Potentially triggering discussion of rape and victim-blaming.
Yesterday, tinylegacies pointed me toward an article about a woman who was raped at gunpoint by a stranger in the Stamford Marriott parking garage. The woman filed a civil suit against the hotel, claiming her attacker “had been in the hotel and garage acting suspiciously days before the attack, as well as the afternoon of the attack, and the hotel failed to notice him, apprehend him or make him leave.”
The full article is at http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/ci_13048639
The article is too vague for me to judge the hotel’s responsibility. Did they receive complaints about this individual? What does “acting suspiciously” mean? Was the rapist’s behavior something a reasonable person should have noticed? What security precautions should be in place? I have some ideas, but I think these are questions to be answered in court.
What really struck me was the approach the Stamford Marriott took in defending themselves. They claim the victim was careless and negligent, and “failed to exercise due care for her own safety and the safety of her children and proper use of her senses and facilities.”
Let’s break this down. Gary Fricker stuck a gun into this woman’s back, forced her and her children into her van, and raped her, threatening to do the same to one of her children. The Marriott claims that this was “unforeseen and beyond their control,” but at the same time, they’re blaming the survivor for her carelessness, for not being sensible enough to avoid “mitigating her damages.”
In other words, it’s not the Marriott’s fault, because everyone knows rape is the victim’s responsibility. If she got herself raped, that’s entirely on her. She should have … well, what should she have done differently? What are we really asking victims to do here?
- Enter parking garages at your own risk! (Make sure you bring a big burly man to protect you! Don’t forget bullet proof jackets for yourself and the kids!)
- Use common sense! Everyone is a potential rapist, so don’t let anyone get within 100 feet of you or your children.*
- If a guy sticks a gun in your back and threatens your kids, it’s your duty to “mitigate the damages.” I suggest spontaneously developing superpowers. Freezing time is a good one, as is the ability to generate a magical force field. Superspeed will do in a pinch.
- Stop worrying about your kids. If this woman had been searching every shadow for potential rapists instead of wasting time watching her children, this whole situation could have been avoided! If your 3-year-old gets run down by an idiot driver, that’s a small price to pay for your safety.
- Avoid places you might be raped, including parking garages, hotels, dark streets, your own home, your friend’s place … actually, you should probably just lock yourself in a bank vault and be done with it.
The Stamford Marriott has attorneys who are responsible for defending the hotel in a lawsuit. It’s their job, and I understand that. But why is this an acceptable defense? The lawyers should have been laughed out of the courtroom the instant they made such a bullshit claim.
Maybe they would have been, if not for the fact that it works. Because too many of us still buy into the idea that survivors of rape deserved it. That they were asking for it, or they were careless, or they were drinking too much, or they were dressed slutty, or they didn’t scream or fight back enough, or….
Lawyers play this defense because it works. As pissed as I am with the Stamford Marriott and their attorneys for spouting this crap, I’m even more disgusted with the society that continues to believe it.
*I don’t know how many times I’ve heard men complaining, “Why do some women say I’m a potential rapist just because I’m a guy? That’s sexist!” Well gosh, could it have anything to do with incidents and reactions like this one?