Sticks and Stones

I’ve held back too much in past weeks to dam any longer, the fatal breach came when my sister Jerri sent me notice of a “sexual assault” trial in Lancaster County, Nebraska where District Judge Jeffre Cheuvront has banned the victim, Teri Bowen from use of certain words such as “rape”, “victim”, “assailant”, “sexual assault nurse”, etc. I find this action absurd on some levels, outrageous on others, and further wholly intolerable on still more levels. I do not want you to miss the significance of the Judge’s ruling particularly as an affront to women so I have provided the following links (without permission):

Woman says she will try to follow order on words - CLARENCE MABIN / Lincoln Journal Star - Thursday, Jul 12, 2007

Judge Silences Survivor of Rape – CARRIE WOOTEN / G-Spot Magazine – July 13, 2007

Please feel free to be outraged on that level as am I… but that alone is not what has sent me over the preverbal edge, my concern is rooted in the growing belief that words carry significance beyond a reflection of the person who has spoken them. Did Don Imus set race relations back decades by his recent remarks, did Rosie O’Donnell inflict irreparable harm on our troops with her noted comments, did the derogatory comments of Isaiah Washington suggest a general homophobia at ABC, or does the use of insensitive words by an editor at an office party expose a greater intolerance at New York Times? In each case I would argue no, their words simply expose individual insensitivities, prejudices, poor taste or pure personal ignorance. I am not suggesting the ad hominem invalidation of the statements, rather stressing the measure of the person by the statements they make.

We started down this road for the right reasons, to combat racism, sexual harassment, homophobia, etc. but have since fostered an environment of overreaction that has minimized the initial efforts, clouded reason and led to Judge Cheuvront’s conclusion that words wield such great power that they should be removed from the court room to secure the rights of the accused. I ask two simple questions… “Is it not the responsibility of the Judge or Jury to evaluate testimony and measure the validity of witnesses statements, regardless of the words used?”, and… “Is it not the responsibility of the listener to measure a speaker by the words they use?”

Be discouraged by a marginal celebrity’s attempt at humor before a select audience, but do not expand such an insignificant issue by suggesting it is more than a distasteful utterance by an insensitive boob. Elevating such events to the national stage merely inflates the negative influence of the statements and conversely hinders the progress of tolerance whilst creating absurd conditions where words are considered infinitely more damaging than is appreciable, such as the case in Nebraska.

Sent from Perth, Western Australia, July 25, 2007