Category Archives: Pop Culture

Easy, ‘Breezy’, and Not So Beautiful: What Chris Brown’s New Tattoo Says About Our Society’s Tolerance of Domestic Violence

  by Katie Reyzis

As much as I try to remove myself from the gossip-laden world of pop-culture, the story of Rihanna and Chris Brown hits closer and closer to home for me with every update. To make a long story short, a verbal dispute between Rihanna and her then-boyfriend Brown, also known as ‘Breezy’, escalated to physical violence and resulted in assault charges against Brown in early 2009. Brown pled guilty to felony assault and the couple split, but media coverage of the incident continued as rumors surfaced about their reunion and their professional collaborations in music.

Through my work and experience with women’s issues, I have been exposed to the issue of domestic violence time and time again. While each situation may present different details about the people involved and the type of abuse, there are many overarching principles that remain the same. Chief among them is a concept known as the ‘cycle of violence,’ which I think has been largely ignored in the media’s coverage of Rihanna and Brown’s tumultuous relationship.

When the most recent articles about Brown were brought to my attention, I expected yet another aggressive comment on Twitter or something along the lines of that one chair-throwing incident.

Holy moly, I must say I didn’t see this one coming.

Brown’s latest contribution to the tabloids was released two days ago, when he was photographed with his newest tattoo of what at first glance appears to be a battered woman and bears a striking resemblance to his ex-girlfriend. While he claims that the image is art to represent a Mexican holiday called Dia de los Muertos (Day of the Dead), the tattoo’s resemblance to Rihanna is uncanny. Even despite the most recent affirmations from Brown’s tattoo artist that the tattoo was in fact an illustration of art, I am not convinced that Brown’s motives were purely creative. The placement of the tattoo coupled with Brown’s history of violence and continuous lack of remorse for his actions make me skeptical that he isn’t just looking to brag about his apparent immunity to punishment for his actions.

While Brown’s tattoo may truly be an artistic illustration of a M.A.C. cosmetic design, it still begs the question – why did a convicted felon of domestic assault choose to get a highly visible tattoo that can at best be described as a female face that has either been beaten or is “half dead”? And why is it that instead of Brown, Rihanna tends to be the one who catches the heat for the back and forth rumors that she and Brown are getting back together?

Rihanna, affectionately dubbed ‘RiRi’ by the press, may be a pop-singer and a high-fashion icon, but her personal exposure to domestic violence makes her like 1 in every 4 women in this country who experience physical, sexual, and emotional abuse by their intimate partners, family members, roommates, and other loved ones. Furthermore, the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence (NCADV) reports that, “Females who are 20-24 years of age are at the greatest risk of nonfatal intimate partner violence.” Rihanna fits into the statistics so neatly that her story should come as no surprise, but the media’s coverage and, subsequently, our society’s response to this issue remains stagnantly ignorant and it is time to catch up with the times.

Critics in the Public Relations field claim that Rihanna’s response and continued connection to Breezy demonstrates the normalization of domestic violence, but I argue to the contrary. I think that by blaming Rihanna, her critics are in fact the ones contributing to said normalization and disregarding a central component of abusive relationships, the aforementioned cycle of violence.

The cycle of violence is comprised of four phases, which form a pattern of abusive behavior: 1.) Tension Building 2.) Incident 3.) Reconciliation and 4.) Calm. These phases revolve in a circular paradigm that makes leaving an abusive situation extremely difficult, particularly when that situation, like Rihanna’s, involves an intimate partner. Although some critics of the cycle of violence state that it isn’t applicable to all intimate partner violence, it is a helpful tool for the public to explain how a person’s psyche and willpower can be broken down and how it can be incredibly difficult to leave an abuser. The psychological, emotional, and physical implications of this pattern are vastly complicated, and Rihanna’s status as a popular icon is a chance to highlight a horribly invasive issue in our daily lives and educate the public about domestic violence.

Sadly, the social reaction to the Rihanna – Brown saga has been disappointing to say the least. For instance, in March 2012, a steakhouse in Georgia had the audacity to create a ‘black and blue’ sandwich as a parody to the incident. The ‘cleverly’ titled sandwich certainly elicited quite a negative retort and an eventual apology from the restaurant, but this was not the first or the last disappointing play on words about the episode.

Just last month, comedian Joan Rivers tweeted the following message to Rihanna directly, “Rihanna confessed to Oprah Winfrey that she still loves Chris Brown. Idiot! Now it’s MY turn to slap her.” As repulsed as I am by Rivers’ remark, I am even more disappointed that her view, in various capacities, is shared by the media, the general public, and my own circle of friends.

As someone who due to her age and gender fits so neatly into the statistical risk factors for domestic violence as Rihanna, I am appalled by critics’ reactions to this situation and disappointed by the fact that coverage of her story has not taken a different angle. For instance, why, instead of criticizing Rihanna’s coping mechanisms with her love of an abusive ex-boyfriend, are we not focusing on how this story demonstrates that domestic violence can affect everyone, even the wealthiest, prettiest, and most famous people in our society? This could have been a chance to underscore a crucial issue and, most importantly, accentuate the cycle of violence that is so common among those 1 in 4 women who are faced with domestic violence. I purposely repeat this statistic twice to draw attention to that fact that it is highly likely that someone you know has experienced it as well.

Yet, despite my loathing of Brown’s actions in this case and the media’s uninformed coverage of this issue, it is important to consider that Brown doesn’t exactly have the statistics on his side either.

The NCADV indicates that “Children witnessing domestic violence and living in an environment where violence occurs may experience some of the same trauma as abused children.”  By the same token, “Boys who witness domestic violence are twice as likely to abuse their own partners and children when they become adults.”  Brown’s mother has been very candid about her history of domestic abuse and very supportive of the steps her son has taken to right his wrongs, but the fact remains that his history cannot excuse his actions in adulthood.

The facts are simple: We know domestic violence exists in America. We know that no one is exempt from it. We know we can report it and speak out against it. So why do we tolerate it?

Even if Rihanna and Brown really did laugh about all this ‘erroneous’ media coverage of the tattoo that resembles a face very similar to hers, the moral of this story is that her brush with domestic abuse and Brown’s unapologetic demeanor are far from unique. Belittling Rihanna’s emotional struggle and continued feelings of love toward her abuser only heighten the obstacles domestic violence victims face in coming forward and seeking assistance.

In my ideal world, I would emphasize a few reforms to the current status of this story in the media:

First, let’s show our understanding for someone in Rihanna’s situation, that leaving an abusive relationship is not black and white and takes many times to leave and return before finally leaving.  Let’s not engage in blaming attitudes that place blame on the wrong person – the victim not the abuser. Shifting our focus away from the victim is crucial not only in the cases of celebrities in the media, but also in the very likely event that we are exposed to similar situations in our personal relationships with neighbors, co-workers, friends, or family members.

Second, let’s stop awarding Brown with Grammys and stop buying his records. How is it that Breezy remains unscathed from his well-deserved assault charges? Not only did he win a Grammy in 2012, he also performed at the Grammy Awards in front of a national audience. At the same time, fellow celebrity and football star Chad Ochocinco was held much more publicly accountable for battery charges as his TV show was cancelled and his contract with the Florida Dolphins was terminated.

It’s time we even out the playing field, take a stand against an issue that is so invasive in our everyday lives, and hold Brown accountable. So he was put on probation, his Got Milk ad was dropped and he was sentenced to some community service hours. Do those punishments fit the crime? Do those three things even fall in the category of ‘punishments?’

One of the most important ways to curb the prevalence of domestic violence is to set a strong precedent so that abusers are afraid of the consequences. As Kim Gandy, President of the National Organization for Women stated, “Young girls and boys watching this [Chris Brown’s trial] unfold on TV will see than men who commit violence against women practically go scot-free.”

Education and awareness about domestic violence and related issues is essential to fostering more healthy relationships in our communities and more resources for individuals who face these crimes in our world. Shifting society’s focus from the victim to the abuser and equipping the public with tools for avoiding and coping with the dangers of domestic violence is the key to prevention. Intolerance to the obvious implications of a continued lack of remorse from a convicted batterer like Chris Brown, artistic or otherwise, is step one on this high road.


Filed under Domestic Violence, Intimate Partner Violence, Pop Culture, Violence Against Women

No joking matter: why we shouldn’t ‘lighten up’ when jokes are harmful

By Katie Reyzis

Daniel Tosh, seen here performing during his Comedy Central series

Image from CNN Article, Courtesy of Comedy Central

Daniel Tosh’s recent controversial joke has been all the rage in the media, and very rightly so. For those that haven’t heard, Tosh’s recent stand-up performance at the Hollywood Laugh Factory in Los Angeles, CA spawned a furious debate over the First Amendment, censorship, and the social norms surrounding acceptable humor.

The story boils down to one female audience member who spoke up during Tosh’s show, the content of which allegedly eluded to the comedic nature of jokes about rape, and said that ‘Rape jokes are never funny,’ to which Tosh responded: “’Wouldn’t it be funny if that girl got raped by like, 5 guys right now? Like right now? What if a bunch of guys just raped her…’. A full account from the female audience member of the incident can be found here.

Tosh claims that he was misquoted, but there is a bigger issue to discuss here: the social tolerance of detrimental material, such as this joke and others that are in the grey area between offensive-but-acceptable and downright harmful.

This incident reminded me of a personal experience I encountered in the fall of 2009, when I was studying abroad in Strasbourg, France. Surprisingly, my most memorable culture shock came from a fellow American student who made a joke about the Holocaust. I don’t recall the joke verbatim, but it was a metaphor about the hot temperature of the room being equivalent to the ovens that burned Jews in Nazi concentration camps.  Seeing my outrage at his remark, the student’s response was that I should ‘lighten up’ because after all, the genocide he was so carelessly mocking ‘happened so long ago!’

I should note here that the jokester did not know that I happened to be Jewish, but I hoped to convey to him that his joke was offensive regardless of my personal background or beliefs.

What made my jaw drop even lower was that the other students in my program were surprised that I had never heard a joke about the Holocaust.  Like the woman who found Tosh’s joke offensive, I was the odd woman out in an environment that seemed so blatantly unethical to me. Standing alone in such circumstances is extraordinarily difficult, and I greatly admire this woman for speaking up in front of a crowd at Tosh’s show and shedding light on a much larger issue: society’s acceptance of harmful humor.

While humor can be an important coping mechanism in our lives, there is a very fine line where humor can cross from funny to offensive, and from offensive to unacceptable. We can and should laugh at ourselves, and every person has the right to an individual sense of humor.  For instance, I don’t watch South Park because I don’t think it’s funny most of the time, but that doesn’t mean South Park isn’t funny to everyone or that it should be taken off television. (That episode about redheads was a good chance for me to laugh at and commiserate with my fellow gingers, so no argument there.) That said, Tosh’s joke crosses into that unacceptable territory that I simple can’t tolerate. What makes it cross the line?

Let’s look at the facts: Multiple government and non-profit reports indicate that rape and sexual assault are much more common than police reports show, with statistics as horrific as 1 in 6 women and 1 in 33 men have been victims of attempted or completed rape in their lifetime. Due to how often sexual violence goes unreported, these statistics may not be exact, but according to the Rape, Abuse, and Incest National Networks (RAINN), “97% of rapists will never spend a day in jail.”. RAINN also suggests that victims of sexual assault are, after all, three times more likely to suffer from depression and six times more likely to suffer from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). With the odds of even one audience member being a victim of such a tragedy being as high as they are, I don’t think the laughs of those ‘lightened up’ folks who thought the joke was funny are worth the trauma that joke may cause.

Just like me being Jewish had nothing to do with me being offended by the Holocaust joke made by my peer, my logic for this article follows a similar line of thinking – I can accept a joke about a carrot-top or a jab at Hitler’s mustache, but blatantly insinuating gang-rape makes me physically uncomfortable and is therefore harmful to my well-being, and that of many others in the audience.

As someone who is well known in the comedic world and in the entertainment industry, I expect better quality from Tosh’s material. Certainly, there is no doubt in my mind that Tosh ever wished any harm toward the woman who spoke up against his joke, which is evident in his somewhat vague apology, which states, “All the out of context misquotes aside, I’d like to sincerely apologize,”. This particular instance, however, was too far below the belt for me.

I’m not mad – I’m disappointed.

Let’s step back in time for a second – it’s like a ‘Yo Mamma’ joke gone bad on the playground, when you actually take a stab at the real ailment of someone’s mamma, you can rightfully expect a reaction, if not a slap in the face, or at least on the wrist. The same rules apply on the big kid playground – Tosh took a stab at a really serious issue that crossed the line, and he should be prepared to deal with the backlash.

Despite my discontent with Tosh’s joke, this argument has a flip side. Numerous comedians have taken Tosh’s side and cited their right to freedom of speech and the widespread acceptance of other offensive humor in our society, namely mainstream shows on Comedy Central and all over YouTube. Generally speaking, articles like this one illustrate that the consensus seems to be that stand-up comedy is inherently offensive by definition, and anyone who can’t roll with the punches shouldn’t enter the ring.

By all means, I have no qualms with the Freedom of Speech of comedians. Doing so would be hypocritical since I am a refugee whose family moved to this country from an oppressive one that restricted this freedom, among other things (to put it lightly).  I am, however, arguing about the morality of this joke and, as an advocate for victims of human trafficking and sexual violence, I’m arguing that this joke, and acceptance of such jokes in society, is detrimental to my work and victims of these crimes who already have a hard enough time coping with their trauma.

Essentially, humor that desensitizes the public perception of violence – whether it’s rape, genocide, or something else along these lines – is harmful not only to individuals who may have been affected in the audience, but to the general cultural norm that accepts such material. A skilled comedian should not have to resort to cheap shots, especially on such a sensitive topic and widespread crime, unless the joke clearly renders the act intolerable.

So, what is the solution? Banning offensive jokes is certainly not the answer, but regulating our tolerance of them is.  I am not referring to government censorship, but rather to social morality. If society stops laughing when a comedian crosses the line, the comedian will have no choice but to find other means to elicit the same response, wherein lies the skill of a quality performer.

Surely, Tosh is not the first and (sadly) not the last to make a joke about rape, especially not after this incident. Yet, the Debbie Downer in me says that just because everyone else is doing it doesn’t mean you should do it too.  A skilled comedian should know better.

The good news is that Tosh’s incident ignited such an overwhelming social response on both ends of the argument, which sheds lights on such an important and prevalent topic in our world. One way or the other, the candidness of such a debate is what makes us a free people. As Americans, we are extremely lucky to live in a society that allows us to publicly voice our opinions about issues that affect us. Anyone who has seen the front page of the New York Times even once in the past decade should know that not everyone in the world is as lucky, and many are severely persecuted for voicing dissent.

The purpose of discussing this topic is that we should not be laughing when jokes go too far, and we should not be ridiculed for failing to ‘lighten up.’ Perhaps instead of ‘lightening up’ our response to morally detrimental humor, we, as individuals, parents, children, and members of our communities, should toughen up our intolerance of all types of discriminatory and violent humor in the first place.

Leave a comment

Filed under Pop Culture, Sexual Violence, Violence Against Women

A Picture says a Thousand Words: sending the right message about the realities of abuse through our images

By Becky Owens Bullard

The power of an image is immeasurable, especially when it comes to promoting awareness of an issue that people don’t exactly understand.  When we want every day citizens to engage in an issue they’d rather pretend doesn’t exist, we try to pique their interest by providing a photograph or video that they can associate with the issue – an image that will be burnt in their memory and make the issue real for them. Often times, these images that we use in awareness campaigns and community education on issues of abuse are our best chance of catching someone’s attention long enough to raise awareness and promote positive social change. Unfortunately, to inform our already media-saturated public we often resort to flashy visuals that do very little to accurately portray the crimes we hope to stop.

Image found at

Example: human trafficking.  Try looking up “human trafficking” on an image search and you may see what I mean about exaggerated or inaccurate portrayals of abuse. While there are some clever images (for example,  humans with price tags representing the idea that people are still bought and sold), the photos most commonly associated with human trafficking are of people shackled or locked in a cage. Now think about the movies you’ve seen or the books that you’ve read on human trafficking.  Most have likely contained a story line about someone who was kidnapped by a large criminal operation, thrown into a brothel and “rescued” by someone from their trafficking situation. I can’t tell you how many times I spoke with individuals when I worked on the national human trafficking hotline who were outraged about human trafficking because they had just seen this type of over-the-top image or video on human trafficking.

While these images and media portrayals of human trafficking are fairly compelling and may serve to spark interest or outrage in the issue, they are also misleading. A human trafficking case where an individual is physically chained or caged is not the norm. In fact, the “chains” that keep a victim tied to a trafficker are often the things that you can’t see – fear, shame, hope and love.

So how harmful are images that portray human trafficking victims as shackled, caged and battered? While some may argue that they are just an innocuous way to grab someone’s attention, these images often promote misconceptions about the issue and make it difficult for victims and survivors to speak out about what happened to them. For example, if someone’s understanding of human trafficking is limited to images of slavery, chains and rescue missions and they sit on a jury for a human trafficking case where they hear testimony from a victim who had a cell phone or was able to go to the store alone, that person would likely think, “this isn’t human trafficking.”

And they would be wrong. Cycles of violence and various non-physical forms of abuse are extremely common in both sex and labor trafficking. The failure to clearly communicate these dynamics is damaging to the issue as a whole and is what led me to create the human trafficking power and control wheel while I worked at the national hotline to detail forms of abuse beyond physical violence that occur in trafficking situations.

Image from Identity Magazine

Example: domestic violence. Now try an image search for “domestic violence.” You will likely see images of women and children bruised and battered, being choked, silenced and slapped. Think of the movies or music videos you’ve seen about domestic violence – they are often aggressive and extremely volatile. While we’ve started to get more creative with domestic violence images and encourage people to see beyond the physical forms of abuse (see this portrayal of verbal abuse), it is still all too common that a black eye is what is associated with abuse instead of the manipulation, isolation and emotional abuse that survivors often say are the most damaging. I can’t tell you how many times I heard the phrase, “it’s not like he punched me square in the face” when I worked as a domestic violence victim advocate in court. The pervasive images of fist punching and serious bodily injury is what the general public, as well as victims themselves, associate with intimate partner and familial abuse.

So how harmful are images of domestic violence centered on black eyes and bruises? Just like with human trafficking, the flashy image of physical injury may seem completely harmless and a way to get a non-interested citizen to agree that domestic violence is a bad thing. But think of that person that is now sitting on the jury for a domestic violence case. When they hear that the defendant threatened the victim and restrained her from leaving the house, but there were no visible injuries, they just might think, “doesn’t sound like domestic violence to me.”  Again, they would be very wrong.

These narrow images paint an incomplete picture of abuse, resulting in unintentional victim blaming. Understandably, the general public may have a hard time reconciling the reality of abuse with the images that they are familiar with and wonder “why didn’t s/he leave if they weren’t chained up?” or “is it really domestic violence when s/he didn’t get hit?”

What’s worse, these images may also persuade victims to minimize their own suffering and think, “I am not a victim because I wasn’t locked away” or “I can’t be a victim because I didn’t get punched in the face.”

While the anti-violence movement has to find thoughtful ways to educate the general public about crimes that affect millions of people each day, it is important to do it the right way. Even though it is necessary to be catchy and inventive to engage individuals who would rather not hear about the prevalence of violence, resorting to exaggerated or inaccurate images that perpetuate misconceptions does nothing but harm victims and survivors while miseducating those who can help us end violence.

So let’s be true to what we know about abuse in the images we use for our education and awareness efforts – that it isn’t all big black eyes and someone chained to a wall. Abuse is complex, psychologically manipulative and incredibly difficult to end without an accurate understanding of its dynamics. It’s time for the anti-violence movement to rise above the desire to be provocative and instead, refocus on our passion of empowering others to end violence by providing images that truly reflect the crimes we seek to eliminate.


Filed under Domestic Violence, Familial Violence, Human Trafficking, Intimate Partner Violence, Labor Trafficking, Pop Culture, Sex Trafficking, Violence Against Women

Mr. Wrong or Mr. Abuser?

By Erin Meyer

from “Mr. Wrong ft. Drake” – Mary J. Blige

Let me start by saying that Mary J. Blige is one of the most empowering female hip-hop artists of the past two decades and her songs have seen me through many a relationship; the times to celebrate and the times to re-evaluate my choices.

“Mr. Wrong” is a song that speaks to all of us.  We have all been there; been in that relationship where you know you aren’t getting what you need, but you still feel that desire, feel that commitment and want to be with him regardless of the cost to yourself.  So if we can all understand this feeling, this draw to the painful, why can’t we understand the cyclical nature of abusive relationships?

What is it about that relationship that makes us say “she should have left…she should have known better”? Is it the physical violence?  Is it that point where we all say to ourselves “if anyone hit me, I would leave him no matter what!”

But most domestic violence relationships don’t start with physical abuse; they start with the emotional.  The emotional abuse leaves just as much of a scar and trains the heart to be more and more vulnerable to the physical abuse as the abuser escalates.  So how do you know when it goes from just the sort-of emotionally abusive of “Mr. Wrong” to the gateway abusive and cyclically escalating abuse of intimate partner violence?

Is it when we convince ourselves that “even though he breaks my heart so bad…we got a special thing going on”. Is that when we tell ourselves that if it gets worse, we’ll be able to leave? That this consuming feeling we have now that “even if I try, no, I never could, give him up cause his loves like that”, will change?

Then it does…

…It is just a bit worse this time; no big deal.  He didn’t mean to hurt my feelings when he called me names and then he took me out to a nice dinner on Saturday night, so he must have felt bad about it and won’t do it again.

…He just broke the window this time.  It wasn’t on purpose.  I just made him so mad because I wanted to visit my family this weekend and he loves me so much, he needs me to be with him.

Drake summed it up perfectly, it’s “a terrible pattern…it goes up and down, it’s just up and down; she’s crying now but she’ll laugh again..” Something the victim convinces herself to be true and a belief that the abuser relies and thrives on.

So if abusive relationships start off so ‘innocent’, how do we know when to get out?

As, on average, an intimate partner violence survivor attempts to leave her situation 7 times before successfully doing so, it is vital that we educate ourselves as a community and understand victims’ mindsets. We must do this so that we can not only recognize the signs and increase prevention, but so that we can also be that support, that strength, for our loved ones when they are ready to explore their options.

Throughout the escalating cycle, abusers have been using isolation and manipulation to make their victims believe that no one will understand what they are going through, and that no one will love them as much as he does.  When a victim tells us her story and we respond with “Well, what are you thinking? Leave that man! How could you stay with him?”, we are proving the abuser right.  We are showing that victim that we don’t understand, we don’t support her, and even worse, that we are judging her and she is alone in this.

Instead we can utilize safety planning resources to help empower survivors to leave their relationships and re-build their lives.  We can direct them to resources, like the National Domestic Violence Hotline, for personalized safety planning, local resources, and emergency assistance.

We must understand the mindset of victims and understand that being caught up in these relationships is not so foreign as we might wish to believe.

We must remember, it is not so different from loving a “Mr. Wrong”, and we need support from our communities to be ready to move on.  In the words of Mary J, we’ve done “enough cryin and don’t need no more drama in our lives“.


Filed under Domestic Violence, Familial Violence, Intimate Partner Violence, Pop Culture, Violence Against Women

A Culture of Violence & Rape: how the normalization of rape perpetuates inequality and injustice

Image souce: Sexual Assault Awareness Month

By Becky Owens Bullard

Desensitization surrounding rape and sexual abuse seems to continuously invade our lives – it’s in the TV shows and movies we watch, in the songs we listen to and it’s even woven into every day speech as if it weren’t a horrifying crime that affects millions of women and men in the U.S. alone.  While some may think that a rape joke is harmless or a TV show graphically depicting a sexual assault is just interesting television, the prevalence and normalization of sexual violence in our daily lives has very serious consequences. Namely, it furthers the perpetuation of a culture of violence and rape in which the sexual objectification and dominance of women is just the norm.

This so-called “rape culture” creates an unhealthy and warped reality that communicates to our children, ourselves and even to perpetrators of sexual violence that we don’t take these crimes seriously and even in some cases, we condone it.

When we use rape as a casual term in everyday language (for example, to express something has gone poorly – “man, our project proposal totally got raped in that meeting”), we are equating rape to an mildly unpleasant event or a hard day.

When we see rape themes or violent scenes in our entertainment (so that by age 18, children will have seen 16,000 simulated murders and 200,000 acts of violence on TV – and that is from a study conducted in 1998), we are consenting that sexual violence is a normal part of life – a part of life to watch without reaction or disgust, a part of life that our kids learn about in the shows they watch or the video games they play.

When we see explicit ads that depict male dominance and sexual violence supposedly meant to be sexy or even funny, we are saying that rape and force are sexy, glamorous and somehow central to our marketing themes.

When we make light of rape and sexual violence, we reveal that we are insensitive to horrific and violating crimes that affect someone every 2 minutes in the U.S. We separate ourselves from an incredibly traumatic type of violence that is also very common – 1 in 6 women in the U.S. (and 1 in 33 men) have experiened rape and 1 in 4 girls (1 in 6 boys) have experienced sexual abuse by the age of 18.

This normalization, along with long-standing gender stereotypes and discrimination, perpetuates myths and misconceptions that lead normal people to trivialize rape and blame victims. So much so that we rarely see a jury of 12 U.S. citizens convict an alleged rapist, as 97% of them do not spend a day in jail. But, why in the world would everday people not want to see justice done and a rapist in jail, especially so they couldn’t perpetrate further violence?

If justice were simply about justice, we would not have to ask this question. Unfortunately, justice also entails individual prejudices from jurors, judges and sometimes even prosecutors as well as pointed antagonism from defense attorneys intent on blaming the victim, not seeking justice. When juries deliberate about a rape conviction or when normal people see news stories about rape and sexual assault, they inevitably ask the inappropriate victim-blaming questions of “why was she alone with him?”; “what was she wearing?”; “what did she do to provoke him?”, etc.  The misconception that these factors should come into consideration of a rapist’s guilt only serve to further injustice and silence future survivors who hope to speak out against their attackers and abusers.

April is Sexual Assault as well as Child Abuse Awareness Month. This month shines a light on issues that most people would prefer to pretend don’t happen, on issues we’d rather joke about or distance ourselves from by making them something more casual. However, the campaign slogan for 2012 Sexual Assault Awareness Month is “It’s time to talk about it” and if we’re ever going to live in a world without sexual violence, it is time to talk about rape and sexual abuse as just what it is and what it isn’t:

Rape isn’t a joke | Rape is a horrible crime.

Rape isn’t appropriate to use in everyday speech | Rape is serious and the word shouldn’t be normalized to the point where it isn’t seen for what it really is.

Rape isn’t somehow exciting, glamorous or something to use to sell products | Rape is traumatic, terrifying and innappropriate to be used as a marketing tool.

Rape isn’t the victim’s fault because of where she was, how she dressed, what substances she might have used, or what she said | Rape is only the fault of the perpetrator, the person who is willing to commit a sex offense.

Rape is not an inevitable byproduct of life, conflict or war | Rape can be stopped, but only if we talk about it, educate ourselves and our communities and stand with victims and survivors to put perpetrators behind bars.


Filed under Pop Culture, Sexual Violence, Violence Against Women

My Funny Valentine? Why Stalking is No Joke

Words Hurt | Post 2

By Becky Owens Bullard

Photo from

Words can hurt in so many different ways, but sometimes the unexpected, offensive joke can feel the most awful. While I love to laugh just as much as the next person, when jokes take that nasty turn from poking fun to causing true harm, I commonly feel my stomach turn and my blood pressure rise. While the point of this transformation from funny to upsetting may be a matter of opinion, for individuals who have survived abuse or dedicate their lives to advocate for survivors of abuse, the line is typically pretty clear: abuse is no joke.

Unfortunately, humor about abuse brought some recent attention to the Target store chain when it created a card that poked fun at the crime of stalking. The card read “Stalker is a harsh word” on the front cover, and inside the card stated “I prefer valentine.” Although Target responded positively to pressure to remove the card, the question still remains – why make a card like this in the first place?

Photo from

While some may contend that this type of joke is innocuous, the fundamental concept of humor makes this a difficult reality to accept. Jokes like this one, published by one of the largest chain stores in the United States, are intended to be palatable to a wide audience, implying that society generally finds something comedic in a joke that is offensive to someone who has survived or is currently a victim of stalking. Consequently, the joke is not only offensive, it is also incredibly harmful. Humor that makes light of a very real, very terrifying crime like stalking often further isolates the victim/survivor by suggesting that people don’t understand that stalking is a violent and predatory crime and in fact, think it is something to laugh about.

Incidentally, this unfunny valentine surfaced on the heels of Stalking Awareness Month in January when advocates and survivors work to spread awareness about the crime and its serious nature. Stalking is a frightening crime, affecting 3.4 million people over the age of 18 in the U.S. each year according to the Stalking Resource Center. Moreover, stalking is often perpetrated by someone the individual knows, with 30% of stalking victims having been stalked by a current or previous intimate partner and 76% of intimate partner homicides committed by a perpetrator who stalked their partner beforehand. The pattern of pursuit and harassment carried out by stalkers is a severe form of psychological abuse that can increase in intensity over time and can become violent and extremely volatile. The effect this abuse has on stalking victims is extensive, from missed worked to forced relocation to severe mental health effects including anxiety and depression.

Too often, the above realities surrounding issues of abuse are disregarded and the golden rule of “think before you speak” is ignored in humor. Sadly, it takes serious consideration of the actuality of abuse for many people to understand that humor about a crime that affects millions of people each year just isn’t funny, and typically this awareness is an after-the-fact occurrence brought on by pressure from survivors and their advocates. While Target’s positive response is encouraging for those who speak out about words that hurt, the real victory would be living in a world where victims/survivors don’t have to fight to have their crime taken seriously and where a card like this one never comes into being.

Leave a comment

Filed under Pop Culture, Stalking, Words Hurt Series

99 Problems? This should be one: Jay-Z’s commitment to the “b word” sends the message that degrading women is just a part of rap

Image Source: Rolling Stone Kevin Mazur/WireImage

Words Hurt | Post 1

By Becky Owens Bullard

By now, you’ve likely heard the rumor that surrounded power couple Jay-Z and Beyoncé and their baby, Blue Ivy, that the proud new papa would no longer employ the “b word” in his music. The rumor caused quite a stir of bloggers and journalists commending the rapper for dropping the degrading expletive frequently used in rap lyrics. For those of us who work on women’s rights yet also appreciate Jay-Z’s ingenious and catchy lyricism (degrading language excluded), it was like non-offensive music to our ears.

Not only did the rumor garner respect, it also provided a glimmer of hope. If one of the most well respected rappers in an industry that commonly encourages degradation, violence and even enslavement of women openly rejects offensive language towards women and girls – imagine the possibilities! Rap artists might decrease the use of all-too-common lyrics that equate females to dogs or property, subsequently encouraging young people (as well as older people) to stop using language meant to degrade women and to be more respectful to their mothers, wives, girlfriends, sisters, daughters, etc.

Amazing, right? But sadly, women’s rights advocates didn’t have too much time to get excited about the endless possibilities of Jay-Z becoming a leader to combat female degradation in rap music. Just days after reports that the rapper wrote a poem for his daughter stating “I didn’t think hard about using the word b**ch” and “[n]o man will degrade her, or call her names”, Jay-Z flatly denied the rumors of his changed ways and the legitimacy of the poem.

As a fan of Jay-Z’s music and a women’s rights advocate, the news is disappointing to say the least. Is it too much to expect that the birth of Jay-Z’s daughter would compel him to acknowledge the harm that the “b word” can cause?

There isn’t a woman on the planet who hasn’t been called the “b word” in one form or another and though it is used to convey varying degrees of insult, at its core it is meant to degrade women by equating them to a female dog or property. In every day life, the word is used by both men and women to cut women down, labeling them as rude/aggressive or signaling that they don’t conform to discriminatory gender roles and are more assertive or outspoken than others would like. Commonly in rap music, women are called the word as a form of humiliation and ownership, implying that women should be subservient to men. Even when the word is applied to men (because I know you are thinking, “hey, men are called the ‘b word’ too!”), it is used to equate the male with weakness or submissiveness associated by sexists with being female.

The word is degrading and can be very hurtful, but it is used all the time.  Not only is the word frequently used in rap music, it is commonplace to hear it in TV shows, movies, other musical genres and every day speech. Kids use it, men use it and even women use it, often in an effort to reclaim the word by giving it a positive meaning of being empowered (the Meredith Brooks’ song, “B**ch,” comes to mind). With this over-use of the “b word”, it may not seem so harmful to hear it in lyrics, on TV or even to call someone you know the word as a joke.

Then why argue that the “b word” truly is a word that hurts? Why ask that rappers like Jay-Z (who used the “b word” in an estimated 109 out of 217 of his songs) stop using it in their lyrics to say things like, “[i]f you’re having girl problems, I feel bad for you son. I’ve got 99 problems but a b**ch ain’t one.”?  Because like every word whose fundamental purpose is to insult or degrade, even when adopted in every day language, it ultimately teaches inequality and disrespect.

So, maybe it was too good to be true that a rapper as influential as Jay-Z would make a stand against degradation towards women in music. Still, with the artist’s recent self-reflection in his book “Decoded” and his daughter’s birth, I can’t help but hold out hope that if his wife Beyoncé asserts that girls “run the world” in her music, maybe Jay-Z will step up and stop calling them degrading names in his.



Words hurt – right? This one of the fundamental golden rules our parents, teachers and other adults made sure we understood growing up.  So why is it that we tend to completely ignore this rule in a number of forums – socially, professionally and in our entertainment – by excusing words or phrases that are hurtful and degrading as “playful” or “not a big deal”?  This blog series explores words, phrases or jokes that, despite their negative effects, have a common place in our daily lives.

1 Comment

Filed under Pop Culture, Violence Against Women, Words Hurt Series