Sexual Violence Isn’t Impartial

Stephens writes about the Blasey Ford-Kavanaugh allegations in a seemingly impartial and dispassionate way, and I appreciate several of his points. The nature of sexual assault, however, is one that doesn’t conform well to his arguments or, frankly, to our system of justice. Sexual assault is overwhelmingly committed by people we know, in places we are supposed to feel safe, in ways that don’t leave behind definitive evidence of a crime. The only difference — the only one — between sex and assault is consent, and the people who claim that they did have consent are supported by our cultural assumptions of who does and doesn’t get to say no, and when, and how often. For these reasons, a tiny fraction of what is already a vastly underreported crime results in arrest, let alone prosecution, let alone conviction. Stephens believes that Blasey Ford should be able to provide “specific,” “definitive evidence” that can be “corroborated independently,” and that, if she doesn’t, “she will have smeared Kavanaugh.” And so even in his attempt to write evenly and impartially, he exposes the difficulties faced by victims of sexual assault and, perhaps unintentionally, perpetuates them.