"And yet, in all the tweets, essays and interviews, Rosen has yet to come across and truly contrite and apologetic. Maybe he should use some of his new-found free time to work on that," Julie Gerstein (New York magazine) offers. And she's correct. There's been no apology.
There's been minimization. A number of women who work for rapists, for example, have come forward to tell you that Nir didn't do anything that awful. Some of the women work at sites where -- even if women were co-founders -- the women in charge left (were pushed out, with sexual harassment, yes, I'm thinking specifically of one site). But to be an apologist for rape mentality, to excuse it away, you have to be comfortable hanging around it. And a number of women are. Maybe because they think it makes them safe? A man who thinks a woman has it coming? You're never safe from him. You're always at risk of being down graded from 'good woman' to 'one who had it coming.' You're never safe.
Lara Logan was sexually assaulted and you'll notice these women who rush forward to tell you Nir Rosen needs to be forgiven or didn't do anything big never express any sympathy for the victims of rape and sexual assault, they never acknowledge them. But you probably can't dismiss what Nir Rosen did and also acknowledge reality.
Certainly he can't.
This is being written late and there's a reason (besides an awful headache and being tired). There's another element to the story. I've noted it here but I haven't gone into it. Last night, Beth explained that she'd received e-mails on it (Beth is the ombdusperson for this site) and her piece (a transcript piece) goes out this morning (it will be in inboxes when this posts). I didn't want to negate Beth's column or 'scoop' the gina & krista round-robin.
But it will be in inboxes when this goes up. I have called out the comments about Anderson Cooper that Nir Rosen made. I have not gotten into them. If you read Beth's piece, you'll see why. As I've noted before, I've known Anderson for years (long before he was on TV) and that limits me in what I can say on this topic because when someone chooses to keep their private life private, you're not defending them by not respecting that. What was said about Anderson was offensive on many levels and Nir Rosen knew what he was saying. In Beth's piece, I go into that in detail. That's a newsletter, that's semi-private. I can't do the same here. I have no idea why others haven't because there's something very grotesque and disgusting about Nir Rosen that isn't being explored. Some may be respecting the wall Anderson has erected.
For any who were bothered by the fact that I didn't approach that topic here, I hope the newsletter helps some. I do understand the issues that were raised with Beth. My apologies for not being able to raise them here. My sincere regrets for not attempting to write something similar to the above before now to make it clear that I was walling off one aspect of Rosen's remarks. That was my mistake and error and I apologize for it.
Lily e-mailed to note Feministing's "Military Sexual Trauma lawsuit -- the day after" which is an important report on the silence about the lawsuit brought by sexual assault victims agains the Pentagon command. The article notes the lack of coverage and it also includes some investigative reporting in which the author (no name is listed, I'm sorry) uses the new chat program that Kaye I-Won't-Testify-To-Congress Whitley (she should have been fired for that, for refusing to give Congress testimony in 2007) can't stop talking up. That chat program is supposed to assist sexual assault victims. The author poses as a victim and accesses the chat page only to be made to wait for 90 minutes before anyone's available. When someone is available, they are no help, offer no help and the most constructive 'assistance' they provide is when "Billy" types "I really feel bad for you."
I didn't check out Kaye's little program, she's lied too many times to be trusted. (That statement ensures that she and her sock puppets will storm the public account with e-mails yet again.) But look at Feministing's piece, it appears the Dept is using RAINN. RAINN has provided embarrassing Congressional testimony in the last two years on the issue of military sexual assault. The male spokesperson they provided and his testimony was offensive and hard to listen to. It was confusing. Apparently, it also gets rewarded. There are a number of organizations that could have been gone with other than RAINN. And how telling that the Dept can't create their own program -- despite all the time they've supposedly been 'addressing' this issue -- but must instead farm it out. But read over the screensnap in the article and grasp that RAINN and "Billy" are not able to help anyone and that, yet again, Kaye's promoting a program that's a joke. Repeating, when the Democratically-controlled Congress called her to testify and she refused, she should have been fired. When Bush was replaced by Barack, she should have been fired. One of the biggest obstacles for victims of sexual assault and rape in the military remains Kaye Whitley. She should have also been fired when a woman ripped herself apart, broke down in tears, to talk about her sexual assault and how it destroyed her, how she was scared to go outside, how destroyed she was. That woman appeared before Congress because she wanted to help others. It was very clear just how hard it was for her to be there, let alone open up. The last thing she needed after she finished testifying on the first panel was for Kaye to show up on the second panel and make insulting remarks that questioned whether the woman had been assaulted.
Let me repeat that in all caps: THAT QUESTIONED WHETHER THE WOMAN HAD BEEN ASSAULTED. Kaye Whitley is supposed to be the DoD's face for sexual assault victims. It's past time she was fired. (Kaye, bring on the sock puppets as you always do.)
Lily notes in her e-mail that "the same people who are ignoring the law suit are also ignoring Nir Rosen's justification for sexual assault."
It's now 7:00 a.m. EST so the gina & krista round-robin is in inboxes. Once again, thank you to those who raised the issue with Beth. It was my failure and my error not to have included anything here to explain that I was walling off one aspect. I apologize for that and will try to avoid not giving any kind of heads up in the future. By not doing so, I know I caused some to wonder and I'm guessing that some were also hurt by that. My apologies and, again, it was my failure and my mistake.
It's over, I'm done writing songs about love
There's a war going on
So I'm holding my gun with a strap and a glove
And I'm writing a song about war
And it goes
Na na na na na na na
I hate the war
Na na na na na na na
I hate the war
Na na na na na na na
I hate the war
Oh oh oh oh
-- "I Hate The War" (written by Greg Goldberg, on The Ballet's Mattachine!)
Last week, ICCC's number of US troops killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war was 4439. Tonight it is [PDF format warning] still 4439.
The e-mail address for this site is firstname.lastname@example.org.
i hate the war