Peters to Sexual Harassment Victims: Don’t Put Yourselves in Dangerous Situations
Published 2017-12-27 by
Cory Allen Heidelberger
Senator Deb Peters (R-9/Hartford) suggests that if you’re being sexually harassed in Pierre, you bear some of the blame:
Don’t want to be sexually harassed? Don’t go to the bar after midnight. Duh.
Peters said she has never suffered nor personally heard of any sexual discrimination, harassment or other sexual misconduct during her nearly 14 years in the Legislature.
“But I also I don’t put myself into situations where that becomes a problem,” she said. “Like my dad used to say, ‘Nothing good ever happens after midnight.’ I’m not at a bar after midnight, you know what I mean? So I don’t know where all of these other issues occurred. I don’t know, and I don’t know enough about each of the individual scenarios, but I don’t put myself in those positions, and if I do, I usually extricate myself before anything happens” [Seth Tupper, “Peters: Sex Misconduct in Pierre Is ‘Anomaly’,” Rapid City Journal, 2017.12.26].
Senator Peters, by dint of her leadership position in the National Conference of State Legislatures, is bringing NCSL staff to Pierre to provide the Legislature’s sexual harassment prevention training on January 17. Evidently Senator Peters herself will benefit from the training, as she may learn that sexual harassment does arises not from people stupidly putting themselves into unseemly situations that invite sexual overtures but from powerful individuals mistaking their power as license to ogle, proposition, and grope whomever they want.
Sigh. Victim blaming. This is just ridiculous. “well, what were you wearing?” “gosh, how much did you have to drink?” This tired old “I don’t put myself in those situations” b.s. is way past getting old.
…That’s too bad that Jeffrey Dahmer killed all those people and ate them, but if they hadn’t put themselves in that situation…..
Peters isn’t alone in these thoughts, unfortunately. Her ignorance and continuing the “it’s not their fault if those darn girls put themselves in a bar after midnight” thought process – shows we have a long way to go. A very long way to go.
Come on Ms Peters. This is just backwards thinking. Ridiculous.
mike from iowa
Oh Boy.
Maybe Ms Peters actually heard stuff she claims she didn’t hear and pre-judged it as locker room talk and filtered it out.
I can pretty much guess girls in middle school through the rest of their lives hear this stuff regularly.
Jenny
Ms Peters says ‘I’ eight times in her message. She will want to brush up on her communication if she wants to go higher places in the future, as the all about me talk usually never wins voters over.
It’s saying to victims and voters – Okay, okay, we get it, we get it. You’re way too smart to ever put yourself in a situation to get harassed or raped. Does she really want that kind of message?
Eve Fisher
What an ass. Never heard, never saw, never knew – she’s definitely lived in a bubble her whole life, either a bubble of privilege and/or willful ignorance.
jerry
According the Ms Peters, if women folk would just wear the roypublican issued burkas, all would be well. However, Ms. Peters declares that “”and if I do, I usually extricate myself before anything happens”” So what does “usually” mean? It looks like it means that what she is declaring an anomaly has actually happened to her…several times. What a hypocrite.
Burkas—there you go, Jerry! No red-blooded South Dakota man would ever direct a sexual advance at a woman in a burka.
Angie Buhl O’Donnell
I can personally attest that she knew of Rep. Gosch’s comments toward me; we had a conversation about it. If she wants to put her blinders on, that’s an unfortunate choice, but it’s not a truthful statement to say she never heard anything.
Ryan
I think you all are a bit quick to tell Ms. Peters what she should think or feel, and how precise her language should be.
First, if she says has never suffered nor personally heard of any sexual discrimination, harassment or other sexual misconduct during her nearly 14 years in the legislature, who are you to challenge that? Aren’t you all the same group saying that if a victim makes an accusation, we need to believe them immediately, without regard to their credibility? However, the experience of Ms. Peters should apparently be questioned and doubted immediately because you have all had different experiences? Or is it just because you are so proud of yourself for being on the “victims” side that you don’t believe anything you hear that isn’t an accusation of wrongdoing? Get it together, folks.
Second, she isn’t saying there is “blame” to be placed on victims. The recent over-use of the term “victim blaming” just feels childish because it prevents us from having constructive conversations about reducing and eliminating sexual assaults and harassment. If people are all going to shout “Victim Blaming!” every time somebody says something more practical than “all predators must immediately stop being predators,” nothing good will ever come from the recent attention to this problem. Does anybody here honestly think that telling somebody to be careful “victim blaming”? Seriously, anybody?
Are any of you parents? Is the advice you give your children full of risk assessment and risk mitigation, or do you simply say to your children “People are supposed to be honorable, and good, and truthful, so just assume that will happen and never be skeptical of a stranger, and don’t look over your shoulder, and go ahead and keep the keys in the car.”
In every other scenario, people are encouraged to take affirmative, proactive steps to defend their bodies and their property. If I went to a baseball game and left my car running in the parking lot the whole time, would people defend my status as a victim when my car gets stolen, or would people suggest I should have taken some common-sense action to protect it? Why is suggesting people exercise this same common sense to protect against sexual predators so disgusting to all of you?
I agree 100% that all criminals should stop being criminals immediately, however, they don’t feel like complying with that request. So, in response to the really real world that really does exist around us, we can either just keep asking immoral rapists to please stop being immoral rapists, or we can use the self-preservation instincts we have acquired over the millennia and be realistic about how to reduce the risks we face in any given situation.
Roger Elgersma
Peters says it is the victims fault. I have also heard a woman say that there is no such thing as rape, it is just great sex. Well, listening to the extremes will not get us anywhere. If someone is wronged, it does not matter if everyone has not been wronged, wrong is still wrong.
Ryan
Can anybody show me where Ms. Peters blames a victim? Or says something is a victim’s fault?
I know I’m dyslexic, but my reading comprehension is usually decent enough to get the gist of things… hmmmm
I think people are putting their own words in her mouth.
Francie
“…..I don’t put myself in those positions, and if I do, I usually extricate myself before anything happens….” She could very well be the victim of having a drug put in her club soda and not even know it, based on this statement.
Now, Ryan, let’s not get clever on Senator Peters’s defense. The implication is clear. “I don’t put myself into situations where that becomes a problem” suggests that people experiencing harassment could have avoided the problem by not putting themselves into risky situations. Her subsequent statement about bars at midnight underplay the problem and condescend to victims, suggesting that if folks just had the good sense to listen to their dad’s advice and not go out late to seedy bars, they wouldn’t have found themselves in their predicament.
And I think we’ve already had the discussion that even at bars, no one should be subjected to unwanted sexual advances. Let’s not replow that field, other than to say that suggesting that harassment results from putting oneself in a bad situation misses the point, that there is no situation—at least not a normal situation in Pierre during Legislative Session—in which ogling, groping, or saying lewd things to a woman is justified by the woman’s choice to place herself in a workplace or public situation.
Ryan
I think Ms. Peters sounds a little bit “I’m better than you,” too, but she isn’t saying victims are to blame, she is saying some people don’t protect what’s important to them like she does. We live in an ugly world, filled with tough stuff happening all the time to all sorts of people. I understand it is currently the trend to ignore rationality in problem solving, and to simply say that THINGS SHOULD BE DIFFERENT. I just don’t think that does any good.
Of course there are no situations that unwanted groping, harassment, or assault is OK. But look at this – we agree, but nothing happened – see how the world doesn’t change just because we agree about that?
Does anybody here leave their garage door open all day while they are at work? Does anybody here leave their wallet on the table unsupervised when you go pee at a restaurant? Does anybody walk around downtown Sioux Falls in the middle of the night showing off expensive jewelry? Does anybody blindly ignore the risks that exist in this sad, angry, criminal-filled world?
We tell people that we care about all the time what they should or could do to protect themselves from predators in all sorts of situations without it being called “victim blaming.” Why is it so wrong to tell people to be smart and make defensive decisions when it comes to just this one particular issue?
Eve Fisher
A lot of women have been carefully taught that “As long as you don’t _____, _____ will never happen to you, because you’re a good girl.” Which is why, when “that” does happen to them, they don’t tell anybody because it would be proof that they weren’t “good.” And why they do say things like “I don’t put myself in those positions”, because they’re proving what a good girl they are. Circular loops are an excellent way of controlling people.
Meanwhile, 54% have experienced “unwanted and inappropriate sexual advances” at some point in their lives, and 30% of them on the job. In my own private poll of friends, every single one of us has been sexually harassed at work, from groping to comments that would, frankly, get us banned from Cory’s blog if I repeated them.
But Ms. Peters doesn’t put herself “in those positions.” Like i said, circular loops are an excellent way of controlling people.
mike from iowa
I think Ms Peters is full of prunes.
Ryan
If somebody uses this ridiculous advice: “As long as you don’t _____, _____ will never happen to you, because you’re a good girl.” I would suggest that that person is a moron.
Eve, if your “statistics” are to be believed, isn’t it quite possible that Ms. Peters falls into that 46% (of people? women? adults? caucasians? legislators?) group that has not experienced such unwanted and inappropriate sexual advances? Also, Eve, somebody disagreeing with you doesn’t make their argument circular and doesn’t mean they want to control people. A circular argument is one that depends on its own assumptions to prove itself correct. Ms. Peters said that she has not been a victim of these crimes, and she said that she doesn’t spend time at the types of places where these crimes are quite prominent. Neither of those statements are assumptions, and neither relies on the other. She isn’t making any circular loops, you just don’t like what she is saying because it’s different than what you think.
I think everyone here seems upset that Ms. Peters had the audacity to not be a victim of harassment or assault.
Cory, yes, I agree with you that I think Ms. Peters is suggesting that “people experiencing harassment could have avoided the problem by not putting themselves into risky situations.” At least, I think she is suggesting that SOME people experiencing harassment could have avoided the problem by not putting themselves into risky situations.
Is she wrong? Do you think people should take no preventative measures in their lives because bad things SHOULDN’T happen?
This is the part of the nation-wide conversation that everyone is scared to have because some social justice warriors and big-mouthed teenagers with no life experience are quick to call everyone “Victim Blamers” when we want to have a conversation about what might actually work in reducing the prevalence of these kinds of crimes.
Eve Fisher
Thank you, JonD for that BRILLIANT video which pretty much sums it up.
Sigh. Of course I’m not saying that people should not take any precautions against crime. However, I am sick to death of people saying things like, “I’m not at a bar after midnight, you know what I mean? So I don’t know where all of these other issues occurred. I don’t know, and I don’t know enough about each of the individual scenarios, but I don’t put myself in those positions, and if I do, I usually extricate myself before anything happens.” Like most sexual harassment on the job happens in a bar after midnight when the person is there for the sheer fun of it. No, most sexual harassment on the job happens ON THE FRIGGING JOB. How hard is that to
understand? And what makes this even worse is that Ms. Peters is (according to the Rapid City Journal) facilitating the upcoming sexual-harassment training session for legislators on January 17. It makes me wonder (1) how seriously she is taking her facilitation duties, (2) and what kind of training this will be? So far, Ms. Peters’ comments don’t give me much confidence in how educational Jan. 17 will be.
Senator Peters takes to Twitter this afternoon and offers this twist:
I am speaking from my legislative experiences in Pierre – I have never experienced sexual harassment. I also don’t go looking for it in Pierre either. Not everyone can avoid these difficult situations. I have experienced co-worker bullying & that is a bigger problem in Pierre [Sen. Deb Peters, Tweet, 2017.12.27].
“Co-worker bullying”—really? Legislator vs legislator? More prevalent than sexual harassment?
grudznick
No doubt, Mr. H. Have you not listened to the committees and what happened to poor Mr. Moser probably happens to many. Imagine how the beating of brows takes place in the caucuses.
grudznick
Ms. Fischer, I don’t think young Ms. Peters is standing up there talking during this training. I think she arranged for a professional to do it.
bearcreekbat
Does the quoted language “I also don’t go looking for it in Pierre either” seem to suggest that there are “others” who do “go looking for it” – namely, to be sexually abused or harassed?”
grudznick
Ogling is now harrassment? There will be a lot more fellows in hot water come the time for the sessions in Pierre. And with Mr. Nelson and his new Lords of Salem clan leading the charge, best watch out.
Stephanie Pochop
“…. I don’t know, and I don’t know enough about each of the individual scenarios, but I don’t put myself in those positions, and if I do, I usually extricate myself before anything happens.” (Seth Tupper, “Peters: Sex Misconduct in Pierre Is ‘Anomaly’,” Rapid City Journal, 2017.12.26). The Lt. Gov. has similarly stated: “Any perception that there is some sort of culture that exists during the legislative session, I would absolutely reject that out of hand.” (“Sexism in State House: Women detail harassment in Pierre,” Dana Ferguson and Megan Raposa, Argus Leader, 2017.10.21) Wishful thinking or a chilling message? Either way, it relays an unequivocal preference for the status quo and excuses bullying, boorish and discriminatory behavior that falls far below the biblical canons that some of these same men (and women) campaign upon. Thus I feel sorry for Ms. Peters. Karma has assigned her the task of “training” our legislators about sexual harassment after they have had full-throated, public affirmation from their leadership that their behavior is not the problem. A training session on Big Foot habitat maintenance, climate change or anything else her peers don’t believe exists would be easier to credibly present than the choreography she has been assigned to design: she must somehow deliver believable sound bytes about stopping predatory abuses of power with just enough winks and nods to assure to her peers that they don’t really need the training. That’s got to be tough duty for a woman who has admitted that despite a studied personal risk analysis of her male counterparts’ behavior at session that leads her to limit socializing with them, even she is only “usually” able to extricate herself “before anything happens.” One wonders what happened to her those other times and who was involved — a discussion subject that would surely garner all of her peers’ immediate and undivided attention. She’s unlikely to ever risk saying because of fear of rejection “out of hand” from the president of the Senate, fear of being branded as a floozy under her own publicly stated standard, and/or fear of becoming tagged as a “difficult person to work with” (the easily decoded code for b*tch) among the men she legislates with. So she’s not so different from the rest of us after all. Bottom line: the current leadership’s public statements perfectly illustrate why your service as a juror is the fairest, most objective means of facilitating or forcing real change. Your vote works too.
mike from iowa
Salem would not have happened had someone not made up religion to try to control people, Grudz. BCB is right as usual.
Linda M. Hasselstrom
I’m saddened to see a woman in an influential position, especially one who admittedly has never suffered from unwanted attention or even outright assault, suggest that the reason these things happen is that the victim put herself in a position to be attacked. This is classic blaming the victim, and worse, it’s by someone who has never suffered abuse. “Let him who is without sin cast the first stone” is a popular saying. I’d say that the experts on this matter are women who have been abused, attacked, shamed–and I can testify that the ones I know did not put themselves in “those positions” and were desperately TRYING to extricate themselves “before anything happens.” Thank you, Seth Tupper, for the direct quotations in which this woman shows herself to be incapable of representing women who have been wronged in this way.
BCB, I’m hoping we can interpret it simply as a statement that Peters hasn’t taken on an active investigative role. That statement would be less bad than the interpretation you suggest. It would also be consistent with her performance as chair of the Government Operations and Audit Committee.
I read Hasselstrom but cannot find Pochop. I think we should be careful to not criticize Ms. Peters too much as she seems to be trying to champion the training and will no doubt get much more press going forward. Perhaps some don’t like how she said things and she could improve with some more thoughts. This could become Ms. Peters new mission in the legislatures and kind suggestions or steering might be better than castigation.
JonD
Apologies, Cory. That is a worthwhile posting guideline and I will adhere to it in future.
Ryan
I agree with grudznick in his last comment – support is better than name calling and shaming.
[I like agreeing with grudz. I think his satire is usually on point and often seems underappreciated.]
Walking Dead
I’ve resisted commenting in the past, but this one is too close to home. I am now in the unfortunate position of having a 20-something daughter at a regional University, and at risk of sounding like an old white man (“things were so much better when I was young”) things AREN”T the same as when I was young. My wife and I, in our 20-somethings, lived for 10 years in a major city and NEVER encountered what is now commonplace at our Universities in both large and small communitites. I will not blame our current President exclusively for all of this, although the events of the last 2 years have normalized misogyny, but I do know that in the 10+ years my wife and I lived in a city of 3.5M+ inhabitants, she was never accosted even when walking home at 1am or later. In contrast, my daughter is now routinely accosted during the daytime at her University with comments about her body and sexual preferences, and in at least one case felt the need to “hide” in a store until a group of predatory males that had accosted her exited the area….at 1:30 in the afternoon, in a major city. This year her Christmas gift was a bottle of Mace and an “alert siren”.
I don’t really have a point, but the “blaming the victim” stuff only works if you assume it’s a rare occurrence. I no longer believe this is true, and unfortunately we have to figure out WHY this sort of disrespect and abuse appears to be increasing in society, despite our increasing recognition of its’ effects. To be frank, I”m deeply concerned about the apparently acceptable sexually-aggressive comments and actions that appear to be routine among our younger citizens. I have no solution to this, but I think it lies at the crux of our solution to these issues.
Kate
I got flashed this week by a barista in a hotel lobby on Christmas morning. Sen. Peters, was I “putting myself in a situation where that becomes a problem”? Perhaps ordering a latte was taking too much of a risk? When you blame women in Pierre for the behavior of men in Pierre, YOU are part of the problem.
Adam
I, truly, no longer expect any better understanding of justice or morality from a South Dakota legislator than what Sen. Deb Peters has just demonstrated.
I hope some national news picks up on Sen. Peters’ statements – just to give suburbanites across the country another glimpse of what a kindergartener state, in America, looks like.
99% of Americans have absolutely zero idea what life is really like in a rural state. I think conservative suburbanites who fantisize about life in rural areas would slow their fancy if only they knew enough truth on the drawbacks of a place like Conservakota. I’d bet that strategy would effectively cut into Republican leverage, nationwide, in the voting booth.
jerry
As an old guy with a bad attitude in general and especially about the way things are now and have been for about 40 years, I wonder if the reason that men are now disrespecting women even more, is due to the fact that we have become weak as a gender and need to lash out at those we feel are weaker than us. When someone like Senator Peters comes out and grovels at the feet of those bully predators, it only adds to that problem you note Ms. Kate. Sexual predators are just another name for bully’s.
Lars Aanning
Not an expert, but after hearing this woman lash out at a GOAC hearing earlier this year in Pierre, I can understand why no one has messed with her….
Diane
Sorry Deb, you have no idea what happens in Pierre. While I was a state employee working in the Capitol building, I was harassed by George Valentine (gross man/lobbyist), had my ass pinched by Harvey Krautschun (ass/representative), was trapped in my hotel room kitchen by a co-worker, and propositioned by another co-worker. Deb, do you have ANY girlfriends to talk with? Honestly, most of the women I know have been sexually harassed at some point. You live under a rock.
mike from iowa
Wasn’t it obvious from wingnut campaigns last year that the major shift was from being racial towards Obama to misogyny towards HRC and other female candidates?
@ Kate- you tell them, girl. No one explains misogyny like another woman.
Peters and Howie are trying to change the narrative away from all the corruption in Pierre that emanates and permeates South Dakota wingnut legislators. If they set the narrative, they can control it. Are we going to let them?
Roberta
The fact that Peters said that she leaves the bar before anything happens shows that she is aware that “nothing good happens after midnight.” Her statements are victim blaming, sure, but they also indicate that she knows that socializing with legislators and others in Pierre may put a woman in dangerous or tough situations. How nice would it be if a woman could be out at whatever time she wanted and, no matter how late or how many drinks, she could feel safe in Pierre surrounded by people associated with the legislative session? Peters’ statement that she leaves before anything happens confirms that this scenario is not the case in Pierre among our state’s “leaders.”
jerry
Max Boot says this:
“”A quarter century is enough time to examine deeply held shibboleths and to see if they comport with reality. In my case, I have concluded that my beliefs were based more on faith than on a critical examination of the evidence. In the last few years, in particular, it has become impossible for me to deny the reality of discrimination, harassment, even violence that people of color and women continue to experience in modern-day America from a power structure that remains for the most part in the hands of straight, white males. People like me, in other words. Whether I realize it or not, I have benefited from my skin color and my gender — and those of a different gender or sexuality or skin color have suffered because of it.
Sigh. Victim blaming. This is just ridiculous. “well, what were you wearing?” “gosh, how much did you have to drink?” This tired old “I don’t put myself in those situations” b.s. is way past getting old.
…That’s too bad that Jeffrey Dahmer killed all those people and ate them, but if they hadn’t put themselves in that situation…..
Peters isn’t alone in these thoughts, unfortunately. Her ignorance and continuing the “it’s not their fault if those darn girls put themselves in a bar after midnight” thought process – shows we have a long way to go. A very long way to go.
Come on Ms Peters. This is just backwards thinking. Ridiculous.
Oh Boy.
Maybe Ms Peters actually heard stuff she claims she didn’t hear and pre-judged it as locker room talk and filtered it out.
I can pretty much guess girls in middle school through the rest of their lives hear this stuff regularly.
Ms Peters says ‘I’ eight times in her message. She will want to brush up on her communication if she wants to go higher places in the future, as the all about me talk usually never wins voters over.
It’s saying to victims and voters – Okay, okay, we get it, we get it. You’re way too smart to ever put yourself in a situation to get harassed or raped. Does she really want that kind of message?
What an ass. Never heard, never saw, never knew – she’s definitely lived in a bubble her whole life, either a bubble of privilege and/or willful ignorance.
According the Ms Peters, if women folk would just wear the roypublican issued burkas, all would be well. However, Ms. Peters declares that “”and if I do, I usually extricate myself before anything happens”” So what does “usually” mean? It looks like it means that what she is declaring an anomaly has actually happened to her…several times. What a hypocrite.
Burkas—there you go, Jerry! No red-blooded South Dakota man would ever direct a sexual advance at a woman in a burka.
I can personally attest that she knew of Rep. Gosch’s comments toward me; we had a conversation about it. If she wants to put her blinders on, that’s an unfortunate choice, but it’s not a truthful statement to say she never heard anything.
I think you all are a bit quick to tell Ms. Peters what she should think or feel, and how precise her language should be.
First, if she says has never suffered nor personally heard of any sexual discrimination, harassment or other sexual misconduct during her nearly 14 years in the legislature, who are you to challenge that? Aren’t you all the same group saying that if a victim makes an accusation, we need to believe them immediately, without regard to their credibility? However, the experience of Ms. Peters should apparently be questioned and doubted immediately because you have all had different experiences? Or is it just because you are so proud of yourself for being on the “victims” side that you don’t believe anything you hear that isn’t an accusation of wrongdoing? Get it together, folks.
Second, she isn’t saying there is “blame” to be placed on victims. The recent over-use of the term “victim blaming” just feels childish because it prevents us from having constructive conversations about reducing and eliminating sexual assaults and harassment. If people are all going to shout “Victim Blaming!” every time somebody says something more practical than “all predators must immediately stop being predators,” nothing good will ever come from the recent attention to this problem. Does anybody here honestly think that telling somebody to be careful “victim blaming”? Seriously, anybody?
Are any of you parents? Is the advice you give your children full of risk assessment and risk mitigation, or do you simply say to your children “People are supposed to be honorable, and good, and truthful, so just assume that will happen and never be skeptical of a stranger, and don’t look over your shoulder, and go ahead and keep the keys in the car.”
In every other scenario, people are encouraged to take affirmative, proactive steps to defend their bodies and their property. If I went to a baseball game and left my car running in the parking lot the whole time, would people defend my status as a victim when my car gets stolen, or would people suggest I should have taken some common-sense action to protect it? Why is suggesting people exercise this same common sense to protect against sexual predators so disgusting to all of you?
I agree 100% that all criminals should stop being criminals immediately, however, they don’t feel like complying with that request. So, in response to the really real world that really does exist around us, we can either just keep asking immoral rapists to please stop being immoral rapists, or we can use the self-preservation instincts we have acquired over the millennia and be realistic about how to reduce the risks we face in any given situation.
Peters says it is the victims fault. I have also heard a woman say that there is no such thing as rape, it is just great sex. Well, listening to the extremes will not get us anywhere. If someone is wronged, it does not matter if everyone has not been wronged, wrong is still wrong.
Can anybody show me where Ms. Peters blames a victim? Or says something is a victim’s fault?
I know I’m dyslexic, but my reading comprehension is usually decent enough to get the gist of things… hmmmm
I think people are putting their own words in her mouth.
“…..I don’t put myself in those positions, and if I do, I usually extricate myself before anything happens….” She could very well be the victim of having a drug put in her club soda and not even know it, based on this statement.
Now, Ryan, let’s not get clever on Senator Peters’s defense. The implication is clear. “I don’t put myself into situations where that becomes a problem” suggests that people experiencing harassment could have avoided the problem by not putting themselves into risky situations. Her subsequent statement about bars at midnight underplay the problem and condescend to victims, suggesting that if folks just had the good sense to listen to their dad’s advice and not go out late to seedy bars, they wouldn’t have found themselves in their predicament.
And I think we’ve already had the discussion that even at bars, no one should be subjected to unwanted sexual advances. Let’s not replow that field, other than to say that suggesting that harassment results from putting oneself in a bad situation misses the point, that there is no situation—at least not a normal situation in Pierre during Legislative Session—in which ogling, groping, or saying lewd things to a woman is justified by the woman’s choice to place herself in a workplace or public situation.
I think Ms. Peters sounds a little bit “I’m better than you,” too, but she isn’t saying victims are to blame, she is saying some people don’t protect what’s important to them like she does. We live in an ugly world, filled with tough stuff happening all the time to all sorts of people. I understand it is currently the trend to ignore rationality in problem solving, and to simply say that THINGS SHOULD BE DIFFERENT. I just don’t think that does any good.
Of course there are no situations that unwanted groping, harassment, or assault is OK. But look at this – we agree, but nothing happened – see how the world doesn’t change just because we agree about that?
Does anybody here leave their garage door open all day while they are at work? Does anybody here leave their wallet on the table unsupervised when you go pee at a restaurant? Does anybody walk around downtown Sioux Falls in the middle of the night showing off expensive jewelry? Does anybody blindly ignore the risks that exist in this sad, angry, criminal-filled world?
We tell people that we care about all the time what they should or could do to protect themselves from predators in all sorts of situations without it being called “victim blaming.” Why is it so wrong to tell people to be smart and make defensive decisions when it comes to just this one particular issue?
A lot of women have been carefully taught that “As long as you don’t _____, _____ will never happen to you, because you’re a good girl.” Which is why, when “that” does happen to them, they don’t tell anybody because it would be proof that they weren’t “good.” And why they do say things like “I don’t put myself in those positions”, because they’re proving what a good girl they are. Circular loops are an excellent way of controlling people.
Meanwhile, 54% have experienced “unwanted and inappropriate sexual advances” at some point in their lives, and 30% of them on the job. In my own private poll of friends, every single one of us has been sexually harassed at work, from groping to comments that would, frankly, get us banned from Cory’s blog if I repeated them.
But Ms. Peters doesn’t put herself “in those positions.” Like i said, circular loops are an excellent way of controlling people.
I think Ms Peters is full of prunes.
If somebody uses this ridiculous advice: “As long as you don’t _____, _____ will never happen to you, because you’re a good girl.” I would suggest that that person is a moron.
Eve, if your “statistics” are to be believed, isn’t it quite possible that Ms. Peters falls into that 46% (of people? women? adults? caucasians? legislators?) group that has not experienced such unwanted and inappropriate sexual advances? Also, Eve, somebody disagreeing with you doesn’t make their argument circular and doesn’t mean they want to control people. A circular argument is one that depends on its own assumptions to prove itself correct. Ms. Peters said that she has not been a victim of these crimes, and she said that she doesn’t spend time at the types of places where these crimes are quite prominent. Neither of those statements are assumptions, and neither relies on the other. She isn’t making any circular loops, you just don’t like what she is saying because it’s different than what you think.
I think everyone here seems upset that Ms. Peters had the audacity to not be a victim of harassment or assault.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51-hepLP8J4
Cory, yes, I agree with you that I think Ms. Peters is suggesting that “people experiencing harassment could have avoided the problem by not putting themselves into risky situations.” At least, I think she is suggesting that SOME people experiencing harassment could have avoided the problem by not putting themselves into risky situations.
Is she wrong? Do you think people should take no preventative measures in their lives because bad things SHOULDN’T happen?
This is the part of the nation-wide conversation that everyone is scared to have because some social justice warriors and big-mouthed teenagers with no life experience are quick to call everyone “Victim Blamers” when we want to have a conversation about what might actually work in reducing the prevalence of these kinds of crimes.
Thank you, JonD for that BRILLIANT video which pretty much sums it up.
Sigh. Of course I’m not saying that people should not take any precautions against crime. However, I am sick to death of people saying things like, “I’m not at a bar after midnight, you know what I mean? So I don’t know where all of these other issues occurred. I don’t know, and I don’t know enough about each of the individual scenarios, but I don’t put myself in those positions, and if I do, I usually extricate myself before anything happens.” Like most sexual harassment on the job happens in a bar after midnight when the person is there for the sheer fun of it. No, most sexual harassment on the job happens ON THE FRIGGING JOB. How hard is that to
understand? And what makes this even worse is that Ms. Peters is (according to the Rapid City Journal) facilitating the upcoming sexual-harassment training session for legislators on January 17. It makes me wonder (1) how seriously she is taking her facilitation duties, (2) and what kind of training this will be? So far, Ms. Peters’ comments don’t give me much confidence in how educational Jan. 17 will be.
[Hey, explanations on YouTube videos and other obtuse URLs, please. No context, no clicks.]
Senator Peters takes to Twitter this afternoon and offers this twist:
“Co-worker bullying”—really? Legislator vs legislator? More prevalent than sexual harassment?
No doubt, Mr. H. Have you not listened to the committees and what happened to poor Mr. Moser probably happens to many. Imagine how the beating of brows takes place in the caucuses.
Ms. Fischer, I don’t think young Ms. Peters is standing up there talking during this training. I think she arranged for a professional to do it.
Does the quoted language “I also don’t go looking for it in Pierre either” seem to suggest that there are “others” who do “go looking for it” – namely, to be sexually abused or harassed?”
Ogling is now harrassment? There will be a lot more fellows in hot water come the time for the sessions in Pierre. And with Mr. Nelson and his new Lords of Salem clan leading the charge, best watch out.
“…. I don’t know, and I don’t know enough about each of the individual scenarios, but I don’t put myself in those positions, and if I do, I usually extricate myself before anything happens.” (Seth Tupper, “Peters: Sex Misconduct in Pierre Is ‘Anomaly’,” Rapid City Journal, 2017.12.26). The Lt. Gov. has similarly stated: “Any perception that there is some sort of culture that exists during the legislative session, I would absolutely reject that out of hand.” (“Sexism in State House: Women detail harassment in Pierre,” Dana Ferguson and Megan Raposa, Argus Leader, 2017.10.21) Wishful thinking or a chilling message? Either way, it relays an unequivocal preference for the status quo and excuses bullying, boorish and discriminatory behavior that falls far below the biblical canons that some of these same men (and women) campaign upon. Thus I feel sorry for Ms. Peters. Karma has assigned her the task of “training” our legislators about sexual harassment after they have had full-throated, public affirmation from their leadership that their behavior is not the problem. A training session on Big Foot habitat maintenance, climate change or anything else her peers don’t believe exists would be easier to credibly present than the choreography she has been assigned to design: she must somehow deliver believable sound bytes about stopping predatory abuses of power with just enough winks and nods to assure to her peers that they don’t really need the training. That’s got to be tough duty for a woman who has admitted that despite a studied personal risk analysis of her male counterparts’ behavior at session that leads her to limit socializing with them, even she is only “usually” able to extricate herself “before anything happens.” One wonders what happened to her those other times and who was involved — a discussion subject that would surely garner all of her peers’ immediate and undivided attention. She’s unlikely to ever risk saying because of fear of rejection “out of hand” from the president of the Senate, fear of being branded as a floozy under her own publicly stated standard, and/or fear of becoming tagged as a “difficult person to work with” (the easily decoded code for b*tch) among the men she legislates with. So she’s not so different from the rest of us after all. Bottom line: the current leadership’s public statements perfectly illustrate why your service as a juror is the fairest, most objective means of facilitating or forcing real change. Your vote works too.
Salem would not have happened had someone not made up religion to try to control people, Grudz. BCB is right as usual.
I’m saddened to see a woman in an influential position, especially one who admittedly has never suffered from unwanted attention or even outright assault, suggest that the reason these things happen is that the victim put herself in a position to be attacked. This is classic blaming the victim, and worse, it’s by someone who has never suffered abuse. “Let him who is without sin cast the first stone” is a popular saying. I’d say that the experts on this matter are women who have been abused, attacked, shamed–and I can testify that the ones I know did not put themselves in “those positions” and were desperately TRYING to extricate themselves “before anything happens.” Thank you, Seth Tupper, for the direct quotations in which this woman shows herself to be incapable of representing women who have been wronged in this way.
Grudz, let’s not trivialize this important issue. Please read Hasselstrom and Pochop.
BCB, I’m hoping we can interpret it simply as a statement that Peters hasn’t taken on an active investigative role. That statement would be less bad than the interpretation you suggest. It would also be consistent with her performance as chair of the Government Operations and Audit Committee.
Perhaps on “co-worker bullying,” Sen. Peters is thinking of the insult Senator Dave Omdahl threw at her on the Senate floor during debate on the 2016 potty bill.
I read Hasselstrom but cannot find Pochop. I think we should be careful to not criticize Ms. Peters too much as she seems to be trying to champion the training and will no doubt get much more press going forward. Perhaps some don’t like how she said things and she could improve with some more thoughts. This could become Ms. Peters new mission in the legislatures and kind suggestions or steering might be better than castigation.
Apologies, Cory. That is a worthwhile posting guideline and I will adhere to it in future.
I agree with grudznick in his last comment – support is better than name calling and shaming.
[I like agreeing with grudz. I think his satire is usually on point and often seems underappreciated.]
I’ve resisted commenting in the past, but this one is too close to home. I am now in the unfortunate position of having a 20-something daughter at a regional University, and at risk of sounding like an old white man (“things were so much better when I was young”) things AREN”T the same as when I was young. My wife and I, in our 20-somethings, lived for 10 years in a major city and NEVER encountered what is now commonplace at our Universities in both large and small communitites. I will not blame our current President exclusively for all of this, although the events of the last 2 years have normalized misogyny, but I do know that in the 10+ years my wife and I lived in a city of 3.5M+ inhabitants, she was never accosted even when walking home at 1am or later. In contrast, my daughter is now routinely accosted during the daytime at her University with comments about her body and sexual preferences, and in at least one case felt the need to “hide” in a store until a group of predatory males that had accosted her exited the area….at 1:30 in the afternoon, in a major city. This year her Christmas gift was a bottle of Mace and an “alert siren”.
I don’t really have a point, but the “blaming the victim” stuff only works if you assume it’s a rare occurrence. I no longer believe this is true, and unfortunately we have to figure out WHY this sort of disrespect and abuse appears to be increasing in society, despite our increasing recognition of its’ effects. To be frank, I”m deeply concerned about the apparently acceptable sexually-aggressive comments and actions that appear to be routine among our younger citizens. I have no solution to this, but I think it lies at the crux of our solution to these issues.
I got flashed this week by a barista in a hotel lobby on Christmas morning. Sen. Peters, was I “putting myself in a situation where that becomes a problem”? Perhaps ordering a latte was taking too much of a risk? When you blame women in Pierre for the behavior of men in Pierre, YOU are part of the problem.
I, truly, no longer expect any better understanding of justice or morality from a South Dakota legislator than what Sen. Deb Peters has just demonstrated.
I hope some national news picks up on Sen. Peters’ statements – just to give suburbanites across the country another glimpse of what a kindergartener state, in America, looks like.
99% of Americans have absolutely zero idea what life is really like in a rural state. I think conservative suburbanites who fantisize about life in rural areas would slow their fancy if only they knew enough truth on the drawbacks of a place like Conservakota. I’d bet that strategy would effectively cut into Republican leverage, nationwide, in the voting booth.
As an old guy with a bad attitude in general and especially about the way things are now and have been for about 40 years, I wonder if the reason that men are now disrespecting women even more, is due to the fact that we have become weak as a gender and need to lash out at those we feel are weaker than us. When someone like Senator Peters comes out and grovels at the feet of those bully predators, it only adds to that problem you note Ms. Kate. Sexual predators are just another name for bully’s.
Not an expert, but after hearing this woman lash out at a GOAC hearing earlier this year in Pierre, I can understand why no one has messed with her….
Sorry Deb, you have no idea what happens in Pierre. While I was a state employee working in the Capitol building, I was harassed by George Valentine (gross man/lobbyist), had my ass pinched by Harvey Krautschun (ass/representative), was trapped in my hotel room kitchen by a co-worker, and propositioned by another co-worker. Deb, do you have ANY girlfriends to talk with? Honestly, most of the women I know have been sexually harassed at some point. You live under a rock.
Wasn’t it obvious from wingnut campaigns last year that the major shift was from being racial towards Obama to misogyny towards HRC and other female candidates?
@ Kate- you tell them, girl. No one explains misogyny like another woman.
Peters and Howie are trying to change the narrative away from all the corruption in Pierre that emanates and permeates South Dakota wingnut legislators. If they set the narrative, they can control it. Are we going to let them?
The fact that Peters said that she leaves the bar before anything happens shows that she is aware that “nothing good happens after midnight.” Her statements are victim blaming, sure, but they also indicate that she knows that socializing with legislators and others in Pierre may put a woman in dangerous or tough situations. How nice would it be if a woman could be out at whatever time she wanted and, no matter how late or how many drinks, she could feel safe in Pierre surrounded by people associated with the legislative session? Peters’ statement that she leaves before anything happens confirms that this scenario is not the case in Pierre among our state’s “leaders.”
Max Boot says this:
“”A quarter century is enough time to examine deeply held shibboleths and to see if they comport with reality. In my case, I have concluded that my beliefs were based more on faith than on a critical examination of the evidence. In the last few years, in particular, it has become impossible for me to deny the reality of discrimination, harassment, even violence that people of color and women continue to experience in modern-day America from a power structure that remains for the most part in the hands of straight, white males. People like me, in other words. Whether I realize it or not, I have benefited from my skin color and my gender — and those of a different gender or sexuality or skin color have suffered because of it.
This sounds obvious, but it wasn’t clear to me until recently. I have had my consciousness raised. Seriously”” http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/12/27/2017-was-the-year-i-learned-about-my-white-privilege/
Max has found that the truth has set him free.