TRIGGER WARNING: This story sickens me. But can we please have some perspective on who to blame?
I repeat a VERY STRONG TRIGGER WARNING if you’re clicking through. If you’re not, there’s a summary after the jump, and I repeat the TRIGGER WARNING.
So, the headline of the story is: “Girl sells sister, 7, to gang rapists in flat 13C”.
Let’s analyse that for a moment. “Girl sells sister” – ok, pretty reprehensible. Sister is aged 7 – even more reprehensible. “To gang rapists” – at least the article is naming the crime that has taken place: ie gang rape.
But even with that headline, I’m having “WTF?” moments. Because while it’s pretty reprehensible to sell your sister, surely it’s at least as reprehensible to buy a seven-year-old in order to rape her. Plus note that the headline says “girl”. The article reveals that the older sister was 15. In other words, too young to even consent to sex for herself, too young – according to the law – to make much of a judgment call. Surely, surely, surely, even though it may well be possible to lay blame at the feet of the older sister, more blame must be laid at the feet of the men?
The article continues.
The first half is all about how bad the older sister is, the charges that have been laid against her, the fact that “everyone knows” the apartment block is a dangerous place – in fact, apparently the younger sister went with the older one because the younger one thought the older one might be in danger.
Inside apartment 13C, police said, the seven-year-old was soon left alone as her sister headed to a back bedroom to sell sex to several men.
This is awful – because the men have paid to rape a fifteen-year-old girl. She may have been willing, she may have gone there for that purpose, but the fact is that it’s still a crime. And then:
When she came out into the living room, she handed her seven-year-old sister money and encouraged her to let the men touch her.
I have two problems with this. First of all, I want to know: what happened before that? My guess is that the men asked (possibly demanded or threatened etc) – that is, that it wasn’t a spontaneous offer by the sister. But there’s no mention of that in the article. Ok, maybe it was a spontaneous offer, but that question still needs to be asked. Second problem, which is a much bigger one: even if there was a spontaneous offer by the older sister, I’m pretty sure she wasn’t placing any pressure on the men to say yes. They could have refused. Obviously, they should have refused. They must have wanted to do what they did. As reprehensible as it may be to say, in effect, “rape my sister”, it is at least as reprehensible to go ahead, accept the offer and rape a seven-year-old girl.
So, what did the police do about this?
When police located the 15-year-old later that night, she also told them what happened and was arrested.
Nothing about the men. Just the sister. Ok, a few paragraphs later, the article says that the police are trying to identify who was there. But it isn’t exactly sold as a top priority.
At least the mayor seems to realise that the men had something to do with this horrific crime:
‘‘It’s sickening,’’ he said. ‘‘The police are taking this personal. I know there’s a place in hell for all the people that participated in this and I’m sure they will get there.’’
As does a councilwoman:
Annette Lartique, the city councilwoman who represents the area where the crime occurred, said the community would expect nothing less than the prosecution of everyone involved to the fullest extent of the law.
‘‘I know we are going to send a message on this one,’’ she said. ‘‘Everybody will pay a price – from the person who opened the door to the person who pushed the elevator button.’’
Nevertheless, the overwhelming feeling I get from this article – especially given the headline – is that the older sister is being painted as most responsible for what happened to her younger sister. And I’m sorry, but that just can’t be correct.
ETA: Go take a look at Jet’s wonderfully rage-filled takedown of the article.
Wallaby 
And that was a better takedown than mine. That article is just WTF from beginning to end.
I am so *angry*!
Oh, I think I like yours better (which I didn’t see before, and will now add a link to). The rage comes across much better than in mine.
And I totally agree with you that there’s a real possibility that the 15-y-o was coerced/threatened/etc herself (as well as being raped in the first place). It certainly explains why she was happy to simply tell the police what happened (as is suggested in the article) – which you would not expect if she had willingly offered her sister up. Damn, I hope she gets a good defence lawyer.
I didn’t put together that the fact that the SMH has actually managed to identify the crime (ie that a rape has taken place, not just “unwanted sex”) is something to do with class/race/etc, but I think that’s a very good point. Like you, I don’t know the area, but the way the article talks about the apartment building makes it seem very much that there are class or “class” issues, and there may well be race issues.
[…] ETA: Jo Tamer posts about this article: So, who are you blaming? […]
Heh, I think we probably posted almost at the same time. I posted, then saw your post.
Yeah, I read ‘invited her to a party’ as the men being to known to her, and quite probably known to her because they’ve abused her in the past.
As far as I’ve noticed, rape is allowed to be called rape if “they” rape “our”women, for changable values of each, or if it’s a case of stranger rape, dragged-screaming-into-bushes variety, or if the vicitim is under 9 – *maybe* – or if physical injuries require surgury. Maybe. Otherwise, well – we can’t prejudge the poor man, can we?
I completely agree that the men are the criminals here. It is obvious that they were actively seeking out young girls to rape. However, I do feel, at least judging by what we are told in the article, that the sister is somewhat guilty. Clearly, she has some sort of emotional or psychiatric problems to blame, and it would appear that she has been a rape victim for a long time. I think she is clearly very troubled, and that both of the sisters need lots of understanding and competent psychiatric care. I guess, as an older sister, this just breaks my soul. I do think that the article does not do a good enough job laying the primary blame on the disgusting men who violated these two girls. They were going for the attention grabbing headline, I guess, and sadly, gang rape of young girls isn’t completely attention-grabbing anymore. I just don’t completely discredit the idea that the older sister willingly sold her sister out. Although there are often lots of sad factors involved, people can do some really, really horrible things, even to those who they are supposed to care for.
See, my problem is this: I agree that there’s a real possibility that some blame can be laid at the feet of the older sister. I make that clear in my post. We don’t actually know whether any blame can be ascribed to her – or if so, how much – because we don’t know the circumstances. But the answer is, quite possibly, “some”.
But no matter how much blame can be ascribed to her, it’s nothing compared to the criminality that can be ascribed to the men who actually committed the rape (or rapes).
And yet what everyone seems to want to talk about is how horrible and awful the girl is!
That’s what the SMH article is about. That’s what your comment is about. That’s probably what a lot of other people are saying, not that I’m going to go and look because I’m somewhat scared of what I might find.
As you say at the beginning of your comment, and in the middle of your comment: it’s the men who are the real criminals! But you spend most of your comment talking about how twisted and sick the older sister must be.
But look at it this way: the most the older sister could possibly be guilty of is saying “please rape my younger sister”, and it’s highly likely that her criminality is significantly less. That’s pretty awful – but there is no fucking way she could have coerced those men, or even convinced them, to do something they didn’t want to do. They made that decision all on their own.
Why are we not talking about that? Why are we not talking about the circumstances in which this was even possible? Why the fuck is everyone focused on the older sister?
I’m angry that the little girl was raped. SO angry I can’t stand it.
But I’m also pretty bloody angry that nobody seems to want to address the real issues about responsibility.
Argh. That is indeed infuriating. It’s just taken for granted that the men are uncontrolled monsters, so the important part of the process is the 15 year old girl’s thoughts and actions, not theirs.