The Casting Couch

Unless you have been living under a rock for the last several decades, you must have heard and been aware of what is euphemistically called The Casting Couch, a phrase attributed to those (mostly) female actors and models who trade sexual favors in return for roles in movies, television, the stage, and in magazines, on billboards, etc.

The practice is so widespread that the stately Oxford Dictionary and Merriam –Webster Dictionary both have included Casting Couch as inclusions in their reference tomes.

The recent barrage of accusations of sexual impropriety by high profile celebrities against equally high profile directors, producers, and the like, are impossible to ignore in the mainstream media. Certainly, one must give credit to those brave enough to come forward to publicize the obnoxious behavior of their perpetrators. Sexual assault in all its forms is repugnant, illegal, and has long lasting psychological affects for the victim that, for them, shred the fibers of morality and peacefulness in their community.

What we are not hearing in the mainstream media and from the so-called victims is a discussion about the trade-offs these “victims” made for cashing their multi-million dollar pay cheques. In many circumstances, one can liken the plight of the adult accusers to that of prostitution rather than sexual assault. The appearance of swapping sex for huge money and fame cannot be overstated. Where was their outrage when they were depositing those fat paycheques?

There are, sadly, a tremendous amount of sexual assault survivors on this planet who, unlike the celebrities now coming out of the woodwork to air their dirty little secrets, do not have the voice, the means, nor the strength, to confront their perpetrators and hold them accountable. Some statistics state that one in four females will experience some form of sexual assault in their lifetime. That’s 25% of the population of mothers, sisters, aunts, daughters, and nieces that will have to heal from the trauma and devastation that this crime envelops on these true victims. No big, fat, multi-million dollar paycheques and accompanying fame for them.

If the mainstream media would commit as much air-time and publishing space to the real victims of sexual assault as they are to the few celebrities who prostituted themselves for fame and fortune, then perhaps major in-roads can be made into eliminating sexual assault from the behavior of all its perpetrators.

Mississippi Burning Again

Mississippi’s history is a colorful one, but a new law signed on April 05, 2016 in the Magnolia State, threatens the rainbow, allowing businesses to discriminate against same sex couples on moral grounds and plunging the state right back into the era of Jim Crow and its devastating human rights violations.

The Way It Was

In many respects, Mississippi was the poster child for black slavery and the accompanying human rights abuses so prevalent in a fledgling America. Formerly part of a vast expanse of Indian lands, Mississippi became the twentieth US state in 1817, and by the 1830’s, it was a powerhouse in the cotton trade. Cotton was king, making the Old South the ninth largest economy in the world, with Mississippi the king of kings, commanding considerable influence among her less affluent peers.

The cotton trade (White Gold) made the Old South. During its heyday, there were more millionaires in Mississippi than anywhere else in the world. Mammoth plantations fed a worldwide frenzy for cotton. And none of this would have been possible without the backbreaking servitude of black slaves under barbaric conditions. In 1861, Mississippi became part of the Secession Movement, breaking away from the Union over disagreements about state’s rights in the republic.

Fast forward several generations, and Mississippi would become known as a hotbed of civil rights conflict and home to the notorious 1955 lynching and mutilation of Emmet Till and the 1964 murder of three civil rights activists that would form the nucleus plot of the Academy Award winning movie Mississippi Burning, starring Gene Hackman and Willem Dafoe, released in 1988.

The Way It Is

Gambling aboard paddle boats amid a sweltering sun. Home to blues pioneering greats such as BB King, Bo Diddley, and Willie Dixon. Residents speaking with a drawl reminiscent of time slowly passing. The Bible Belt, and an equally religious passion for college football. These all describe Mississippi today.

As firmly planted as one foot is in the past, so too is the other foot marching forward. There is an air of sophistication among Mississippi’s simpler way of life that is uniquely placed. Most would be startled to learn that the world’s first heart and lung transplants were performed at the University of Mississippi Medical Center. Or that Jackson, Mississippi is the only North American city to host the International Ballet Competition. Or, that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station in Vicksburg, Mississippi is the world's largest hydraulic research laboratory.

Despite their advancements in culture, science, and medicine, Mississippi and Mississippians cannot seem to shake its Rebel heritage. Thumbing its nose at international covenants and federal law, Mississippi Governor Phil Bryant signed into law House Bill 1523, or more formally, Protecting Freedom of Conscience from Government Discrimination Act, that paves the way for widespread discrimination and human rights violations against a broad swath of people.

Protecting Freedom of Conscience from Government Discrimination Act

Mississippi House Speaker Philip Gunn claims House Bill 1523 does not enable discrimination, but rather promises that the state government will not punish people who refuse to provide services to people because of a religious opposition to same-sex marriage, extramarital sex or transgender people.

To some, HB1523 protects religious freedoms. For others, it’s just another Jim Crow law painted in the colors of a rainbow.

Governor Bryant took to Twitter in response to the explosive backlash against signing HB1523 tweeting that he did so, "to protect sincerely held religious beliefs and moral convictions ... from discriminatory action by state government."

Mississippi is a state that is already known for its extremely narrow protection of human rights. Mississippi legislation protects only three beliefs or convictions: that marriage is between a man and a woman, that sex is "properly reserved to such a marriage," and that words like "male" and "female" are "objectively determined by anatomy and genetics at birth." This bill appears to constrict any remaining legislated human rights in the state.

Governor Bryant’s full statement regarding the signing of HB1523 is as follows:

A link to the Protecting Freedom of Conscience from Government Discrimination Act in pdf format is listed below.

What It Shall Be

Tyson Foods and Nissan North America, both with major holdings in the state, called on Governor Bryant to veto the bill. He didn’t listen. He also did not heed the pleas from international conglomerates such as Time Warner and The Walt Disney Company.

Mississippi’s ally is North Carolina, who also adopted a new law violating LGBTQ rights recently. The consequence to North Carolina was immediate, when PayPal nixed its planned expansion into North Carolina that would have provided 400 jobs.

It would not be out of line to suggest court challenges to HB1523 and its similar legislation in North Carolina. In commenting on the Mississippi bill, the ACLU said, "It's a sad day for Mississippi".

In brighter human rights news, Georgia's Governor shot down a similar bill in the Peach State.

The Protecting Freedom of Conscience from Government Discrimination Act becomes law in the Magnolia State on July 01, 2016.

Links

House Bill 1523 Official Act

Contact Mississippi Governor Phil Bryant

Domestic Violence Knows No Bounds

The recent arrest for domestic violence of famed singer/songwriter Don McLean, at his home in Camden, Maine once again brings to light the prevalence of family abuse. More glaringly, however, it spotlights just how little has been achieved in eradicating this plague that transgresses every socioeconomic barrier in society.

At the time of this writing, few details on McLean’s arrest have been made public and the 70 year old singer of such hits as American Pie and Cats in the Cradle has not been convicted of anything in connection with this incident, but his mere arrest is telling enough to propel the conversation surrounding domestic violence back into the public consciousness and create another teaching moment for children and adults alike.

The United Nations defines domestic violence as “…that [which] results in, or is likely to result in, physical, sexual or mental harm or suffering… including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or in private life”.

According to Statistics Canada, there were 88,000 victims of police-reported family violence in 2013, representing more than a quarter of all violent crimes reported. Victims can be male or female, straight or otherwise, rich or poor, young or old, hold advanced educational degrees or be illiterate, believe in a faith or not, be of any color, and defy any combination thereof. The same can be said of those who perpetrate the violence.

Figures vary immensely depending on the criteria established, but estimates indicate that only one in five incidents of domestic violence is ever reported in Canada. Not surprisingly, female victims are twice as likely as male victims to file a complaint of domestic abuse, according to the Canadian Association For Equality (CAFE).   

The Canadian Women’s Foundation cites an alarming statistic that on any given day, 3300 women and their 3000 children will be sleeping in a shelter because of a domestic violence issue. A further 200 women are turned away due to lack of space. There are no men’s shelters in Canada for victims of domestic abuse.

The public discussion surrounding domestic violence is a fairly recent phenomenon, having once been whispered as a private family matter. Still, evidence continues to mount that the openness with which domestic abuse is discussed has yet to be potent enough to see it expunged. Violence should never be acceptable, regardless of the circumstance.

In 2012, the first study in Canada was conducted to quantify the costs of spousal domestic violence. The study undertaken for the Government of Canada’s Department of Justice stated, “Including the impact borne by the justice system, the impact borne by primary victims, and the impact borne by third parties and others, the total economic impact of spousal violence in Canada in 2009 is estimated at $7.4 billion amounting to $220 per Canadian”.

Money aside, the impact domestic violence has on a victim mentally, socially, physiologically, emotionally, and physically is devastating and immortal. Absenteeism from work for medical appointments and court appearances causes some victims to lose their job. Family splits cause some to lose their standing in houses of worship. The abused tend to move more often to avoid further violence. Persistent medical issues can result from abuse. These are but a few of many scars left as a result of domestic violence.

What can you do if you think someone is being abused? The Canadian Women’s Foundation offers these tips for female victims of domestic violence, but is applicable for all.

·         If someone is in immediate danger, call 911 or the emergency number in your community.

·         Put her safety first. Never talk to anyone about abuse in front of their suspected abuser. Unless she specifically asks for it, never give her materials about domestic abuse or leave information through voice messages or emails that might be discovered by her abuser. However, abuse thrives in secrecy, so speak up if you can do so safely.

·         If she wants to talk, listen. If she doesn’t, simply tell her she does not deserve to be harmed and that you are concerned for her safety. Ask her if there is anything you can do to help, but don’t offer to do anything that makes you uncomfortable or feels unsafe.

·         If she decides to stay in the relationship, try not to judge her. Remember, leaving an abuser can be extremely dangerous. Sometimes, the most valuable thing you can offer a woman who is being abused is your respect.

·         Learn about emergency services in your community, such as your local women’s shelter or sexual assault centre. Search on-line, or consult the front pages of your telephone directory.

Torture From the Comfort of Your Armchair

So quick we are to point our righteous finger at other countries for their human rights violations that we often forget about our own complicity in torturing prisoners on both a local and national level.

The horrific images from Abu Ghraib and the leaked information from the US Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay (Gitmo) caused us to gasp en masse and to wag that same collective finger at our own administration demanding they put an immediate stop to the boorish and humiliating torture tactics we apply.

For at least as long as there has been recorded history, man has used torture to subdue, to punish, to humiliate, to subjugate, and to extract. At times, torture has been put on display as a public spectacle for entertainment and as a warning to others who might transgress against the oppressor of the day. At other times, torture was conducted in a clandestine fashion, away from the prying eyes of those who would be brave enough to protest its use.

The tactics employed in torture take many forms. Your local police department extracted confessions, without regard to whether or not the admissions were legitimate. In fact, Chicago Police has just paid out millions of dollars to a number of detainees it concedes they tortured. Your government actively water-boards, beats, electrically shocks, humiliates, and otherwise tortures detainees. And it does not matter who your government is either. President Obama admits the United States did so.

Coalition forces citing a ‘doctrine of necessity’ routinely use torture methods domestically and abroad in the so-called War on Terror. They tend to use the euphemism ‘enhanced interrogation’ so as not to alarm the uninformed and apathetic electorate. To counter any criticism, nation states have come to rely on contracting private militias to conduct torture sessions so that there exists an arms-length ‘plausible deniability’ on the part of the politicians. Elected officials and senior administration detest getting their hands dirty. History is chock full of similar overt and covert examples.

One of your friends or neighbors is or was a victim of terror at the hands of a bully or abuser.

Israel’s domestic intelligence agency, Shin Bet, goes so far as to justify the use of torture proudly asserting recently, “The purpose of the interrogation being carried out is uncovering the organization and thwarting future attacks. In coordination with the judicial system, the [suspects] are being interrogated according to established and professional judicial criteria for foiling serious future attacks”.

If society is prepared to criminalize future acts, and therefore rationalize the use of torture, how far removed are we from the barbarians from whom we profess to differ? Is it okay to torture a little bit? Where is the proverbial line in the sand, and whose responsibility is it to draw our tipping point?

State sponsored torture is supposed to be unlawful. It has been condemned by the 158 countries who are party to the 1984 United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (the Torture Convention) and those of the 1948 United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Yet, in verifying the parties to these conventions, nary a one could be found that is not currently embroiled in strife involving torture.

Torture apologists would have us believing that employment of extreme measures during desperate times save lives and that the urgent suspension of civil liberties is a warranted and temporary necessity. Yet, there is little to no evidence supporting this position. To the contrary, it has been proven that torture tactics escalate in frequency and intensity once the envelope has been pushed despite dubious outcomes in terms of intelligence gathering.

Information and knowledge gleaned from torturing detainees is almost exclusively inaccurate and misleading. Prisoners just want to end the pain, anguish, and humiliation. Everyone has their breaking point and when it is reached, the crimes to which you will confess, the secrets to which you will assert, and the rules to which you will conform would otherwise be incomprehensible were you not subjected to the cruelty at hand.

Aside from the unreliable data culled from the sufferance, one must ask the self if practicing torture tactics is an acceptable form of humanity. It is an ethically slippery slope to, on the one hand, claim to be a civilized and sophisticated top-of-the-food-chain species while, on the other hand, take delight in dispensing the most depraved and nefarious pain and distress imaginable on another human being.

Under Common Law, we generally accept the principle that it is better that one person goes free rather than be wrongly convicted, even if we know in our heart of hearts that person is guilty. How is it that we can accept this edict as a moral compass point if we are prepared to permit state sponsored torture? Why are we inclined to condemn spousal abuse and bullying yet condone our military, police, and intelligence agencies engaging in torture?

Have we truly been stunted in our thinking? Once, we burned witches alive. We stewed political rivals in kettles. We stretched on racks, impaled on spikes, and dismembered the living in order to hear the words of concession we so eagerly sought. It mattered little what the tortured affirmed.

Our judicial system appears to offer an acknowledgement that torturing detainees is unsound and defective, awarding reparations in civil judgements brought against the state. Bestowing money to torture victims after the fact is our way of having our cake and eating it too. It gives us permission to violate our perceived morality while according just enough aloe to soothe the discomfort of having done so in the first place.

What we have learned from survivors of torture is they suffer prolonged and profound psychological trauma. Many wish they had not persevered, as the ongoing damage they experience is as bad as or worse than that endured at the hands of their persecutors. Many are left with deformities or physical impairment. These victims become visual billboards to their community advertising that what happened to them awaits others who are suspected of running afoul of the oppressive regime. Others are luckier and are killed by their captors.

Some links of interest:

Human Rights Watch

Amnesty International

United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights

United Nations Torture Convention

Torture Museum in Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Museum of Torture in Prague, Czech Republic

How You Contribute To Human Trafficking

In what is the 150th anniversary of the founding of Nestle (Six Swiss Stock Exchange: NESN), the mammoth worldwide corporation finds itself facing civil proceedings for using human trafficked child labor in the African republic of Ivory Coast.

Founded in Switzerland in 1866 by Henri Nestle, a German-born pharmacist, the now household name’s first product was an infant cereal. Since that time, Nestle has expanded into consumer foods such as chocolate, coffee, bottled water, prepackaged frozen foods, and dairy, as well as expanding its cereal line and baby products, adding pet foods, and established its own extensive science division. In this regard, Nestle has to be considered a success on par with any of the world’s top corporations.

The cocoa industry is fraught with human rights violations wherever it is a driving force of an economy. The world demand for chocolate is not unlike that of diamonds in that the end consumer cares little for how the coveted product ends up in their hands. The difference being that now, the disparaging moniker of ‘blood diamond’ has forced socially aware consumers to look a bit closer at the source of the raw product so they can feel better about their purchase. The cocoa industry has yet to find a recognizable way to make this happen, although there exists a voluntary program in which manufacturers can participate.

The majority of cocoa’s human rights violations stem from the use of forced child labor, and it would be unfair to label Nestle as the sole contributor to the conditions under which these destitute agricultural workers find themselves.

What is most fascinating about the civil proceedings against Nestle in this particular circumstance is that Nestle is being sued by migrant workers from Mali who worked on a plantation in Ivory Coast supplying cocoa to Nestle, and that the suit was filed in the United States.

The original suit was filed in the United States in 2005 on behalf of three Mali plaintiffs who state they were trafficked from their homeland to Cote d’Ivorie (Ivory Coast) to work as slaves on a cocoa plantation. The suit names Nestle, ADM, and Cargill as defendants, all of which used the plantation as a supplier. Nestle does not own any cocoa plantations.

Through delays, filings, and proceedings, the suit wrangled its way to a January 2016 ruling by the United States Supreme Court to decline hearing an appeal by the defendants to throw out the case. The three corporate defendants had relied on the 1789 Alien Tort Statute which supposedly covers alleged violations on American soil, and that has been cited successfully in thwarting similar lawsuits against other defendants in the past. The Supreme Court ruling means this case will continue in lower courts.

Nestle and the other defendants in this case emphatically deny using slave labor of any kind and claim their internal audit procedures weed out unscrupulous suppliers who may be so tempted. In going a step further, a Nestle spokesperson stressed that it respects and follows international laws and that using forced child labor goes against everything Nestle stands for.

Still, one cannot escape the prevailing and troublesome existence of forced child labor worldwide. It lives not only in Africa, and not only within the cocoa industry. It flourishes because (largely) western consumers demand cheaper consumer goods on which to spend money they think they have, and without having to directly suffer the consequences of their insistence.