Learn more about the case and donate to her legal fees here.

Sign a petition demanding her release here.

This Thursday two Support New Yorkers will be speaking at the New York State Coalition Against Sexual Assault’s Annual Conference in Albany.  This year’s theme, “Weaving A World Without Violence,” signifies all of the tremendous work so many of the various organizations and presenters are doing to address violence in their communities.  Topics will include bystanders’ work to prevent violence, mobilizing men and youth to prevent sexual assault, and the use of art therapy in healing.

Leah Todd and Sarah Hanks, a member of For the Birds, will present a panel about the work of the Support New York Collective entitled “Community Accountability and Transformative Justice: An Alternative Approach to Responding to Intimate Partner Violence”.

Find out more about NYSCASA, how to become a member, find a crisis center, or take action by visiting their website.

Turning the tables on an advocacy group that has long supported victims of pedophile priests, lawyers for the Roman Catholic Churchand priests accused of sexual abuse in two Missouri cases have gone to court to compel the group to disclose more than two decades of e-mails that could include correspondence with victims, lawyers, whistle-blowers, witnesses, the police, prosecutors and journalists.

The group, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, known as SNAP, is neither a plaintiff nor a defendant in the litigation. But the group has been subpoenaed five times in recent months in Kansas City and St. Louis, and its national director, David Clohessy, was questioned by a battery of lawyers for more than six hours this year. A judge in Kansas City ruled that the network must comply because it “almost certainly” had information relevant to the case.

The network and its allies say the legal action is part of a campaign by the church to cripple an organization that has been the most visible defender of victims, and a relentless adversary, for more than two decades. “If there is one group that the higher-ups, the bishops, would like to see silenced,” said Marci A. Hamilton, a law professor at Yeshiva University and an advocate for victims of clergy sex crimes, “it definitely would be SNAP. And that’s what they’re going after. They’re trying to find a way to silence SNAP.”

Lawyers for the church and priests say they cannot comment because of a judge’s order. But William Donohue, president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, a church advocacy group in New York, said targeting the network was justified because “SNAP is a menace to the Catholic Church.”

Mr. Donohue said leading bishops he knew had resolved to fight back more aggressively against the group: “The bishops have come together collectively. I can’t give you the names, but there’s a growing consensus on the part of the bishops that they had better toughen up and go out and buy some good lawyers to get tough. We don’t need altar boys.”

He said bishops were also rethinking their approach of paying large settlements to groups of victims. “The church has been too quick to write a check, and I think they’ve realized it would be a lot less expensive in the long run if we fought them one by one,” Mr. Donohue said.

However, a spokeswoman for the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Sister Mary Ann Walsh, said Mr. Donohue was incorrect.

“There is no national strategy,” she said, and there was no meeting where legal counsel for the bishops decided to get more aggressive.

Mr. Clohessy and others founded the survivors network as a loose collective of volunteers who had been victimized by Catholic priests. Their goal was to help others grapple with the emotional and psychological fallout. They make referrals to therapists and lawyers, and hold protests outside church offices.

The group has three paid staff members, two part-time administrators and volunteers who lead 55 chapters in the United States and about 8 overseas. Its total revenue for 2010 was $352,903, some of it donations by lawyers who have sued the church. The group says it has spent about $50,000 and hundreds of hours of staff time since the subpoenas began, and is now arranging for lawyers who will work pro bono.

When the scandal over clergy sexual abuse reached a peak in Boston in 2002, American bishops met at their conference in Dallas with network members who gave emotional testimony about the toll of the abuse. But relations have deteriorated since then, and SNAP members say bishops now refuse to meet with them.

The first indication that the network would be caught up in legal proceedings came from Kansas City, where Bishop Robert W. Finn last year became the first American bishop ever to be criminally indicted for failure to report suspected child abuse.

Mr. Clohessy received a subpoena in October at his St. Louis home, where he works, regarding the case John Doe B.P. v. the Rev. Michael Tierney and the Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph.

Four plaintiffs are accusing Father Tierney of sexually abusing them years ago. The cases would be outside the statute of limitations in Missouri, but the plaintiffs contend they recovered their memories of abuse only recently.

The subpoena asked that Mr. Clohessy turn over all documents in the last 23 years that mention repressed memory, any current or former priest in Kansas City, the diocese, Father Tierney, John Doe or Rebecca Randles, the attorney for the plaintiffs.

The church’s lawyers say they need to see SNAP’s records to investigate whether Ms. Randles violated a gag order by giving the group information about one of the Tierney cases before it was filed, which the group then included in a news release.

Ms. Randles said in an interview: “I certainly didn’t violate the gag order that is based on the ethics rules. And I did get an informal opinion from the Missouri bar ethics council indicating that it was acceptable to give an advance copy of the petition as long as my client had given me permission to do so.”

Ten victims’ advocacy groups filed a supporting brief arguing that the subpoena was unconstitutional. The Missouri Press Association also filed a supporting brief.

However, Judge Ann Mesle of Missouri Circuit Court in Jackson County ruled that Mr. Clohessy must release the files and be deposed because he “almost certainly has knowledge concerning issues relevant to this litigation”

Mr. Clohessy was deposed in January by lawyers for five accused priests and the diocese. In the 215-page transcript, made public on March 2, most of the questions were not about the case but about the network — its budget, board of directors, staff members, donors and operating procedures.

Mr. Clohessy testified that he had never had contact with John Doe.

“It was not a fishing expedition,” Mr. Clohessy said. “It was a fishing, crabbing, shrimping, trash-collecting, draining the pond expedition. The real motive is to harass and discredit and bankrupt SNAP, while discouraging victims, witnesses, whistle-blowers, police, prosecutors and journalists from seeking our help.”

Many of the questions were intended to prove that the group does not meet the definition of a rape crisis center. If it did, the group’s records would be shielded under a Missouri statute.

In a damaging admission, Mr. Clohessy answered, “Sure,” when asked whether his group had ever issued a press release that contained false information. In an interview on Monday, he said his response had been an acknowledgment that there must have been some errors in the thousands of news releases and alerts that the group had sent out over the years, “but never intentionally, and never mistakes of substance.”

While Mr. Clohessy was being deposed, another network employee in St. Louis, Barbara Dorris, received a subpoena involving the case of Jane Doe 92 v. the Archdiocese of St. Louis, et al.

That subpoena was nearly identical to the one issued to Mr. Clohessy, said Ken Chackes, the attorney for Jane Doe. It requested all correspondence about repressed memory even though the Jane Doe case does not involve repressed memory.

Mr. Chackes said, “I assume there’s some kind of communication” between the church lawyers in the two cities.

In the Kansas City case, SNAP refused to turn over all the subpoenaed documents or answer all the questions in the deposition. So attorneys for the church and the priests have filed a motion to compel SNAP to comply. A hearing on the motion is scheduled for April 20.

The experience has sent a chill through the network’s volunteers, Ms. Dorris said. “They want to do what’s right, and they want to help others, but this is a threat,” she said. “I think for some it’s strengthened their resolve, but others are scared.”

by Zerlina Maxwell (Ebony)

New rule for 2012: No more ad campaigns and public service announcements targeted at women to teach them how to avoid rape.  It’s not effective, it’s offensive, and it’s also a lie. Telling women that they can behave in a certain way to avoid rape creates a false sense of security and it isn’t the most effective way to lower the horrible statistics which show that 1 in 5 women will become victims of a completed or attempted rape in their lifetime.  The numbers for African American women are even higher at nearly 1 in 4.

We need anti-rape campaigns that target young men and boys.  Campaigns that teach them from a young age how to respect women, and ultimately themselves, and to never ever be rapists.  In addition, we should implore our men and boys to call out their friends, relatives, and classmates for inappropriate behavior and create systems of accountability amongst them.

There are a number of men who do not understand what constitutes a “rape”, which is a consequence of the “stranger in the alley” falsehood presented in movies and popular culture.  You don’t need a mask and a gun to sexually violate a woman. The truth is that rape can happen with a woman you are dating whom you’ve had sex with previously, in a monogamous relationship, and even in marriage.  If one party withdraws consent at any time then it’s rape.  Consent can be withdrawn by the words “no “or “stop” and in many states, a woman doesn’t have to say no at all.  Consumption of alcohol can prevent a woman from being able to legally offer consent. Therefore, it is important for men and women alike to be very clear about their intentions and prioritize consent over the excitement of getting some.

Our community, much like society-at-large, needs a paradigm shift as it relates to our sexual assault prevention efforts.  For so long all of our energy has been directed at women, teaching them to be more “ladylike” and to not be “promiscuous” to not drink too much or to not wear a skirt. Newsflash: men don’t decide to become rapists because they spot a woman dressed like a video vixen or because a girl has been sexually assertive.

How about we teach young men when a woman says stop, they stop? How about we teach young men that when a woman has too much to drink that they should not have sex with her, if for no other reason but to protect themselves from being accused of a crime? How about we teach young men that when they see their friends doing something inappropriate to intervene or to stop being friends?  The culture that allows men to violate women will continue to flourish so long as there is no great social consequence for men who do so. And while many men punished for sexual assaults each year, countless others are able to commit rape and other crimes against women because we so often blame the victim instead of the guilty party.

Holding women and girls accountable for preventing sexual assault hasn’t worked and so long as men commit the majority of rapes, men need to be at the heart of our tactics for preventing them.  Let’s stop teaching ‘how to avoid being a victim’ and instead, attack the culture that creates predators in the first place.

Zerlina Maxwell is a political analyst and staff writer for The Loop 21.You can follow her on Twitter: @ZerlinaMaxwell

Violent sex crimes committed by active U.S. Army soldiers have almost doubled over the past five years, due in part to the trauma of war, according to an Army report released on Thursday.

Reported violent sex crimes increased by 90 percent over the five-year period from 2006 to 2011. There were 2,811 violent felonies in 2011, nearly half of which were violent felony sex crimes. Most were committed in the United States.

One violent sex crime was committed by a soldier every six hours and 40 minutes in 2011, the Army said, serving as the main driver for an overall increase in violent felony crimes.

Higher rates of violent sex crimes are “likely outcomes” of intentional misconduct, lax discipline, post-combat adrenaline, high levels of stress and behavioral health issues, the report said.

“While we have made tremendous strides over the past decade, there is still much work to be done,” Army Vice Chief of Staff General Peter Chiarelli said in a statement.

“Many of our biggest challenges lie ahead after our soldiers return home and begin the process of reintegrating back into their units, families and communities,” Chiarelli said.

Violent sex crimes committed by U.S. Army troops increased at a rate that consistently outpaced the national trend, a gap that is expected to continue to grow, the Army said.

The top five violent felony offenses committed by soldiers in 2011 were aggravated assault, rape, aggravated sexual assault, forcible sodomy and child pornography.

Soldiers suffering from issues such as Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), traumatic brain injury, and depression have been shown to have higher incidences of partner abuse, according to the report.

Soldiers with PTSD are up to three times more likely to be aggressive with their female partners than those without such trauma, the report said.

The report also said that family abuse cases are typically underreported.

As the largest branch of the U.S. armed forces, the Army has done the bulk of the fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, including years of extended duty and repeated deployments. The rate of suicides among Army soldiers was steady in 2011 after years of rising, the report said.

Have you ever been called out? Are you a man who keeps getting called out by feminists who “take things too seriously” or “take themselves too seriously”? Are you a white feminist who has felt paralyzed when women of color questioned the inclusiveness of your efforts? Are you a white person who gets defensive when people of color bring up racism? Do you like to “mansplain” how things really are to women? Have you ever really said or thought a sentence starting with the words “But some of my best friends are…”? Do you ignore or mask your class privilege? Do you think people are “too P.C.” when they call out your language? Has a trans or non-gender-conforming person told you their preferred gender pronoun, but you can’t seem to use it because you don’t “get it” or you want to talk the way you’re used to? Are you a hetero person who gets weirded out when your queer friend asks you to hang out in queer spaces? Did you, hypothetically, get called out for drawing a transphobic, racist, and generally shitty comic and don’t understand why people complained because that’s how things really are and it’s other people who don’t “get it”?* You’re just calling it like you see it, right?

These represent a wide range of examples, but most of us have been called out before—myself included. The trouble is that most people are uncomfortable with admitting to these kinds of faults in themselves, past or present. Anyone who is reading this and exemplifies these kinds of behaviors would sooner go on the defensive than actually shut up and listen, but I’m hoping you are curious or bored or on a long subway ride or on the toilet or you want to pick a fight with me or something and you’ll humor me and read this.

I’m writing this because I keep noticing patterns in my loose community of punks where people keep sticking their foot in their mouth. It usually has to do with people being afraid to own or accept their privilege(s). I’ve seen people do some pretty impressive mental gymnastics in an attempt to bend reality to rationalize their ignorance versus just shutting up for a minute and learning a basic point from someone else’s experience.

For example, I’ve heard dudes say they don’t like female vocalists. When prompted, they’ll explain something like, “No, I’m not sexist. It’s just a taste preference” or “I don’t like high pitched voices” or something equally idiotic. They try to justify it as a “preference” or about their impeccable ear and good taste instead of understanding the inherent misogyny behind disliking the sound of 50% of the population’s singing voices. Not to mention that there is wide variation among both male and female vocals, including low-pitched women like Nico and high-pitched men like Geddy Lee. Another example is hearing men say things like “women aren’t funny” or “female comedians aren’t funny” without realizing the ways in which their dominant position in culture and society informs their opinion. I think what pisses me off so much–hearing these ideas come out of someone’s mouth who’s not a frat dude–is that it seems so antithetical to punk. It’s about blindly accepting dominant culture and refusing to examine one’s place in it.

I’ve also been in or witnessed various situations in which I’ve seen one privileged person called out by a person from an oppressed or marginalized group, and the privileged person automatically gets defensive and redirects the conversation by (a) claiming some kind of other marginalized position (that somehow gives them immunity from being a dick) or (b) pointing out that worse oppression exists out there in the world (i.e. women in some nameless “backwards” country have it way worse, which magically negates all forms of oppression in the U.S. Hooray!). I can’t stand this fucked up bullshit logic and all the work it requires to turn a conversation completely around just to ignore the person who spoke up so you can feel less like an asshole (while still being one).

I’m so tired of having my mind boggled by these kinds of situations that I’ve wanted to create some kind of tool…for tools (har, har). In all seriousness, though, many people–myself included–are at times blind to our own privileges. That is the whole thing about privilege: people who have it don’t have to see it or deal with it because they are the dominant group and benefit from it. As a well-educated, white cis woman, there are times when I don’t get something at first and I make mistakes or I need to put in extra work to see beyond my privileged positions. And oftentimes it takes all kinds of fucking up and stumbling and learning and re-learning to see it and learn how to be less of an asshole. That is why it’s important to learn from examples in which one’s privilege is called out. That may be easier said than done, which is why I’m here to offer my own experience as an educator.

I’m a sexuality educator by trade. I get paid to talk about sex, which is pretty great. A lot of my work is skills-based, so we do things like teach kids an acronym that will serve as an mneumonic device (remember our friend Roy G. Biv for remembering the colors of the rainbow?) to use when confronting a difficult situation in their lives, like peer pressure or a partner pressuring them to have unprotected sex. And even with adults we have little tricks like “the 4 steps” to answering a challenging question. Often the first step is to breathe, and most people can do that!

Lately, I’ve been thinking about my experiences as an educator and how it’s made me more patient and understanding with people outside of work—in my personal life and in my community. It’s forced me to be more careful with my language and to be more aware of the ways in which my words may affect someone else’s feelings or learning. It’s forced me to accept and enjoy that I’m still learning instead of being too stubborn to listen to other people’s points. So I decided to outline some steps to consider if/when you’ve been called out.

What to Do if You’ve Been Called Out

So, you’ve been called out. It doesn’t feel good, but remember it feels worse to have to call someone out for alienating, offending, or disrespecting you. Ouch.

So now what? Here are some relatively simple steps to help you minimize harm, prevent being called out in the future, and maybe even become an ally.

Step #1: Breathe.
Bite your tongue if you have to, and take a deep breath.

Step #2: Listen.
Shut up and listen!
“But…”
No! Really…
“But, but…”
LISTEN. Listening is harder than it seems. Take the time to hear what the person is telling you. Experiment with letting them speak for 30 seconds, 60 seconds, 2 minutes, etc. without interrupting or trying to make a point or defend your actions. Hear them out. The best thing you can do as an ally is listen.

Step #3: Kill your intentions.
Don’t cling on to your intentions. Unless you are a complete asshole, you didn’t mean to hurt someone. And if you are a complete asshole, you’re probably not reading this to figure out how not to be one. It doesn’t matter what you meant, it matters what you said and how it made the person feel. You said something hurtful and it’s your responsibility to deal with it. Getting wrapped up in “but what I meant…” or “but I didn’t mean to” is not going to help right now. If it’s all just a miscommunication then you can at least learn how to be a more effective and sensitive communicator.

Step #4: Assume their intentions are good.
Likewise, assume they are coming from a good place as well. Are you getting called out because someone is mean and trying to make your life difficult? Hell no. This is not their hobby and there’s no conspiracy against you. They are calling you out because you made them uncomfortable and they have the courage to speak up. Remember, while it may not feel good to know you said something ignorant or disrespectful, it feels worse to be disrespected or alienated. Try to empathize. Have you ever had to call someone else out? What did it feel like to be on the other end?

Step #5: Ask.
Don’t tuck your tail between your legs and leave. Seize the opportunity to make amends and learn. Be present. Make sure you are clear about why you were called out. How did it make them feel? What do they need from you? Is there an alternate thing you can say/do in the future to not offend? How can you advocate for them? Is there research you need to do on your own to educate yourself? Try asking questions, but note that they have the right to pass down educating you. It’s not the responsibility of oppressed groups to teach the oppressor, so don’t get pissed off if they don’t want to teach you. It’s your responsibility to learn and anything they teach you is out of generosity. Be thankful for their time and patience.

Step #6: Learn and reflect.
Even if you will never be on the same page or at the same place in your understanding, think about what you can learn from the experience. What can you do differently in the future? How may this conversation apply to other areas in your life? How can you be more aware of your privilege(s)? How can you advocate for others?

*this was a reference to a cartoon that was in MRR and myself and some others wrote letters about and then the artist basically said what he saw is just the way it is and then a bunch of dudes said people like me have too much time on our hands since we write letters to MRR but then they…wrote letters to MRR to say that.

No Forced Kisses for Your Kids: A Holiday Safety Tip for Families

As parents well know, the holiday season is both incredibly exciting and potentially overwhelming for kids, sometimes all rolled together into one. At gatherings with families and friends, expectations about affection, attention, and teasing can create unnecessary stress and discomfort. By accepting our children’s different personalities and thinking through our boundaries ahead of time, we can teach our kids important life skills and make holiday parties and reunions more fun.

Most of us can remember being pressured to just “suffer through it” from our own childhoods. Who doesn’t recall being forced to kiss “Great Aunt Edna” as a kid, or getting scratched by Uncle Bob’s beard as he leaned in for a squeeze? Or, being told to just ignore the teasing and roughhousing of our cousins?

As a mother, I can relate to the embarrassment that a parent might feel when a child doesn’t want to give a big hug to Grandma when she walks in the door—especially if Grandma has been eagerly anticipating the visit for weeks and months. But through my work teaching personal safety as a Kidpower instructor, I have learned that supporting our children when they set boundaries is a very important practice.

Backing up a child who doesn’t want to be kissed or hugged does not mean that Grandma, or Great Aunt Edna, or Uncle Bob or Cousin Sara are doing anything wrong, but it does demonstrate that touch and play for affection or fun is your child’s choice in all situations. The holidays are a perfect time to work on “boundary setting” with our kids, so they feel confident and empowered as they move through different ages and stages of life.

When possible, try to bring relatives into this conversation ahead of time, letting them know that you are practicing with the kids to help them learn to set boundaries—and who better to practice with than people who know and care about the kids. That way, when a child sets a boundary with Grandma, she can feel that she’s part of a positive practice rather than left out. Some parents report that this is a difficult conversation to have, but I maintain that is an important one, and an opportunity for meaningful dialogue and exploration. Many parents feel that their culture has expectations the children show adults respect through affection. At Kidpower, we have found that this is truly a cross-cultural phenomenon across a wide variety of backgrounds, and an issue that is worth addressing: how can we come up with ways for children to show respect to their elders in ways that feel nurturing and respectful to the child as well? One point I like to emphasize about child safety is to ask “How can we expect our children to set clear boundaries about touch when they are on their own, if we do not support them in doing so when we are together with our families, standing right there in a position to advocate for our kids and back them up?” In practice, this may be as simple (yet powerful) as saying, “Do you want to give Grandma a hug, a high-five, a kiss, or a wave? ….Not right now? Okay… Maybe you’ll want to blow a kiss or do a high-five later.”

Some kids are social butterflies and will thrive on the opportunities to be the center of attention. Be prepared to help them to notice the boundaries of others and to remember to follow your safety rules about Checking First before changing the plan, even in a family gathering. Other children are more reserved and are best off being allowed to warm up at their own pace. They might need your involved advocacy to redirect unwanted attention away from them and your help in setting boundaries when well-meaning adults try to pressure them.

Even if a relative is offended when a child does not want to kiss or hug them, this is an important time to keep in mind the bottom line—kids need to learn from an early age that touch or play for affection and fun should be the choice of BOTH people, safe, allowed by the adults in charge, and not a secret. These core safety rules should be respected in all situations.

It’s confusing for kids to try to set aside their feelings of discomfort for certain kinds of affection or teasing in the name of good manners, since it gives young people a contradictory message about their boundaries. Keep in mind Kidpower’s founding principle: A child’s safety and healthy self-esteem are more important than ANYONE’s embarrassment, inconvenience, or offense. Or, more simply stated: Put Safety First.

We are a grassroots group of women and men called Safe Slope, and our work is focused on providing community-based responses to violence. Safe Slope formed in Brooklyn in August 2011 to respond to multiple sexual assaults that occurred in Park Slope and several surrounding neighborhoods. Our goal is to work with neighbors to empower and protect the community, and to help create a citywide network of those seeking to do the same.

First, we applaud the NYPD’s decision to be more open with the public and to take these assaults more seriously by investing extra resources, such as more officers patrolling the neighborhood and doing more to increase awareness, such as handing out brochures at subway stations. 

However, we are deeply concerned with some of the NYPD’s responses—both before and after the increased police presence that began the week of September 18^th.  We have compiled examples we have seen with our own eyes and ones that have been reported to us by community members. We are writing so that we may highlight practices by officers that we believe may continue to harm women in our community. We are not bringing these to your attention as mere criticism. We are concerned about the impact of such actions and it is our hope that we can provide realistic solutions to truly make our community safer.  Please note that these examples may not be true for all officers; however, this pattern by any number of officers is counterproductive to increasing safety in our community, and these actions must be addressed.  

Issue 1: Showing Videos of Attacks to Women: We were alerted by community members that police officers have been going door-to-door to show women videos of the assaults. While we appreciate that the police have been doing more direct outreach to raise awareness, we believe this is a harmful and unnecessary practice. Showing these videos can re-traumatize survivors of sexual assault. Considering that 1 out of every 6 American women has been the victim of an attempted or completed rape in her lifetime, there is at least a 1 in 6 chance that showing these videos will be incredibly traumatic for female viewers.

• Recommendation: We do not believe that showing videos of assault is a safe, productive, or necessary practice. Showing these videos is likely to do more harm than good. Instead of showing the videos, officers could explain, in sensitive terms, the prevalence of recent assaults, increased risk for violence in the neighborhood, and ways to protect oneself and one’s loved ones. If officers do choose to show the videos, please make it optional and, prior to showing the video, explain to women that the videos are extremely violent and may have a triggering effect on survivors of violence.

Issue 2: Following Women: While it is a relief to see more officers patrolling our blocks at night, women have reported that some officers have made them feel uncomfortable while walking alone at night. One woman explained that on her walk to the subway, two officers followed her closely, without explaining why or communicating with her at all. Considering that many women are already on-edge about potentially being followed by a perpetrator, closely following women without letting them gain your trust will make many women feel unsafe. In a similar fashion, some women have reported that officers in police cars have stopped their vehicles directly in front of them to stare at them and then drive away without a word.

• Recommendation:  We applaud the attempts of some officers to escort women in the area, but to do so without communication or context is ineffective and could be emotionally harmful.  Most women (and folks of other genders) do not like to be followed closely by strangers—even by those wearing a uniform. If your intentions are to make women feel safer, then communicate sensitively the increased risk of violence. Explain why officers are on the street and respectfully ask for permission to escort a woman to her destination.

 Issue 3: Promoting Victim-Blaming Messages: We have received reports that multiple women have been told by officers on patrol that they are making themselves targets of violence by wearing clothing items like shorts, dresses, or skirts. These messages place the blame on women, including the survivors of assaults, in our neighborhood. Women should be able to wear whatever they want without fear of violence. It is the job of the police to protect people from harm—not blame them for it.  

• Recommendation: Blame for sexual assault should be placed on perpetrators only. This type of messaging from the NYPD demonstrates a lack of sensitivity toward violence against women. The NYPD should raise awareness about the assaults and should not provide any type of information that places the onus of responsibility on victims or potential victims.

Issue 4: Trivializing Violence: Since the March 2011 assault, there have been many examples in which the NYPD did not take people seriously when they reported attempted assaults or when community members requested information about the crimes and police response. One recent example occurred the weekend of the September 11^th. After hearing about a recent attack, one woman saw a pair of officers in the Prospect Avenue R-train station. She took the opportunity to ask a female officer if there would be an increased police presence due to the assaults. The officer responded, “We have real things to worry about—like terrorists.” Aside from being disrespectful and trivializing violence against women, responses like these are likely to make women feel even less comfortable reporting a rape to the police, possibly leading to long term negative impacts.

• Recommendation:  All NYPD officers should be sensitive to the prevalence and prevention of ALL types of violence in the community.  All NYPD officers—not just SVU—should understand the scope and severity of sexual violence in NYC and take violence against women seriously.

Issue 5: Providing Only English Language Materials: The vast majority of information disseminated by the NYPD (e.g., police sketches with narratives, Crime Stoppers van announcements, etc.) is being provided in English only. These strategies are likely to be ineffective, as they fail to include a significant portion of our community’s population.

• Recommendation: Please provide Spanish-language materials in South Slope. Latinos are a significant portion of our community’s population and need to be informed to help build awareness and response. Moreover, Spanish-speaking Latinas should have equal access to information that may protect them from violence.

Issue 6: Educating Women Only: We have noticed, by and large, that when handing out brochures, officers are only providing them to women. This sends the message that only women are concerned about sexual assault and that it is a women’s issue.

• Recommendation:  People of all genders are responsible for understanding and preventing sexual assault. Awareness-raising should be directed to men so they may help protect their neighbors and pass the information on to female friends and family members. In fact, some members of Safe Slope are men and we have received a high number of volunteer requests from men. Many men care about this issue and want to be involved in addressing and preventing violence. 

Issue 7: Inconsistent Information or Withholding Information: Officers on the street have reported inconsistent information (e.g., number of cases, location of attacks) when asked about the assaults. During the summer, many officers were stationed on 5^th Avenue after one attack, but officers refused to provide information to those who asked why they were stationed there. As a result, it was Safe Slope members that put up flyers in the community to raise awareness about increased violence against women.   Many community members told us this was the first they heard about these crimes. Furthermore, many citizens of the surrounding communities have been relying on the latest news from blogs instead of the police, who have the most accurate information on crime reports.

• Recommendation:  If the NYPD truly cares about the marked increase in violence against women, please take the time to educate officers, providing them with consistent, up-to-date information about each case. Additionally, proactively offer this information to the community so they can be aware.  As Safe Slope members did over the summer, clearly post flyers and make information available as soon as assaults are reported. 

Together, these examples demonstrate a disappointing pattern of insensitive, misinformed responses to sexual assault in our community. While some officers have demonstrated best practices in their response, we are concerned about the impact of the practices we have highlighted. Such actions may further harm the community rather than protect the community. These practices cannot go on.

We urge the 72^nd and 78^th Precincts to immediately provide comprehensive sensitivity training to all officers.

The community does not need increased police presence alone. We need solutions that are sensitive to the complexities of sexual assault.  We are willing to provide further information or guidance, if needed. Some of us are community educators and we are willing to create and lead an appropriate sensitivity training.

Thank you for addressing the concerns of our community.

Signed,

The Members of Safe Slope