When
I read Leah Parson’s emotive description of the pain, and anguish which drove
her daughter to suicide after persistent victimization by former friends and
school mates and the failure of the Canadian judicial system to help her.
She
wrote “The Person Rehtaeh once was all changed one dreaded night in November
2011. She went with a friend to another’s home. In that home she was raped by
four young boys…one of those boys took a photo of her being raped and
decided it would be fun to distribute the photo to everyone in Rehtaeh’s school
and community where it quickly went viral. Because the boys already had a “slut” story, the
victim of the rape Rehtaeh was considered a SLUT.”
The
case was complicated in many ways; there was no way to prove rape as the
compliant was registered a week later and the picture circulated online was of
an obscene act, but did not show their faces. Her mother writes “Rehtaeh was
suddenly shunned by almost everyone she knew, the harassment was so bad she had
to move out of her own community to try to start anew in Halifax. The bullying
continued, her friends were not supportive.”
Two
of the perpetrators were caught and recently charged with child pornography for
distributing a sexually implicit image of a child, the only charge that the
police could legally raise.
To
me, a young girl was being victimized by a large number of young people in a
small community, over a period of time using social networks and isolation. This case is similar to the Steubenville Rape
case where a rape conviction was made against two juvenile footballers.
Alcohol, drugs, peer pressure, lack of parental supervision, and an unconscious
victim were the chief ingredients in this crime.
Social
media was used extensively to tweet or post about the incident. Immediately
after the crime, perpetrators bragged and shared obscene videos and picture
online, denigrating the victim among friends and the local community. During the trial, social media was used
to intimidate, harass and threaten the victim; her supporters, bloggers,
parents and others who supported the case.
During the trial by social media,
these comments were witnessed and supported by a large number of passive
bystanders. Knowingly or unknowingly, by not taking a stand and condemning
the slander, they and their parents became active participants in
support of the ongoing victimization. Their inactivity fuelled the victimization as the perpetrators thought they were on the winning side. Most of the bystanders had the
power to end the victimisation, there and then by a single comment. But none did.
Parents
should educate their
children not be party to rumours and gossip online. To fight for morally
right causes. To be able to walk away or take a stand against bullies or other
popular students who behave immorally. Only then, will be make cyber space safe
for our children. It should be noted that social media was effectively and positively used to
harness support for the victim, their families and bring about changes in law.
We can always ask ourselves some of the questions below:
1.
What role did the parents of Rehtaeh’s
classmates and school mates who supported the bullying do? Did they advise
their children against passing judgments and took part in the victimization?
2.
The boys who committed the offence,
seemed least apologetic and in fact appear to aggressively prove their
innocence. What drove them to brand and harass Rehtaeh? What role do their
parents play in this entire incident? Passive
or Active?
3.
Should the law reform in line with the
new age or simply try to apply old laws to the online world.
4.
Is parental supervision of their
children moral conduct online lacking?
5.
Do children not understand the
implication of sexting and that it is illegal?
6.
Do children not understand the
implication of non consensual sexting?
7.
What role do social networks play in
reducing use of their network for such victimization?
photo credit:
renattovect via
photopin cc
