Eastercon has a Hay lecture given by an actual scientist, and the BSFA instituted a talk by a social scientist to match this. This year's talk was by sociologist Dr Louise Livesey, about the politics of sexual abuse of children. The talk generated really a lot of discussion over the course of the con, and I'd like to carry on that discussion here. Please don't hate Dr Livesey because my summary doesn't do her talk justice; it was a very good talk and also a contentious one, and I wasn't taking notes and I'm not a sociologist.
The subject of the talk is what it is. It wasn't graphic, because it was mainly about the politics of how society reacts to accounts of child sexual abuse rather than the act itself, but still.
( hearing stories of child sexual abuse )
So, in conclusion, if someone tells you they were sexually assaulted, you should at least default to believing them, and you should listen to what they actually say happened and how they feel about it, rather than assuming. But believing them doesn't necessarily mean you should get into a huge panic about how everything must be completely terrible, nor does it mean that you be in a rush to punish the alleged perpetrator. I don't know, does that seem like a helpful way of looking at things?
The subject of the talk is what it is. It wasn't graphic, because it was mainly about the politics of how society reacts to accounts of child sexual abuse rather than the act itself, but still.
( hearing stories of child sexual abuse )
So, in conclusion, if someone tells you they were sexually assaulted, you should at least default to believing them, and you should listen to what they actually say happened and how they feel about it, rather than assuming. But believing them doesn't necessarily mean you should get into a huge panic about how everything must be completely terrible, nor does it mean that you be in a rush to punish the alleged perpetrator. I don't know, does that seem like a helpful way of looking at things?