The Penn State scandal is as sickening as they come, and understandably has inspired much anger and disgust.
I don't want to insert any more controversy into this situation than already exists, but...I have been thinking a lot about one aspect of this story and wanted to pose my ideas here. Lately I have been contemplating whether the actions of the PSU coaching staff and administrators would have differed had the victims in this case been girls rather than boys.
Consider this: imagine if Mike McQueary had walked in on Sandusky having sex with a 10-year old girl. Do you think he would he have acted differently? I think it is possible that the answer is yes, for two reasons. First, short of incest, man-boy sexual interactions are perhaps the most taboo in our society. I wonder about the extent to which there were concerns not just about potentially outing Sandusky as a pedophile, but as a gay pedophile. Second, male-on-female assault fits our mental image of "rape" much better than male-on-male assault. In a scenario involving Sandusky engaging in penile-vaginal penetration of a young girl, it would be difficult to imagine any eyewitness interpreting that as anything other than RAPE. But I think it is possible that the fact that Sandusky was with another male overrode the obvious and far more alarming fact that he was engaging in penile-anal penetration of a child. To be clear, I am not in any way, shape, or form excusing or defending McQueary's inaction. Instead, I am proposing that the concept of Sandusky "fooling around" with young boys may have been easier for people to dismiss or downplay (in the context of gay stereotypes and assumptions, and therefore outside the context of sexual assault) than the concept of him "fooling around" with young girls. Putting these two observations together, I can't help but think that there is a gendered element to this story that is not being discussed. I may be way off base, but I don't think so.
Either way, I have tried to find at least something positive in this sordid, appalling situation by discussing it in my classes and using it to teach students about the great complexity in how we perceive and report "crime" -- particularly acts of this nature.
Friday, November 11, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
3 comments:
Other interesting discussions on the PSU case and gender over at _Tenured Radical_ @ http://chronicle.com/blognetwork/tenuredradical/2011/11/1401/ and _Historiann_ @ http://www.historiann.com/2011/11/10/brief-thoughts-on-penn-state/
Doc Hos
Looks like someone's been reading the GBOC -- this is my exact argument!
It might not be that complicated. There might be a better "built in excuse" that otherwise would not be applicable. Two males in a male locker room and/or shower is not so inherently wrong. Thus the built in excuses are more acceptable. Ther eis more of an acceptance it is wrong now but this is a relatively new development. People want to believe this would not be done so the seemingly obvious excuses seem to work.
Post a Comment