What happens to men who have caused harm to women?
A number of prominent Australian men – including Supreme Court judges – attended a recent launch of a book by supposedly 'disgraced' former High Court judge Dyson Heydon. In 2020, Heydon was found by an independent High Court inquiry to have sexually harassed six young female associates. Heydon maintains his innocence.
None of this is any surprise. Donald Trump has been found guilty in a civil court of sexual misconduct, and was subsequently returned to the White House by voters. The longstanding myth that being accused of (or even found to have committed) sexual harassment ruins your career and life forever is being publicly and repeatedly debunked. This is a reminder that the people who subject others to sexual harassment or perpetrate sexual assault are often normal people embedded in and atop the fabric of our society, not outcast from it.
So, what do we actually want from men who have been found to have caused harm? Is it punishment, rehabilitation, or both? How do we measure what level of social ostracism it would take for them to not harm again? Should victim satisfaction or future behaviour be the focal point of these reflections?
Power and entitlement are the bedrock of all forms of sexual harassment and assault. Powerful people have access to subordinates and have seen institutions or circles they are part of routinely protect their own kind, while silencing victims. This creates a sense of legal and reputational immunity (one that is often proven correct), and contributes to levels of entitlement that manifest as their prerogative to the bodies of others.
One of the criminal justice system's greatest failings in addressing sexual harm is its all-or-nothing approach – unable to reckon with the complexity of human experience and interpersonal harm. The criminal system was designed by men, for men, when sexual harm was an act of 'damaging' another man's 'property'. We still lack a socially acceptable form of accountability outside the criminal system, a system many victims avoid, not just because of its traumatising process or the slim chance of a conviction, but because many do not want their perpetrators jailed, especially when they are friends, mentors or colleagues.
The problem here is that each victim will have their own threshold for what constitutes justice.
Loading
Some perpetrators face social consequences for their actions – terminated or forced resignations from positions, exclusion from parties, or reputational damage – but when you're close to the harm, it feels irrelevant compared with the gravity of consequences for the victim.
Both things can be true: accountability can exist in public form (generally, men fear this), and yet this can feel painfully insufficient to those who bore the impact (generally, women resent this). However, it must not be forgotten that the question of accountability is only being explored at all because Heydon was found by a High Court inquiry to have committed the actions he was accused of. I wonder whether, had the standard of proof in this inquiry been 'beyond reasonable doubt', the women who spoke up would be branded as 'attention-seeking liars'. The reality was the same, regardless, but the finding is what has shaped the public narrative.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News AU
6 hours ago
- Sky News AU
‘Needs to be removed': Sustainability education linked to climate anxiety
Institute of Public Affairs Brianna McKee says sustainability must be removed from the Australian schooling curriculum to reduce climate anxiety. 'Children are at a particular stage of psychological development where they think about things in very concrete or literal terms,' Ms McKee told Sky News host Rowan Dean. 'So, when they hear phrases like 'climate action now' or 'sea levels are rising', they interpret that literally, and that causes anxiety. 'The first step towards addressing this is to take sustainability out of the curriculum. 'It needs to be removed.'
The Age
7 hours ago
- The Age
‘Progressive patriot' prime minister faces his call to arms
'In today's Australia, the new default should be that patriotism is a love of country that is democratic and egalitarian. It is something that includes those of different races and backgrounds,' he wrote in this masthead a couple of weeks ago. 'With his political authority unquestioned, Albanese has an opportunity to craft a nation-building agenda. The significance is more than just national. At the moment, parties of the centre-left are struggling to find compelling alternatives to Trumpist populism.' Albanese's defiance of America doesn't come out of nowhere. It rings a Labor bell. It resonates with the decision by Labor's celebrated wartime leader, John Curtin, to defy Australia's great and powerful friend of his time, Britain. 'I'm conscious about the leadership of John Curtin, choosing to stand up to Winston Churchill and say, 'No, I'm bringing the Australian troops home to defend our own continent, we're not going to just let it go',' Albanese said last year as he prepared to walk the Kokoda Track, where Australia and Papua New Guinea halted Imperial Japan's southward march of conquest in World War II. Defiance of allies is one thing. Defeat of the enemy is another. In a moment of truth-telling, the Chief of the Defence Force, Admiral David Johnston, this week said that Australia now had to plan to wage war from its own continental territory rather than preparing for war in far-off locations. 'We are having to reconsider Australia as a homeland from which we will conduct combat operations,' Johnston told a conference held by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute. 'That is a very different way – almost since the Second World War – of how we think of national resilience and preparedness. We may need to operate and conduct combat operations from this country.' He didn't spell it out, but he's evidently contemplating the possibility that China will cut off Australia's seaborne supply routes, either because it's waging war in the Taiwan Strait or South China Sea, or because it's seeking to coerce Australia. 'The chief of the defence force is speaking truth,' says Professor Peter Dean, co-author of the government's Defence Strategic Review, now at the US Studies Centre at Sydney University. 'There's a line in the Defence Strategic Review that most people overlook – it talks about 'the defence of Australia against potential threats arising from major power competition, including the prospect of conflict'. And there's only one major power posing a threat in our region.' History accelerates week by week. Trump, chaos factory, wantonly discards America's unique sources of power and abuses its allies. China's Xi Jinping and Russia's Vladimir Putin are emboldened, seeing America's credibility crumbling. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, alarmed at the rising risks, this week declared a campaign to make Britain 'battle ready' to 'face down Russian aggression'. Loading Starmer plans to enlarge the army, commission up to a dozen new nuclear-powered submarines jointly built with Australia under AUKUS, build six new munitions factories, manufacture 7000 long-range weapons, renew the nuclear warheads on Britain's strategic missiles, and put new emphasis on drones and cyberwar as war evolves daily on the battlefields of Ukraine. Starmer intends to increase defence outlays to the equivalent of 2.5 per cent of GDP with an eventual target of 3 per cent. Ukraine's impressive drone strike on Russia's bombers this week knocked out a third of Moscow's force, with AI guiding the drones to their targets. The Australian retired major-general Mick Ryan observes that Ukraine and Russia are upgrading and adapting drone warfare weekly. 'The Australian government has worked hard to ignore these hard-earned lessons and these cheaper military solutions,' he wrote scathingly in this masthead this week, 'while building a dense bureaucracy in Canberra that innovative drone-makers in Australia cannot penetrate in any reasonable amount of time.' At the same time, the FBI charged two Chinese researchers with attempting to smuggle a toxic fungus into the US. It's banned because it can cause mass destruction of crops. A potential bioweapon, in other words. What would John Curtin do today? 'Curtin, like Albanese, was from the left of the Labor Party,' says Dean. 'He was not an internationalist, he was very domestic focused.' Indeed, he was an avowed Marxist who believed that capitalism was in its late phase and bound to fail, leading to world peace. He abandoned his idealism when confronted by the reality of World War II. 'He realised that a leader has to lead for his times. He had to bend his interests from the domestic sphere to the international.' Curtin famously wrote that, after Britain's 'impregnable fortress' of Singapore fell to the Japanese in just a few days, Australia looked to America as its great and powerful friend. 'Albanese can't repeat that,' observes Dean, 'because there's no one else to turn to.' 'A modern John Curtin,' says the head of the National Security College at ANU, Rory Medcalf, 'would take account of the strategic risk facing the unique multicultural democratic experiment of Australia. He'd unite the community and bring the trade unions, industry, the states and territories together in a national effort. 'It's certainly not about beating the drums of war, but we do need a much more open conversation about national preparedness. Australia might be directly involved in war, but, even if we aren't, we will be affected indirectly [by war to our north] because of risks to our fuel security, risks to the normal functioning of the economy and risks to the cohesion of our society. Is there scope to use national cabinet' – which includes the states and territories – 'to talk about these issues?' And the defence budget? Albanese is dismissive of calls to peg spending by set percentages of GDP. Apply that to any other area of the budget and you'd be laughed out of the room. The prime minister prefers to decide on capability that's needed, then to fund it accordingly. How big a gun do you need, then find money to pay for it. Medcalf endorses this approach of deciding capability before funding, but says that risk should come before both. 'And if you look at risk first, it will push spending well above 2 per cent of GDP and much closer to 3 or 4 per cent.' Regardless of what the Americans say or do. Do they turn out to be dependable but demanding? Or uselessly absent? 'Australia will need to spend more either way,' says Medcalf. 'The only future where we don't need to increase our security investment is one where we accept greatly reduced sovereignty in a China-dominated region.'
West Australian
10 hours ago
- West Australian
French woman allegedly concealed 10kg of meth in suitcase
A young French woman allegedly concealed 10kg of methamphetamine in her suitcase on a flight from Paris to Perth. The 18-year-old was travelling from Paris when Australian Border Force officers selected her for a baggage examination at Perth Airport. A white crystalline substance was allegedly found in five sealed plastic pouches inside her suitcase. The substance tested positive for methamphetamine during initial testing, with an estimated weight of 10.7kg. Her phone, suitcase and its contents were seized by the Australian Federal Police (AFP), with police to allege she'd planned to travel to Sydney. She was charged with one count of importing a commercial quantity of a border controlled drug, of which there is a maximum penalty of life imprisonment. AFP Inspector Matt Taylor said 'criminal activities are not welcome in this country'. 'The AFP's aim is to disrupt all levels of the drug trade and the criminals attempting to profit at the expense and suffering of the Australian community,' Inspector Taylor said. 'Even in small amounts, drugs such as methamphetamine cause immense harm to users and the community around them, through the impact on the health care system and associated crime. 'Our message is simple to anyone involved in the drug trade – your criminal activities are not welcome in this country.' The young woman fronted Northbridge Magistrates court on April 26 where she was remanded to reappear on Friday.
