Richard Roeper has some interesting thoughts on the identifying rape victims issue. (He makes reference to an Omaha column in the story; here it is.)
Again, using phrases like "more shameful than ..." and words like "embarrassment" don't cut it. This issue is not an "if-then" statement that linear types can package up with a pretty little bow: robbery=crime; rape=crime; therefore robbery=rape. And if there is still someone who thinks that a woman who's been raped is shameful, that person probably lives in an outhouse in the woods and this argument doesn't concern him/her, anyway. It's a matter of the media splaying open the victim's wounds for a story, wounds that are not like the wounds of robbery or any other crime. Robbery doesn't take the ultimate intimacy and pervert it for the rest of a woman's life. There is no historical sexist symbolism in getting your stereo stolen. Once (mostly male, it seems) commentators grasp that, then maybe they'll see that this is a little more multi-faceted than an MS-DOS command. ne day there will be enough time between when sex (and even rape) was a man's privilege, and and the newer time of a woman's body being her own, to view rape as any old crime.
I really like that. It's sort of what I was trying to say last time this came up. Sure, rape is a crime, but all crimes are not equal. And it's true-- I haven't seen a female commentator arguing this.
Well, the first and most prominent person to argue in favor of naming was a woman: Geneva Overholser, former Washington Post ombudsman, Pulitzer Prize winner, ex-NYT editorial writer, journalism ethics authority, feminist, and Wellesley '70.
Quote: "We [the media] seem too ready to be social workers, choosing not to list the cause of death, not to name a rape victim, not to write about such socially unacceptable crimes as incest in the interest of some social good other than the one we most ardently believe in: accuracy, comprehensiveness, completeness, unvarnished truth."
It's hardly a male-only position, and -- believe it or not! -- it's not one held only by simpletons who've never evolved past using tools to broil mastodon meat.
Well, I didn't mean to imply that only neanderthals supported naming the victims. I just hadn't seen a woman arguing for it. That's all.
But I don't see how choosing not to name a rape victim makes you a social worker.
Neanderthals! The lot of you!
It's a complex issue, as I said before, but I still think I'd err on the side of giving the victim the choice of being named or anonymous.
Joshua Benton is the director of the Nieman Journalism Lab at Harvard University, among other things. Before that, he was a staff writer and columnist for The Dallas Morning News. (More.)
About | Archives | Contact | Writing | Photos | Links | Wish
Any opinions expressed here are solely mine, and not those of my employer. In many cases, they may not even be mine.
Comment Preview
said: