More than Words

"They're just words."  They were "taken out of context."

Political campaigns frequently rely on a war of words, and especially love isolated soundbites (remember the 47%?) that are campaign-sinking.  However, this campaign seems to be producing far more of these than any from our past (I haven't done the actual analysis, so its just my educated guess here).  This month alone there have been two, in particular, that have caused the national gasp-o-meter to work overtime (along with several young press staffers clambering to get out statements for their republican bosses).

The first came on October 3, 2016, at a town hall answering a question about veteran suicide.  Donald Trump made the statement "when people come back from war and combat, they see things that maybe a lot of folks in this room have seen many times over.  And you're strong and you can handle it."

The second emerged in the form of a video tape taken in 2005 on the set of Access Hollywood, where Donald Trump and Billy Bush are over heard having the following conversation: 

Trump: I better use some Tic Tacs just in case I start kissing her.  You know, I'm automatically attracted to beautiful - I just start kissing them.  It's like a magnet.  Just kiss.  I don't even wait.  And when you're a star, they let you do it.  You can do anything. 

Bush: Whatever you want. 

Trump: Grab 'em by the pussy.  You can do anything.

Both comments, in their isolation, are horrendous.  And I have a personal connection to both.  As a combat veteran, I haven't always been able to "handle it."  I have done things for this country that I have been given accolades and awards for, yet they have led me into self-destructive behavior, and ultimately out the other side where my strength came from seeking help.  I am also the survivor of rape, by someone who believe that his position, his stardom if you will, allowed him to grab me "by the pussy."  

But this isn't just about me, and my visceral response to these words.  The defense of these words is what I'm concerned with, and how they highlight a growing divide among Americans.  In both these cases, Donald Trump's words have been defended by high-level officials and average Americans across social media platforms.  They've been excused away as "just words."  Or "not as bad as X that Hillary Clinton did."  Or "taken out of context."  Dismissals like this, however, not only fail to hold the speaker accountable, they undermine and dismiss the experiences of the groups targeted by this speech.  In particular, Donald Trump has continually highlighted both the ever-growing civilian-military divide, and the prevalence of patriarchal rape culture in the US.  

"Strength" and the Citizen Soldier

Over the past 15 years, the growing "gulf" between civilian citizens and members of the US military has gained increased attention.  With less than 0.4% of the population serving in the military at any one point in time, very few Americans have a personal connection to a service member.  Concurrent to the shrinking number of Americans serving, the US has been embroiled in its longest war, resulting in multiple combat deployments for many of us who do serve.  

When asked to describe members of the military, "strength" is a typically near the top of the list for positive and desirable attributes.  And with good reason.  Being in the military requires great strength - both physical and mental.  We want people who are strong carrying out violence on behalf of our government.  It is why throughout basic training, strength is constantly reinforced.  It is why we're broken, and rebuilt into physically and mentally hardened instruments of political violence.    

But at what point is "strength" harmful?  In the day-to-day operations of war, we (as a collective society) ask our women and men in uniform to do things that would be immoral, illegal, and unspeakable in any other context.  We laud these actions as "heroic" and plaster them on the big screen for our collective war porn pleasure.  We believe that we're honoring the troops by continually praising the violence they did.  We use it as a point of conversation (just yesterday, I got a call from a reporter for a story and his first questions were "did you take fire? Did you return fire?  How many people did you kill? It must have been awesome!").  The civilian population often forgets that those of us who choose to serve are also human beings, and that at some point the "strength" it takes to do the profession of violence becomes quite a burden to bear.  The "strength" it takes to shut off our morals and sense of justice and engage in the act of ending another human life at some point feels more like a curse. And it takes a great deal of strength to return home and assimilate into civilian life, where the things that we've had to do are unspeakable.  It's the conversation about war civilians prefer not to have (with good reason), but is incredibly necessary for the moral healing of our country.  

In realizing this, the military has become active in launching several mental health campaigns, invoking the "strength of a warrior."  It takes strength to seek help, to confront what you have done, lived through, and seen.  Strength is not "handling" it, or pretending that everything is ok.      

So why does this matter with regards to Donald Trump's comments?  Unlike some, I don't think he was being overtly malicious.  But he was being dangerously ignorant.  The psychological and physiological effects of having to wear the strength of a warrior in combat are real.  And while it is true that everyone is impacted differently by them, there comes a point when "handling it" just doesn't happen anymore.  (A review of the literature on PTSD onset shows that the length of delay between traumatic event and symptoms of PTSD is incredibly varied, making the linking of strength and "dealing with it" even more problematic, as someone who is dealing with it today, may not be tomorrow.)        

When asked why they do not seek mental health treatment even when they feel they need it, a statistically signify percentage of veterans cite that receiving treatment "means I am weak."  Donald Trump's words reinforce this belief.  Whether he knew it or not, equating "strength" with "handling it" sends a powerful and dangerous message to a population that is fixated on being strong.  It divides veterans, and combat veterans in particular, along a trait that is central to their identity.  By only invoking strength in those who "handle" trauma in a way that outwardly manifests as "dealing with it," he has undermined all of the work military leaders and mental health professionals have done on promoting proper mental health care.   

Even more problematic than Trump (a man who has seemed to make offensive statements a habit) uttering these words is the response from every-day Americans coming to his defense.  In the aftermath of this statement, my Facebook feed was filled with people, primarily civilians, defending him.  They cried that his words were taken "out of context," or that his statement really was "one of caring."  In response I shared my own story of how believing that strength meant "dealing with it" led me to destructive behavior.  I spoke of tasting the barrel of a 9mm and sitting in my bathroom with bottles of pills and Jack Daniels.  Such comments were dismissed as "my opinion," as they doubled down on their defense of "you're strong and you can handle it."  

While these were my experiences, the destructive effects of equating strength and "handling" it are hardly my opinion alone.  Research on barriers to mental health care and found that the "stigmatizing" view of mental health care has resulted in less than 10% of veterans getting the help they need.  It is hard enough to break through to veterans when they feel that this stigma is coming from their fellow service members.  But with civilian citizens parroting this false narrative, these barriers will become even more insurmountable, and the civil-military divide grow even more.  These words are more than just words, for many of us they are the difference between life and death.  

My Pussy is not your Property 

On October 7, the pussy grab heard round the world was exposed.  By now, everyone has heard the audio.  Thankfully, the response to this egregious action has been swift, with republican officials condemning Trump.  

However, once again, there has been a strong contingent standing by, and even doubling down, on the acceptability of his speech.  They were "just words," "distractions" from the real issues.  Blame has been deflected by pointing to Bill Clinton's actions, or dismissed as "locker room" banter.  These dismissals and deflections are both horrendous on their own, and even more disturbing when viewed as a larger reflection of the culture we live in.  

By deflecting responsibility in pointing to Bill Clinton's action, Trump's champions are continuing a long standing patriarchal tradition of not holding men responsible for their actions.  What Bill Clinton did may have been bad, but it doesn't make what Trump said any less bad, nor does it excuse Trump's actions.  Last I checked Trump was an autonomous human being who alone chose to engage in that behavior.  And alone believed it was appropriate.  Bill Clinton wasn't some grand puppet master feeding him lines.  

The refusal to hold men accountable, and to allow them to deflect and dismiss this language and behavior is why we get judges concerned about the "emotional injury"perpetrators of rape may receive if they are sentenced to jail time.  It is what leads to 1 in 3 women being assaulted in their lives. It is what led a man to honestly believe that he had a right to my pussy because of his position and my prior relationship with him.   (And, as an aside, it's also what leads people to say that Hillary Clinton is somehow responsible for Bill's actions ... a form of victim blaming that be better addressed in its own post).  

Talk leads to action, and every person who says that it is "just talk," they are complicit in the perpetuation of the idea that consent doesn't matter.  My dear friend Shannon Galpin address this far better than I ever could, so rather than ramble on, I am going to point you to her post here. (Honestly, Read it) before you go on any further with this piece.  

More than Words 

We've heard a lot about words this election.  We need to stop treating words like empty syllables.  Words have meaning, especially when strung together.  Words have the power to unite, but recently they have been used to divide.  So rather than defending the indefensible words, take some time to listen to those affected by them.  Understand why they hurt.  Lift your veil of ignorance and explore the discomfort they bring.  Healing, unifying, and bridging the gaps that these words are causing is not going to be easy, but it is necessary.