как себя вести образцовой жертве

интересный поворот приобрел ход Ghomeshi trial

три женщины журналистки обвиняют бывшего коллегу в sexual assault, причинении страданий и сексуальном контакте без согласия

обвиняемый утверждает что это был rough sex но по взаимному согласию. То есть суду предстоит выяснить как отличить жесткий секс по согласию от секса по принуждению. Думаю они должны найти способ обойти этот момент.

после нескольких дней разбирательств выяснилось что после событий нападения, они продолжали поддерживать отношения с обвиняемым, и даже писали Emails to Ghomeshi игривого содержания и приглашая к проведению времени совместно.

Изначально жертвы утверждали что после sexual assault они с обвиняемым дел не имели. Но когда обнаружились эти электронные сообщения, теперь получается что они обманывали. В свое оправдание они говорят что не считали эти записки существенной частью обвинения.
Поэтому one of Canada's most prolific criminal defence lawyer cчитает что на этом основании суд может усомниться в их изначальных показаниях.

Наираскрутейший лойер комментирует, что эти женщины вели себя не как образцовые жертвы. Они вызывающе продолжали пользоваться имейл и даже общались с обвиняемым.

Будет ли суд выяснить состоялись ли те встречи о которых шла речь в электронной переписке и какого характера были эти встречи? Будет ли считаться что если жертва встречается с тем кто на нее нападал, то значит тем самым с насильника снимаются обвинения в предыдущем причинении ущерба личности?

Если они были коллеги, я легко могу представить что попытка уладить "трения" через какие то записки и встречи - это наиболее экономный способ продолжать работать в одной коменде, или какие у них там по работе субординации были... Работать вместе нормально можно только если между участниками нормальные рабочие отношения. И кто ответственен за налаживание климата, агрессор или жертва?

я также легко могу представить что искать способ отомстить или взять реванш - это еще один повод считать переписку уместной.

Только если суд станет настаивать на том что сначала женщины говорили о том что ни каких отношений после нападения не было, а переписка показывает что отношения были, то на этом основании изначальное обвинение оказывается вызывающим сомнения


вообще в новостях стало больше сюжетов с участием женщин. Эффект новой политики нового премьерминистра?

два фильма

Examined life (2008) реж. Astra Taylor
Temple Grandin (2010 )реж. Mick Jackson

заключительный эпизод в Examined life - диалог Judith Butler и Sunaura Taylor - выглядит предисловием, обозначением смысловых акцентов художественного фильма - истории о жизни женщины с диагнозом аутизм, которая стала ученой биологом, преподавателем и журналисткой, отстаивающей права животных. В одном случае идеи сформулированы философским языком, а в другом - эти же идеи выражены языком художественной метафоры

затрагивает вопрос нормативности телесных проявлений и обнаруживает допускаемую по умолчанию иллюзию что обычное тело - является радикально самодостаточным. Хотя это совершенно не так и люди различаются очень сильно по самым разным своим способностям - по силе мускул - мужчины физически сильнее женщин, но у мужчин отсутствует, например, мускулатура матки - как тут сравнивать вообще, люди различаются по интеллектуальным способностям, по качеству психических реакций, по уровню эмоциональной компетенции и тд итп. То есть тело с ограниченными способностями - у всех и каждого - кто то хуже других видит, кто-то лучше чем другие слышит, кто-то акробат, а кто-то передвигается в кресле-коляске. И при всем этом тем не менее есть проблема социального принятия.

диалог Judith Butler и Sunaura Taylor (с небольшими сокращениями)

"One of the things I wanted to talk about was what it means for us to take a walk together.When I first asked you about this, um, you told me you take walks, you take strolls.can you say something about, um, what that is for you? When do you do it and how do you do it and what words do you have for it?

Well I think that I-I always go for a walk-Um, and I always tell people that I'm going for walks.I use that word. And most of the disabled people who I know use that term also.

And which environments make it possible for you to take a walk?

I moved to San Francisco largely because it's the most accessible place in the world.And part of what's so amazing to me about it...is that the- the physical access-the fact that the public transportation is accessible,there's curb cuts most places.Almost most places I'll go, there's curb cuts. Buildings are accessible.

And what this does is that it also leads to a social acceptability, that somehow because-because there's physical access,there're simply more disabled people
out and about in the world.And so people have learned how to interact with them...and are used to them in this certain way.And so the physical access
actually leads to,a social access, an acceptance.

what I'm wondering about is, um, moving in social space, right? Moving- all the movements you can do...and which help you live and which express you
in various ways.Um, do you feel free to move in all the ways you want to move?I can go into a coffee shop and actually pick up the cup with my mouth...and carry it to my table.But then that- that becomes almost more difficult... because of the-just the normalizing standards of our movements...and the discomfort that that causes...when I do things with body parts...that aren't necessarily what we assume that they're for.That seems to be even more, um,hard for people to deal with.

I'm just thinking that nobody takes a walk without there being
a technique of walking.Nobody goes for a walk...without there being something
that supports that walk, uh, outside of ourselves.Um, and that maybe
we have a false idea,that the able-bodied person is somehow radically
self-sufficient.

It wasn't until I was in my early 20s, about 20 or 21,that I became aware
of disability...as a political issue.Um, and that happened largely through discovering the social model of disability...which is basically-In disability studies, they have a distinction...between disability and impairment.So impairment would be my- my body, my embodiment right now.The fact that I was born
with arthrogyposis,which affects- what the medical world has labeled
as arthrogyposis-Um, but basically that my joints are fused.My muscles are weaker.
I can't move in certain ways.And this does affect my life in all sorts of situations.For instance, you know, there's a plum tree in my backyard.I can't pick the plums off the plum tree.I have to wait for them to drop or whatever.And so there's that- embodiment,our own unique embodiments.
And then there's disability which is basically the-the... social repression
of disabled people.The fact that disabled people have limited housing options.We don't have career opportunities.Um, we're socially isolated.You know, in many ways,
there's a cultural aversion to disabled people.


So would disability
be the social organization
of impairment? The disabling effects,
basically, of society. What happened?
Did you come in contact
with disability activists?Or did you read certain things?


I read a book review actually.And when that happened,
I lived in Brooklyn.And I would- I would really try
to make myself go out...and just order a coffee
by myself.And I would sit for hours
beforehand in the park...just trying to get up the nerve
to do that.In a way, it's a political protest
for me to go in...and order a coffee
and demand help...simply because in my opinion,
help is something that we all need.And it's something that is-
is, you know, looked down upon...and... not really taken care of
in this society...when we all-
when we all need help...and we're all interdependent
in all sorts of ways.

...

I think gender and disability
converge in a whole lot
of different ways.But one thing I think
both movements do...is get us to rethink, um,
what the body can do.There's an essay by the philosopher
Gilles Deleuze called
"What Can a Body Do?"Uh, and the question
is supposed to challenge,
um, the traditional ways...in which we think
about bodies.We usually ask, you know,
what is a body...or what is the ideal form
of a body...or, you know,
what's the difference
between the body and the soul...and that kind of thing.Uh, but "what can a body do?"
is, um- is a different question.It's- It- It isolates
a set of capacities...and a set of instrumentalities
or actions,and we are kind
of assemblages of those things.Um, and I like this idea.It's- It's not like
there's an essence,
and it's not like
there's an ideal morphology-you know, what a body
should look like.It's exactly not that question.Or what a body
should move like.Um, and one of the things
that I found...in thinking about gender
and even violence...against, uh, sexual minorities
or gender minorities-people whose gender presentation
doesn't conform with standard ideals...of femininity or masculinity-is that very often, um,
it comes down to, uh,you know, how people walk,
how they use their hips,
what they do with their body parts,uh, what they use
their mouth for,what they use their anus for
or what they allow
their anus to be used for.There's a guy in Maine who-
walked
with a very, um,You know, the hips going one way
or another- and very feminine walk.But one day
he was walking to school,and he was attacked
by three of his classmates,and he was thrown over a bridge
and he was killed.And, um, the question that community
had to deal with-and, indeed, the entire media
that covered this event-was, you know, how could it be
that somebody's gait,
that somebody's style of walking...could engender the desire
to kill that person?And that, you know-
that makes me think
about the walk in a different way.
I mean, a walk
can be a dangerous thing.


I'm just remembering
when I was little- when I did walk-I would be told
that I walked Iike a monkey.And I think that for a lot of,
you know, disabled people,the violence and the-the- the sort of-
the hatred exists a lot...in this,reminding of people...that our bodies are... going to age...and are, um, going to die.And-where our boundaries lie
as a human...and what becomes non-human, you know.


You know, in some ways,
I wonder also just, you know-It makes me wonder
whether the person
was anti-evolutionary.Maybe they were a creationist.It's like, "Well, why shouldn't
we have some resemblance
to the monkey?" I mean-

Well, the monkey's actually
always been my favorite animal too.So actually quite a lot
of the time I was flattered.

Exactly.
Yeah.

But that When
in those in-between moments...of, you know- in between male
and-and female...or in between, um- uh,
death and-and health-when- when do you still
count as a human?


My sense is that
what's at stake here...is really rethinking the human
as a site of interdependency.And I think, you know,
when you walk
into the coffee shop. Right?If I can go back
to that moment for a moment.And you- you ask for the coffee,or you, indeed,
even ask for some assistance
with the coffee,um, you're basically
posing the question-Do we or do we not live in a world
in which we assist each other?Do we or do we not help
each other with- with basic needs?And are basic needs there
to be decided on
as a social issue...and not just my personal,
individual issue...or your personal, individual issue?So, I mean, there's a challenge
to individualism...that happens at the moment
in which you ask for some assistance
with the coffee cup.Yeah.
And hopefully,
people will take it up...and say, "Yes, I too
live in that world...in which I understand
that we need each other
in order to address our basic needs."And I wanna organize
a social, political world
on the basis of that recognition."