REACTION to “Law & Order: SVU” titled “Grey”

This post is a reaction to tonight’s episode of “Law & Order: SVU”  based on a college campus (further down on our blog page is the original post about the episode which we posted BEFORE the show aired).  Now, is the time to react to the actual episode where several concerns arose.

Please be aware I will be referring to some stereotypes which played out on the show concerning sexual assaults and thus I want to give full disclosure before anyone chooses to read on.

Consider all of the following in tonight’s episode:

1) The show had a person who is obliged to keep a student’s comments confidential BREAK the confidentiality and tell the police information [in the show tonight, the police detective is informed his daughter was the "Buddy" in the "Buddy System"]. This scene is MANY survivor’s nightmare and could deter other survivors from speaking with people on campus who are “Safe” to share with (must keep information confidential).

2) A campus professional referred to the “Buddy System” as a way to protect you (seem to imply females) when you  make dumb or stupid mistakes (paraphrasing).  A simple statement like “The Buddy System is to help students look out for each other when they see potentially dangerous situations” would have been much more effective and less potentially aimed at referring to women’s mistakes in these cases.  The fact is wording such as “dumb or stupid mistakes” is often used against survivors as victim blaming.

3) The District Attorney was the ONLY person who used the term “Grey Rape” and did it in a way that would concern many sexual assault advocates.  The DA implied: “He Said. She Said. results in Grey Rape and not having a case” (paraphrase).  Once again, students and/or survivors watching the show could become very concerned no one would take their case seriously if they came forward.

4) The campus in this episode hides all sexual assaults as other crimes to avoid the Clery Act.  If what was occurring in the show was taking place, federal crime was being violated. The campus wasn’t “avoiding” the Clery Act.  They were violating it.

5) The other detectives in the Police Station made almost the EXACT comments I said in my previous video (blog post below) for showing examples of how people blame survivors.  No, I had not seen the show beforehand.  That coincidence proves how often the same “victim blaming” is used throughout society.  In this case, it could have made survivors think that is how police will look at their case and thus hurt the chances of survivors coming forward.

6) No one ever referenced a local sexual assault crisis center and talking with an advocate (another option in addition to talking with the school and/or the authorities).  Sexual assault advocates can make a tremendous, positive impact for survivors.  Many campuses will encourage the survivor to speak with an advocate from a local crisis center.  Unfortunately, not all campuses do this and so the show may be fair in projecting that situation.

7) Then the show switched to a completely different discussion (homicide through abortion) and NEVER came back to resolve all the issues it arose in the first 15 minutes – such as all the issues around campus reporting, campus judiciary systems, sexual assaults on campus involving alcohol, confidentiality, etc…   A wound was open and never closed back up.

Yes, I understand this is a TV show. Why all the attention?  Because this cast (2 of the co-stars) spoke out in advance of this show as if this episode was going to be progressive in helping survivors.  While I absolutely appreciate the media working to make a positive difference, I wish the Producers and Writers would have had someone on set to help them truly create an equally effective drama which would have provided great opportunity for increasing viewer’s awareness.

This show brought up so many different issues with regards to the opening sexual assault case that they easily could have made the entire episode about the first sexual assault case discussed on the broadcast.

What did you think?  SHARE YOUR COMMENTS BELOW.  I look forward to personally responding to everyone’s comments as the day progresses. I am speaking in Richmond, VA, and so will do my best to respond when possible.

  • MarcDLS

    The issues I had with this episode was that it was stated that the buddy system was so that a woman needed a second woman or a man to verify that she was of sound mind to consent. In fact, it was explicitly stated it was the male's responsibility to make sure a female wasn't too intoxicated to consent. There was no such restriction placed on the male participant. This is clearly a double standard and even goes as far to imply that a woman's opinion of her state of mind is less than that of a man, since a man is under no obligation to get a second opinion as to his mental state.

    [Edited because content was not in relation to the blog posting]

    • http://www.DateSafeProject.org admin

      Engaging in sexual activity with a partner who is not of sound mind is wrong - regardless of gender.

  • http://www.jaredandkyal.wordpress.com Jared

    "Law & Order: SVU" has consultants just like "Grey's Anatomy" has medical consultants. While they do get advice from them, many Executive Producers from these shows will instead go for what they call "compelling" television. That's why they always show the disclaimer before and after the episode as well, and claim for it to be fictional.

    • http://www.DateSafeProject.org Mike Domitrz

      Thanks. We, the viewers, need to let them know they can have drama AND listen to their consultants in such situations.

      • http://www.jaredandkyal.wordpress.com Jared

        I agree. I don't know if it has been discussed anywhere on the site yet, but "Private Practice" dedicated two whole episodes dealing with the rape of its central characters. While I am not a fan of the series, I read reviews from many different support groups and organizations who felt that the show dealt with the situation better than almost any show has in the past few decades.

        Mr. Domitrz, continue your great work and continue to spread your message. I remember seeing you speak four or five years ago, and I still carry your book with me wherever I go.

        • http://www.DateSafeProject.org Mike Domitrz

          Yes, I want to watch those episodes. A few people have mentioned it to me. Thanks for the reminder and ALL your kind words.

  • stevemcallister

    Mike -- you made some very strong points. I especially agree with your point about the lack of mention of advocates. I have a few additional points to make.

    As a former student affairs professional who continues to address sexual violence on campus, I'm disappointed with the complete dismissal of the potential usefulness of a university judicial system as a viable option for survivors. Obviously, the hearing panel on the show was a disaster. However, a process where a university investigates a complaint and santions a perpetrator, when done properly, can be a positive option for survivors who do not wish to report to the police. Not only that, universities are REQUIRED by Title IX to have these processes in place.

    The police in the show give the impression that the only place a survivor can find relief is within the criminal justice system. If they don't "stand up for themselves" and "do the right thing" this maniac will victimize other women and it will be their fault. Meanwhile, in real life NYC, I've had survivors share with me as recently as last year that SVU detectives not only convinced them that they shouldn't file a complaint, but encouraged them to sign an affidavit stating they will not pursue the matter with law enforcement in the future. Even if the police do investigate, the prosecution rate for acquaintance rapes are a joke, and even the "good" cases will likely result in a plea deal for a lesser offense and no jail time. I can see how a student would turn to their university for some relief.

    I could go on and on. My opinion is that Law & Order missed the boat on this one. And not just by a little bit. By a mile. Instead of earnestly showing the struggle that survivors on campus actually face (even without the exaggerated old fart "boys will be boys" Dean and the Keystone Kops-like campus police), they decided to take the show off the tracks and show that the only way an acquaintance rapist will be held accountable for his actions is if he stealthly gives a woman a chemical abortion and she subsequently dies.

    Unbelievable.

    • http://www.DateSafeProject.org Mike Domitrz

      As Genevieve said, Steve, you would think they would have experts on-hand to assist with this information. Being accurate would NOT takeaway from any of the drama of the show.

  • GenevieveG

    Ever notice how a war movie has some military consultant on pay roll? You know to tell them how to make it authentic. Same thing is true of most police shows. There's usually a law enforcement consultant who tells them if they are off base in their procedure information. Kind of makes you wonder why a show about sexual assault, wouldn't have 1)a sexual assault advocate consulting for them, 2)actual sexual assault survivors consulting for them, and 3) if they do have one or the other or both, why aren't they listening to them? Because I find it hard to believe that they would hire experts who would miss all these glaring mistakes. If they don't have any of them, which is more likely, maybe their publicity and legal consultants should encourage them to do that. Because you can bet they didn't short change themselves by not having someone to advise them on legal issues and promoting the show. I mean the shows been on for like 10 years now, but its never too late to try accuracy over drama... Just my opinion, everyone has one, but its not a bad idea at all.

    • http://www.DateSafeProject.org Mike Domitrz

      Well said.

Our Networks
Linkedinfollow me