Moxie Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 Would this situation have been different had the witness to the rape been a woman? Would a woman be able to walk away from something like that and only tell her boss or would the natural...instinct, I guess...women have to protect offspring kicked into high gear? I like to think a woman would not have walked away from that child but maybe I'm naive (no, I know I'm naive because I really wouldn't have thought a man could walk away from it either). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cricket Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 Probably depends on the person witnessing it. I know that if my dh had walked into that locker room, that man would either be dead or permanently disabled. I keep thinking of a different What if? What if the crime being committed in the locker room was the rape of a woman? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audrey Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 Probably depends on the person witnessing it. I know that if my dh had walked into that locker room, that man would either be dead or permanently disabled. I keep thinking of a different What if? What if the crime being committed in the locker room was the rape of a woman? I think that's apples and oranges. Walking in on a grown woman and a grown man having sex is embarrasing. Unless there were truly obvious signs of distress, it would be hard to tell at a quick glance if it were consensual or not. Most people would just be embarrased or maybe disgusted, but not necessarily outraged at having seen it and would quickly walk away. This was a child, which is a completely different story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macpuffins Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 Interesting article in Time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigMamaBird Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 I've been wondering this all day. Would a woman have reacted differently? I don't want to paint all men with the same brush, I'm positive there are honorable, men of character who would have stood that monster down and rescued those boys. But I think there's something "Big Mama Bear" in (again, not to paint all women with the same brush) most women that would have torn that beast apart, or at least screamed bloody murder till help came. I also imagine that a woman would sympathise with a victim of a sex crime more, simply because they're more likely to be a victim of one themselves. But then part of me wonders, how much of the lack of reaction was due to a culture of intimidation build into a program like that? Would a woman who had attained a position of power in any structure like that view her job preservation over the right thing? I'm sure there are women who turn a blind eye to criminal activity in their workplaces all the time just to keep their job. But such a crime, I just can't fathom why someone wouldn't immediately intervene! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scarlett Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 I can only know for sure what *I* would have done. I would have physically attacked that rapist with every fiber of my being. I don't think this has to do with the gender of the person who walked in on a child being raped. I think it has to do with moral character. I would hate to be McQ and have to wake up and look at myself every day in the mirror. (and there is no snark there....I seriously do not think I could live with myself) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcnlvr Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 (edited) Article talking about just that (3 pages): http://health.yahoo.net/experts/menshealth/why-joe-paterno-did-nothing?page=1 I know what I would have done. I would have intervened. Edited November 13, 2011 by bcnlvr Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcconnellboys Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 This article specifically talks about the differences in men's and women's reactions to such things: http://health.yahoo.net/experts/menshealth/why-joe-paterno-did-nothing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paige Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 I bet they would have acted differently if it had been a 10yr old girl as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mommaduck Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 Probably depends on the person witnessing it. I know that if my dh had walked into that locker room, that man would either be dead or permanently disabled. I keep thinking of a different What if? What if the crime being committed in the locker room was the rape of a woman? Yep, I know that would be the case if my husband or many of our male friends had walked in on it...there would be definite jail time AND they would consider it worth it (several of our male friends and one male relative were molested by a church deacon/USAF officer when we were kids...he served his jail time, got out, and still got his full pension! :glare: ). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veritaserum Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 I would have called the cops for sure. I would have tried to stop it, too, but I'm not sure how much of a fight I could put up against a big guy like Sandusky. If I could lure him off the kid, though, maybe the kid could run to safety.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mimm Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 I once read a news story about a woman who sexually abused her own children and took pictures of it and sent them to a man she met online. I personally know people whose own mothers ignored the continual sexual abuse their daughters were suffering at the hands of their boyfriends. Yes, I think women are capable of just about any atrocities a man is capable of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claire in NM Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 did not require any one aware of the Penn State child abuse to report it, from the coaches to the school's police department to the school's president. (This was reported on one of the national news broadcasts.) Claire in NM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurie4b Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 (edited) I can only know for sure what *I* would have done. I would have physically attacked that rapist with every fiber of my being. I don't think this has to do with the gender of the person who walked in on a child being raped. I think it has to do with moral character. I would hate to be McQ and have to wake up and look at myself every day in the mirror. (and there is no snark there....I seriously do not think I could live with myself) It's not necessarily moral character and people are not always accurate at predicting what they will do. Many people "freeze" in situations like this. They go into a kind of mental/emotional shock and they actually don't act in the way they would have predicted and often later experience intense shame over this--or lose their lives because they froze. It can happen in an accident, natural disasters, etc. It's very much like the proverbial "deer in the headlights." People freeze. I don't think moral character is as much at issue as personality (certain types of personalities will act when others are frozen) and most importantly, *past experience* . For us who are only reading about what happened, it's easy to imagine what we think we would have done because all the people are strangers to us. It is much more complicated when someone you know, look up to, who is in a *trusted* position of authority is the one committing the heinous crime. Many people cannot immediately mentally process what they are seeing because it doesn't fit with all their previous past experience with the person and it contributes heavily to the "shock." The brain just shuts down to cushion the blow--or maybe it's more like a computer freezes when too many windows are open--too much data to process. (It's very similar to the shock we experience when we hear someone has died . "No!" is often the first thing we say. And you'll hear people say over and over, "I can't believe it." or "I just saw him yesterday." They may not take any actions consistent with the new news for quite a while despite the fact that nearly all adults have past experience with people we know dying. Walking in on sexual abuse is not something we all experience. We have no past experience to help us process it more quickly. (Those who were sexually abused could beeither more inclined to act, due to their past experience, or to freeze if it triggers retraumatization) I know mothers who initially "froze" but then acted decisively once they had talked together and processed what they had witnessed. The point is, that initially, they could not process (believe) what they were seeing and thus couldn't act on it as they would have thought that they would have. It's much more disconcerting to think that we ourselves might also freeze rather than act heroically, but there is a good chance that could happen to any of us. So I am actually willing to say that there is a possibility that McQueary's *initial* behavior was a result of freezing. It's what happened later (or didn't happen later) that there is no way to explain. Edited November 14, 2011 by Laurie4b Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gardenmom5 Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 Would this situation have been different had the witness to the rape been a woman? Would a woman be able to walk away from something like that and only tell her boss or would the natural...instinct, I guess...women have to protect offspring kicked into high gear? I like to think a woman would not have walked away from that child but maybe I'm naive (no, I know I'm naive because I really wouldn't have thought a man could walk away from it either). considering the number of cases of women pimping out/abusing/allowing-their-boyfriends to abuse their daughters - who knows. some men would have done more, and some women would have done even less. I think gender has nothing to do with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scarlett Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 It's not necessarily moral character and people are not always accurate at predicting what they will do. Many people "freeze" in situations like this. They go into a kind of mental/emotional shock and they actually don't act in the way they would have predicted and often later experience intense shame over this--or lose their lives because they froze. It can happen in an accident, natural disasters, etc. It's very much like the proverbial "deer in the headlights." People freeze. I don't think moral character is as much at issue as personality (certain types of personalities will act when others are frozen) and most importantly, *past experience* . For us who are only reading about what happened, it's easy to imagine what we think we would have done because all the people are strangers to us. It is much more complicated when someone you know, look up to, who is in a *trusted* position of authority is the one committing the heinous crime. Many people cannot immediately mentally process what they are seeing because it doesn't fit with all their previous past experience with the person and it contributes heavily to the "shock." The brain just shuts down to cushion the blow--or maybe it's more like a computer freezes when too many windows are open--too much data to process. (It's very similar to the shock we experience when we hear someone has died . "No!" is often the first thing we say. And you'll hear people say over and over, "I can't believe it." or "I just saw him yesterday." They may not take any actions consistent with the new news for quite a while despite the fact that nearly all adults have past experience with people we know dying. Walking in on sexual abuse is not something we all experience. We have no past experience to help us process it more quickly. (Those who were sexually abused could beeither more inclined to act, due to their past experience, or to freeze if it triggers retraumatization) I know mothers who initially "froze" but then acted decisively once they had talked together and processed what they had witnessed. The point is, that initially, they could not process (believe) what they were seeing and thus couldn't act on it as they would have thought that they would have. It's much more disconcerting to think that we ourselves might also freeze rather than act heroically, but there is a good chance that could happen to any of us. So I am actually willing to say that there is a possibility that McQueary's *initial* behavior was a result of freezing. It's what happened later (or didn't happen later) that there is no way to explain. I do agree somewhat with this explanation....but I think it goes to prove how important it is to think through what we woud do in such situations. I have been taught that my entire life ---think it through!!! What will be the consequences if you do XYZ vs ABC....mostly to monitor my own behavior, but I think it carries over to protecting others when we can. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TravelingChris Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 While I haven't ever seen any sex crime in person, I have seen other crimes happening and know that I immediately took action. No, it didn't involve running into the store which was having a robbery but did mean I immediately got the last kid in the car and while my husband drove off we called 911 and reported a robbery in progress. But basically I agree with Laurie's post. I think McQuery was in shock but why no one ever called the police is the problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
battlemaiden Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 I don't know. The judge who decided to let Sandusky go was a woman...and she worked as a volunteer at The Second Mile. :glare: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joker Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 I don't know. The judge who decided to let Sandusky go was a woman...and she worked as a volunteer at The Second Mile. :glare: I read that this morning, too. It made me wonder if it's going to be possible for the victims to have a fair trial in that area. It seems his connections are so far reaching. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhonda in TX Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 considering the number of cases of women pimping out/abusing/allowing-their-boyfriends to abuse their daughters - who knows. some men would have done more, and some women would have done even less. I think gender has nothing to do with it. :iagree: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spaceman Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 (edited) I agree with Laurieb Cover-up type of autrocities like this have happened before in history. I think we are asking the wrong questions. Not why did these specific people not act, but how can we raise a new generation who will? Is everyone familiar with the Milgram experiments? http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment Here's an excerpt: Moreover, even when the destructive effects of their work become patently clear, and they are asked to carry out actions incompatible with fundamental standards of morality, relatively few people have the resources needed to resist authority. Edited November 14, 2011 by spaceman Added excerpt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.