers created by constructs of masculinity identifying and reporting sexual assault, such as pride and shame, but the article fails to identify the importance of her study” and I think you hit the nail right on the head. While Weiss is recognizing a problem, being the lack of acknowledgement of male victims of sexual assault and violence, it is done in a way that further glosses over any emotional trauma that could have resulted from these circumstances and communicates the accounts of sexual assault in a bland, cut and dry manner. I also find the addition of statistic graphs to further the overall un-empathetic feeling of this piece. While Campbell’s “Thinking To Feeling” recounts survivor’s experiences of sexual assault in a way that makes a strong emotional response from the reader nearly impossible to avoid, Weiss’s falls flat. Yes, it is important to acknowledge that many other groups experience victimization through sexual assault, but it is equally important to communicate these stories in a way that emphasizes why it’s important.
ReplyDelete