I wrote a letter to the New York Times in 1991 after they ran a piece by Fox Butterfield (4/17/91) that invaded the privacy (literally peering into her daughter’s bedroom window) and scrutinized the personal life of a woman who accused a member of the Kennedy family of raping her. Clearly some people inside the paper were outraged as well, because they don’t usually print letters that are this critical (4/21/91):
I read with growing disbelief the “profile” of the alleged victim in the Palm Beach, Florida, rape case. It seems you are borrowing not only your policies on naming rape victims from supermarket tabloids but also journalistic and ethical standards.
There has been a decades-long struggle by advocates for rape victims to convince the courts that details of a victim’s personal life are simply not relevant to the crime committed against her. Yet you consider it appropriate to note that the alleged victim’s mother was called a “longstanding girlfriend” in her stepfather’s divorce case; that in ninth grade, she skipped classes in school; that when out on a date with a chef, she talked to other men.
When one looks at this information and tries to puzzle out why you thought it worth reporting, the conclusion seems inescapable: The lifestyle of a woman is a significant question in determining how sorry we should feel if she was raped.
The article shows contempt not only for the woman, but also for the intelligence of your readers, when you explain that “the matter of her privacy” was taken out of the hands of Times editors by NBC‘s April 16 nationwide broadcast. When NBC aired the woman’s name (without irrelevant details of her social life), it justified its decision by pointing to the Globe, a supermarket tabloid; the Globe passed on responsibility to a tabloid in Britain.
Only the Times is responsible for maintaining journalistic and ethical standards in the Times, and by publishing this sensationalistic invasion of privacy, you have failed in that responsibility.
This shifting the blame in rape cases was a persistent problem at the Times; this is from a 1991 Extra! piece by Laura Flanders (3-4/91):
“After Rape Charge, Two Lives Hurt and One Destroyed” was the New York Times headline (11/12/90) above a story about a University of Rhode Island student who committed suicide before giving testimony to police about a rape he had witnessed. The story, by William Celes 3rd, presented the rape survivor and her attacker as equally “hurt,” the real victim being the 20-year-old young man with “personal problems” who couldn’t bear the memory of the assault he’d witnessed without trying to prevent. (Celes points out, however, that “some said the real victim was Mr. Lallymand,” the man charged with the rape.)
This was 20 years ago, and it would be nice to believe that consciousnesses have been raised at the Times since then. Unfortunately, a piece by James McKinley Jr. that appeared in the Times yesterday (3/9/11), about a town in Texas where 18 men and boys were charged in the gang-rape of an 11-year-old girl, suggests little progress has been made. (See MotherJones.com, 3/9/11.) McKinley reports that the East Texas town is asking itself “how could their young men have been drawn into such an act,” and provides this as part of the answer:
Residents in the neighborhood where the abandoned trailer stands–known as the Quarters–said the victim had been visiting various friends there for months. They said she dressed older than her age, wearing makeup and fashions more appropriate to a woman in her 20s. She would hang out with teenage boys at a playground, some said.
There’s no indication in the article that the reporter questions in any way the reaction of the town, which seems (to hear McKinley tell it) more concerned about the plight of “their young men” than about the 11-year-old victim.
Faced with widespread criticism of this report, the Times is digging in its heels: “The paper stands by the controversial piece,” a spokesperson told Yahoo! News (3/10/11).
UPDATE: New York Times public editor Arthur Brisbane (3/11/11) weighs in on the story, saying “the outrage is understandable.”
And just after International Women’s Day.
Do these bastards have a keen sense of irony or what?
There is no excuse whatsoever for those beasts in Texas, gang-raping an 11-year old girl!!! I think there is one way to halt rapes – and it´ll be VERY hard for the rapers. When a man is sentenced for rape for the first time, he´ll lose one of his balls, on top of, let´s say, 10 years imprisonement. AND if he´ll caught for rape once again, he´ll lose his second – and last – ball + 10 years behind bars!! I think this will drastically lower the statistics of rapes.
Besides that, I can´t understand how the courts are reasoning about the victims appearance in front of the rapers! THERE IS NO EXCUSE WHATSOEVER FOR RAPE!!! If a woman have to consider whether her appearance will “turn men on” when she´s strolling around downtown, she´ll wear black cloaks from top to bottom to avoid turning men´s sexual appetite on – like women in Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Afghanistan etc.
You got the point? If a woman says NO, it is NO! You have to accept that, no matter how horny You are at that very moment! It is a matter of respect for another persons personal integrity.
This eleven-year-old girl was the VICTIM. Any woman/girl that is raped is the victim. The only way the men and boys can be considered victims is as the victim of their own decision to participate in an action they knew was wrong. The way a woman dresses or acts is not relevant and any media bringing it into the equasion should be ashamed of themselves. Men must be held responsible for their actions. Shame on the NYTimes and other media wo continue to pass the buck for their own decisions.
It has never been clear to me why most men are not completely outraged at the way human males are portrayed in this “blame the victim” approach to rape. The underlying assumption is that human males have no control or choice over their own actions. The only way that the dress or behavior of an eleven-year-old girl (particularly) could be blamed for sex being done to her is if the human males cannot keep themselves under their own control.
Excuse my complete refusal to call a human male who is a rapist a “man”. Men take responsibility for their actions, as do women. That’s what adults do.
I’m a feminist from the late 60’s who is not the least bit shocked by the information in this piece. Sexism is alive and well. Women have been fighting for many, many decades for rights. The US likes to think it’s so much more advanced than so many other ‘sexist’ cultures around the world. Guess what?
Don’t go there. Don’t give me that “it’s not any where near as bad for women in the US, as it is in other parts of the world” rationale.
Look at the escalating sex-slave trade industry, where women in shocking numbers are lured, kidnapped and sold into slavery. Look at the pornographic industry that is probably one of the most lucrative “businesses’ on the face of the planet, based on the subjugation of womenâ┚¬”Âand even childrenâ┚¬”Âall for the pleasure of men. In 2011!!! Look at the money that’s poured in sports–and paying male “stars” exorbitant salaries, while teachers, cops, and other public service workers are paid peanuts, in comparison.
We are a sick society, based on the subjugation of one sex to the other, on the victim/abuser mentality, on the dominant corporate-power-over low-paid-exploited-worker mentality and all of the other disturbing scenarios we live with.
The politics of the far right is an extreme representation of this attitude/belief system. Over the past 40 years, it has taken/stolen power to dominate politics, our government and people’s views, choices and lives. It’s succeeded by pitting one group against another and lying and deceiving all every step of the way toward amassing the wealth of the country, stuffing it permanently into their own pockets. Corporate greed and a total lack of respect for the earth we live on, has resulted in the mass extinction of many species, unprecedented pollution of our water and air, global warming, and a decimation of land and resources. And we allow it to go on.
Look at the way Hilary Clinton was treated by the right, (ball-buster) and even gone after by the still male-dominated media and DNC, for having the audacity to run for President. They showed her, didn’t they! The left pushed Obama forward–a decent human and I suppose, a good man at heart–but one who has demonstrated that he wasn’t ready to be President. His ineptitude for dealing with the rightâ┚¬”Âwho, without using the wordâ┚¬”Âhave as much as called him nigger to his face–has cost this country dearly. From personal experience, Hillary knew what the right was capable of and the extreme lengths to which it would go to get what it wanted. Never would she would have taken from the right, what Obama has put up with. She would have stood up to them and backed them down into the small corner in which they deserve to stand.
Though we are more than 1/2 of the population, women are still a minority in political and corporate leadership positions, still earning significantly less for the same work as men, despite being the primary caretakers and supporters of our families, in overwhelming numbers. Our daughters and granddaughters still face the same kind of dangers we did growing up, incest, rape, abuse, and second-class status. At a time when the country is falling apart due to the oppression of the worst kind of men–those on the right–we still refuse to allow women to step up and take real leadership positions to show what we could do and what could be done.
We’d better take a long hard look at ourselves, get off the couch and into the streets for justice for everyone, or we can kiss this planet goodbye.
Carol, I hear you loud and clear. Sometimes, even casually between lovers there is talk of “rape” in a playful way, if that is possible. Rape is not an act of love under any circumstances, it is an act of extreme violence and clearly women being raped by a man, or men seems to happen too, too often. On the Real Time with Bill Maher show last week Tavis Smiley tried to make the point about how the US in its treatment of women historically up to the present is not at all exemplary, but Bill insisted that Muslims treat their women worse, as in cutting their heads off for whatever reason, completely missing the point that Tavis was making which is that no matter of degree of ill treatment of women is acceptable, whether they are walking down the street to the catcalls of construction workers or others, to the cutting of women’s heads off, bad treatment and a lack of respect for women goes on anyway but should be soundly disallowed.
As you mention more than half of the population is women and most of the rearing of children and the cooking and cleaning is done by women, and I might add for crappy wages, if any at all.
Congress lost representation by women in the 2010 midterm election. I feel there should be equal men and equal women to be represented in Congress. Sadly one of the reasons the Republicans won was the women’s vote for them. As it stands you have a male dominated Congress. While a Republican House that is trying to set women’s rights back to the 19th century with all those abortion bills which attempts to tax women in some cases and essentially make it harder to access abortion services along with defunding of Planned Parenthood. Add to that the spending cuts that affect more women and children than others and it becomes complete the notion that women are meant to be second class citizens. And all these bills about abortion introduced by those who can’t get pregnant and who just dismisses the decision to have an abortion as frivolous or cavalier, anything but the very difficult situation that it is, which they will never have to make. These no nothing men are F**king prima donnas.
It doesn’t stop at the federal level. In Georgia a guy is trying to introduce a bill about miscarriages that if passed gives government investigative powers to determine whether the miscarriage was intentionally done by the pregnant woman, or not. But who causes intentional miscarriages? Women, I have known have said just how uncomfortable and sometimes very painful a miscarriage can be. Again a bill by a guy who can’t get pregnant. And all across the country there are states making things harder by insisting before getting an abortion on vaginal ultrasounds(I guess the idea there is too somehow make a woman get an emotional attachment to the fetus, so that she will not have the abortion), and mandatory reading of evangelical Christian readings against abortion, all the while these antichoice dupes are trying to insert themselves between a woman’s constitutional right to an abortion and what happens to her body. Others bring out ultrasounds of fetuses that “testify” indicating a heart beat supposed to sway the decision against abortion. And still others want to make a law that will give antichoice groups carte blanche to kill abortion providers and call it”justifiable homocide”.
I will admit that there are situations where I would like to be given free reign to do away with people I don’t agree with starting with the Teabaggers and most Republicans and Libertarians, that’d be just great!!!! But then I am, of course joking, but these people are not joking.
Ann Coulter thinks that the worst thing that could have happened in this democracy was when women were given the right to vote.!!!! Idiot!!!
I think Hillary was treated very badly when she was in the running for president, and all the while I felt she would have stood up to the Repugnuts, unlike Obama who just loves the approval of the Right wing who have as you say have all but called him nigger to his face; they have hidden it by saying Muslim, socialist, racist, and used other euphemisms. I really thought that when I voted for president, I was voting for a Progressive president(the platform he ran on) only to be told that if I’m not satisfied it is because I’m a purist, or a retard, or that I whine about being unsatisfied with his accomplishments, watered down though they are.
There are, even in this day and age, in the year 2011, no matter what the political persuasion, rampant male chauvinists throughout the US; it should not be, but it is indeed.
If I can beat my own drum here, I try very hard to rid myself of prejudices towards women, which I hope there are very few, and I hope that I am not one of the male chauvinists that I rail against.
No matter what I wear,
No matter where I go,
Yes means yes,
and No means no.
This seems to say it all.
Raymond, I saw the Bill Mahr show you refer to and heard Tavis Smiley’s terrific comment that the degree to which women are oppressed is not the point. The point is that women and children should not be oppressed, period, at all, in any way, shape or form, in ANY country. Bill’s dismissal of women’s oppression in the US because it may be worse in another country, was ludicrous. Bill’s political humor and insight are right on target brilliant. But his sexual politics have always lagged far behind his political acumen.
I’ve come to believe that nothing much will change for women, children and families until women make up 50% of the political and corporate leadership in this country. I’m very impressed with Emily’s List, an organization that’s worked for years to train, support and assist women candidates to run for political office.
Men who aren’t afraid to see and acknowledge the truth and have the courage to speak honestly can make a real difference.
First offence: life in prison with no possibility of parole. Do you want to be the one to release these predators and risk having your daughter raped? They’ve identified themselves. No put them away for good.
So why are none of you concerned about men that are raped and otherwise sexually abused? Can you not see the flaming double standard where only sexual abuse of women is a concern? And if you think sexual abuse of women is under-reported, how under-reported do you think sexual abuse of men is?! For women, at least a culture of acknowledging and even reporting sexual abuse has been developing for some time. There is virtually no such culture for men. A man who acknowledges even the possibility of abuse is ipso facto a “pussy”, etc., and a candidate for further abuse.
And do you seriously think that a hyper-sexed society, in which sex is used to sell virtually everything and anything, and where women routinely dress much like prostitutes, has nothing to do with sexual abuse problems? Women in our society routinely dress in ways that are very sexually coded; that does not JUSTIFY rape under ANY circumstances, but we as human beings ought to take a little bit of responsibility for the kind of society we are creating. We need to considerably desexualize public life, and lower the heat on the pot of sexual emotions and needs churning inside each person, not by law, but because of people taking responsibility to stop sexing everything up.
We need a more balanced, more humane, less sexed up society. Why can the Left not see this?
@ paul kane
Incredible amount of fail in that comment.
Although points for being clever enough to note that “women are asking for by dressing that way,” without simply coming out and, you know, saying it.
Somehow I can look at a sexy woman and keep it in my pants, but then I’m not afraid of my own sexuality.
Comments here are in response to an article about women who are raped and then victimized yet again, by being ‘blamed’ for the perpetrator’s actions. It isn’t about MEN who are raped, which, of course, is just as unacceptable.
If this is something you’ve experienced or are concerned about, get involved with or start a group for men who’ve been victimized.
Women have fought long and hard on the issue of rape: to develop an awareness in society that rape is not something that’s done because a guy can’t control himself, but out of asserting power over and humiliating the victim; that it’s not the woman’s fault, but the responsibility of the perpetrator. It’s completely appalling for anyone to claim that the person they raped caused the rapist’s behavior because of the way she dressed, or whatever. We’re all responsible for our own actions. Period.
A ‘culture’ for men needs to be created BY MEN to foster awareness and rejection of all forms of abuse on ANYONE, just as women have had to do for themselves, with the support of some men. I welcome that. I assure you–all women would. If many more men developed a greater awareness of issues like sexuality, power and abuse, it would soon become unacceptable for those men without awareness, to dismiss male rape with a ridiculous sexual-slang put-down.
I agree that we live in a hyper-sexed society, and that capitalistic advertisers use sex as the primary motivator to get people to buy their products. When the public makes it clear that this isn’t acceptable–that products using sex just won’t sell–this will stop.
Women with low self-esteem, little sense of self, and/or a lack of education are vulnerable to getting caught up in and behaving like sex objects, which is hugely rewarded by our “culture”.
I can assure you that feminists haven’t worked to change the world we live in, so that women could choose to become sex objects. We’re as appalled by this development as you are. Being sexually alive and active is wonderful, but we all have to take responsibility for every facet of our lives, our choices, our behavior toward othersâ┚¬Ã‚¦AND how we treat ourselves and the consequences of our choices….
I think the left does see the need for a more balanced, more humane, less ‘sexed up’– far less greedy, selfish and judgmental society.
It’s the right that works against establishing greater awareness about societal problems by denying they exist or seeking to “control” them. The right is impatient and doesn’t want to do the groundwork of studying and understanding why problems exist. They show very little-to-no interest in problem solving and solutions that really change people’s lives and options. The right always wants to provide simplistic solutions and enforce them; when that doesn’t work, they try to dominate and control by limiting, rather than expanding people’s lives and choices (women’s reproductive choices, for one example). That’s part of the problem, not part of a workable solution.
P.S.
I just want to add that the left needs to clean up its act, too, when it comes to women and how women are treated in our society.
Holy shit, paul kane, you don’t get it, do you? Those goddamn hooker-dressin’ sluts need to cool it down, lest troubled men who are churnin’ and burnin’ might start to do a little less gapin’ and a lot more rapin’? You need help, son, and this ain’t the place for it. Re-examine your life in the light of your imbecile comments–just because a woman, no matter what her station, dresses “provocatively,” doesn’t mean a man who can’t control his base impulses can be excused for brutalizing her. That you actually don’t understand this is alarming, to say the least. You might have a career in reactionary Right-wing politics, though, perhaps as Newt Gingrich’s or Peter King’s bagman, or even Chief of Staff. Good luck, and get going.
Tim …….Christ I totally agreed with your comments till you somehow drug the right in for a side swipe. Cinton is a much easier target when talking about mistreatment of woman.Or how about his second in charge(Gore) who still has assault charges pending.
No, Al Gore does not have assault charges still pending.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-20012342-504083.html
I’m usually a big fan of FAIR’s analysis, but I think this one is a big miss. Why, exactly, is it the reporter’s job to “question in any way the reaction of the town”? Isn’t that exactly the sort of mixing of reporting and editorial that FAIR constantly (and correctly) bashes Fox News for?
If the town is only concerned with the alleged rapists and not the alleged victim, then that’s probably a terrible thing (knowing nothing of the case, I’m not about to draw conclusions) – but why, exactly, are we getting angry at Mr. McKinley instead of, say, the townspeople themselves? If the New York Times or its employees have an opinion on the story, the place for it to be expressed is in the editorial pages, not the article itself.
Mixing opinion with fact doesn’t suddenly become acceptable when you like the bias being expressed. Frankly, I’m deeply disappointed that FAIR needs to be reminded of that. You’re supposed to be the champions of journalistic integrity – what the hell happened?
Maybe, Michael C., FAIR thinks it’s the repoter’s business to question “the reaction of the town” because the reaction of the town is newsworthy? Do you think the reporter should have let it slide (as he did)? That it wasn’t a big deal, that the reporter didn’t need to ask at least one person why the eleven year old victim’s assault was apparently as unfortunate as the assaulting group’s predicament after the assault? And mixing opinion with fact is oftentimes in the eye of the observer, with his particular point of view, isn’t it? At any rate, that charge is irrelevant here–the reporter took what is increasingly the common path in journalistic circles–try not to offend the perceived more powerful group (reactionaries, settled small town parochial sexism, out-moded and immoral social mores) at the expense of telling a full, honest story about a crime or some other event. What might be called the FOX model.
P.S.: I “dragged” the Right into the discussion because this is a typical reactionary reaction, as it were. Folks of a more liberal mindset (like feminists, and anybody interested in equality in general) simply find the reaction of the above townies (and the Times) repugnant, and rightfully so. I’m guessing that Mr. Paul Kane above is not an enlightened person, not a man who reflects much on things, not a person who sees much merit in considering events like this carefully, or at least from the point of view of the assaulted child. Again, absolutely typical from the Right-wing point of view–keep in mind here that the Rightists recently emplaced in the House want to re-define rape as something other than what it’s known to be, all in the service of their low and idiotic and contemptibly slavish devotion to ending abortion rights for women, for ending any kind of reproductive rights for women. Jobs? What jobs? Those goddamn liars were always more interested in tax breaks for the rich and grinding their boot-heels ever deeper into the necks of women. Not to mention workers everywhere. They’re assholes, and that’s why I put them under the light. Those weasels are just getting started–they want to destroy anything that remotely helps the downtrodden, or anybody in deep trouble (ironically, mostly because of the Right’s draconian, numbskull, greedy depradations) because of these bad economic times.
TimN, the reporter obviously did think the town’s reaction was newsworthy, which is why he reported on it. Why you think he should have included some moral judgment about said reaction in the article itself is still unclear – that’s clearly editorial, and precisely the “Fox model” you seem to despise. If you want a news source that tells you how to feel about every given story, the tabloid section is never empty.
Exactly how powerful do you think a bunch of “small-town parochial reactionaries” are going to be? And if Mr. McKinley was trying to curry favour with them for some unstated reason, wouldn’t he have been more explicitly biased? As the article stands, can you find one solitary sentence that implies any agreement by the reporter with the townspeople? Sorry, but your analysis simply doesn’t hold water.
“And mixing opinion with fact is oftentimes in the eye of the observer, with his particular point of view, isn’t it?”
No, it’s really not. Facts are indisputable – opinion is subjective. Journalism 101. And you may want to note that “full and honest” does not mean “with the bias I would prefer to see expressed”. Again, articles are for facts – editorials are for opinion.
Seriously, have you people never heard the phrase, “Don’t shoot the messenger”? If you don’t like the world depicted in the article, maybe the effort currently being directed towards pillorying the person who exposed it would be better directed towards trying to effect some change on the ground. As of now, all you’re accomplishing is ensuring that the next time some similar atrocity occurs, journalists will think twice before putting it in the spotlight. Is that really what you want to achieve here?
Tim speak clearly.You say abortion rights for woman….But you forgot to say “and the rights of children to die.”I am pro choice but……..lets not mince words here.Assaulted child?Assaulted child?What is a dead child Tim?Assaulted? Or just his mothers choice?
The liberal mindset has no idea of equality unless you mean government enforced equality. They are literally anti equality.To them equality is producing an uneven playing field for the benefit of their constituents -whomever they might be.
Grinding their boots into the necks of woman?Tim take a look at your college students.Majority are woman. Whatever in equality existed is fast disappearing. Soon it will be woman on top. Soon spanish speaking people will be the majority.Im hoping you will ask for a kickback toward me ,that lowly minority called caucasian male.
Tax breaks for the rich?Yeah we are getting huge breaks.Wanna see what I pay uncle Sam Tim?Make your hair turn grey.How many rich people do you know who are celebrating their huge tax breaks?Honestly Tim those who are paying the majority of all taxes in this country don’t know who it is you are talking about.Why not be honest.We make more, and we pay more.Say thank you and move on.I went to school for a life time while working every kind of job imaginable.Now that i hold a position that affords me a good life i have you to tell me what a uncaring bastard i am.As I tell my little ones…. when you work -take one third for bills.One third for You.And one third for charity.(Bet they have already given more than Obama and Bidon :)I think i have done Ok.Now going to some of the finest schools in the world may not make me enlightened in your eyes. But really these endless diatribes against successful people is simply envy.Sad, dibilitating .It keeps people in the cage of their station in life.My dear friends father came to this country illiterate,poor,could barely write his name.To you that is a death sentence in life.Whithout all sorts of assistance she was doomed right?Yet she is one of the most brilliant surgeons i have ever seen.You see “we” see the possibility. to fail AND succeed. Unlimited possibility.As long as government stands out of your way.You see a marginal life for all ,enforced by a government that saps the creativity and spirit of a country to redirect the output of its finest toward a continuation of mediocrity.A nanny state.The only utopia a socialist state can understand.I think your anger comes from seeing the poorest among us.I agree.I simply disagree on the best way to chip away at that.Look at how the bottom has dropped away from charities as Obama has attacked charitable deductions.How can anyone see a positive in that.Why is the question never asked….Mr Obama you have no history of giving to charity.Or supporting your family though you have been a rich man for some time now.May the same be said for the VP.What gives?how can dems posture as caring when you their leader never has in his own life.Now Tim take a look at how much McCain and Palin have given for the last 20 years.Startling the hypocrisy.
Those making more than roughly $200,000 a year saw a sharp decrease in their tax burden starting in the 80s. That trend has continued to this day. Today’s tax rates are low by historical standards–and for the rich they’re very low.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/20110316/ts_yblog_thelookout/chart-shows-low-tax-burden-for-rich
You need to re-read my post, Michael C. Do you think the reporter should not have asked the townspeople any questions (specific people about the events)?
Amazing Bill Maher! A whole lot about Bill Maher right now; I really appreciate the guy. Come on Bill Maher! Isn’t it Time to Get Real? Rick Perry and Bachmann may be Tebow, i’ll be Aaron Rodgers. Maher strikes (out) again along with polygamy punch line. Maher To Interview Herman Cain On ‘Real Time. The New New Rules: A Funny Look at How Everybody but Me Has Their Head Up Their Ass by Bill Maher … http://goo.gl/i6X4b
Maybe all boys moving into puberty need a sort of “rape class” in school. That is, they could be presented with pix of girls in alluring clothing, “what’s it okay to do about this?” “If this girl is highly drunk, is it okay to assume you can have sex with her?” The main thing is, I doubt if anyone has ever really talked with ordinary school-age boys about controlling their feelings. They may not even understand that provocative clothing doesn’t mean a girl is interested in sex, she just wants some attention. This might seem like a focus on males, but it could be a way to cut down on potential rapists’ impulsivity.
@ Carol Lemieux
“Women with low self-esteem, little sense of self, and/or a lack of education are vulnerable to getting caught up in and behaving like sex objects, which is hugely rewarded by our “culture”. ”
Sounds like middle east to me. Even though women are not all over magazines, billboards and so forth, they are abused in greater numbers over in many of those countries.
Over all this is same kind of tactic used by people in power and government. Walk all over people and get away with murder and viewed as a hero for it.
Yet is liberalism that led women to burn bras, run around naked as a hippie, dress like a flapper and so forth. Many call it freedom but unbridled freedom usually leads people to destruction.
You made your bed, now sleep in it.