Police, Michael Forbes and sex addiction as an excuse
I have long been an advocate for understanding why people offend so we might better assist them to change. Michael Forbes indicates that he has been in therapy for a year dealing with the causes of the behaviour in question and acknowledging that he has a sexual addiction. However according to the Prime Minister and Louise Upston, although apparently the allegations were “investigated” by Police and dismissed, he hadn’t seen fit to disclose this to his employers even though it was clearly something that affected his job. His attitudes towards women, towards another human being’s right to privacy and respect will undoubtedly affect the way that he conducts himself but also the kind of advice he might provide. The argument being ironically that he had a right to privacy.
Presumably Michael Forbes needed to apply for the job with the Prime Minister’s policy team under public service protocols when he moved from Louise Upston’s office. Surely a Police report must have been sought and clearly this did not produce the information about this complaint. There is an unwillingness to follow this matter up by the Commissioner for Police which is telling about the culture that exists not just in the Police but in the Government to isolate an individual to take the blame and a refusal to look at the system that produced it.
Remember Richard Chambers is the man who has seen no evidence of institutionalised racisim, a man who calls a press conference without having apprised himself of that information that he presumably could get but clearly does not want to get. One would expect that given the role he is in, he would want to uncover any miscarriage of justice but he is displaying in this interview all the signs of not wanting to know, perhaps under pressure from his Minister of Police to take a particular line.
Because that it seems is how leadership is in this day of politics and to be fair was also true of the Ardern administration as well. It’s not actually trying to improve anything, not actually trying to get to the bottom of justice but it’s all about maintaining systems which are deeply rotten.
It’s a situation yet again that shows the rot in the Police when it comes to the treatment of sex workers and white influential men. Although many police have themselves taken advantage of sex worker trade, as have many white influential men, they seem unable to see the women and men servicing their sexual needs as worthy of respect as human beings. This includes the legal right to justice and protection under the law. It has long been this way with sexual offenders offloading the shame they feel onto their victims, in this case people they choose to engage with in an economic contract.
And yet it seems society has seen this as fair game because of the narrative of the whore promoted by the religions over time as somehow a dirty and immoral human being rather than one simply trying to financially survive. It seems inconceivable to us to rather ask : when do men actually grow up and start taking responsibility for managing their emotional needs rather than acting them out sexually ? When do we actually start holding men accountable for the child sex trafficking industry ? When do we start saying that men do not EVER have the right to use women, children and vulnerable men as sexual objects for their personal gratification ? I say men because the bulk of the offending is done by men but there are also women who use others as sexual objects rather than as sexual partners.
It says a lot about our state of humanity that we think objectifying another human being is “kinky sex” thesedays. What it says to me is that we have no idea about mutual respect for all beings - humans, animals and the natural world but especially it condones an attitude of entitlement which tends to mean those most vulnerable - economically, emotionally, physically, socially are fair game for the bored indulged elite who hold power. Nothing very civilised or mature about that.
Even in the quick images supplied in the story of Luxon in India with Michael Forbes, there is an entitlement in his body posture which does not suggest a genuine wrestling with the police “investigation” of a single conversation. His willingness to resign appears to be completely driven by the breaking media story as does Chambers desire to tell the Government what the media told him. And in the Police refusing to take the criminal offence of taking images of women undressing in their private homes seriously, they have simply by their non action, indicated collusion with that sort of behaviour. Here is the actual wording from the Crimes Act 1961.
216GIntimate visual recording defined
(1)
In sections 216H to 216N , intimate visual recording means a visual recording (for example, a photograph, videotape, or digital image) that is made in any medium using any device without the knowledge or consent of the person who is the subject of the recording, and the recording is of—
(a)
a person who is in a place which, in the circumstances, would reasonably be expected to provide privacy, and that person is—
(i)
naked or has his or her genitals, pubic area, buttocks, or female breasts exposed, partially exposed, or clad solely in undergarments; or
(ii)
engaged in an intimate sexual activity; or
(iii)
engaged in showering, toileting, or other personal bodily activity that involves dressing or undressing; ”
Unsurprising that Richard Chambers shows no interest at all in opening up any examination of this case and presumably there will be others because none of it will reflect well on anyone. That executive members of the Police knew about this information and refused to act tells you just how high up the rot is. Unsurprising really when you consider the Police’s willingness to intimidate sex workers by taking their kids away, their unwillingness to provide an effective Crown prosecution witness in escort against Polkinghorne and their Deputy Police Commissioner’s personal use of sexual material that reaches the offensive material definition. Probably it was a friendly wink wink nudge nudge sort of chat.
I think we don’t really understand how widespread male misogynist behaviour is and so really it should be no surprise that this is how it is in the Police. You only have to follow political footage produced by Whangareitim on Youtube who seems to be a great supporter of the Coalition Government to get a taste of a general disdain for women, especially Maori and Green women, in our leaders.
But there is a clear sense that Michael Forbes wants to excuse his behaviour as sex addiction and claims he has been having therapy for a year. From personal experience in relation to an alcoholic, addiction is fuelled by dishonesty both to oneself and to anyone that challenges the addictive behaviour. Although there is no doubt that it fills an important function for the individual in protecting them from having to deal with difficult things, we as a society do not assist people to grapple with it by simply excusing it or overlooking it. Probably the most effective action I took in that relationship was when I set a boundary or a consequence. The excusing of harmful behaviour because of trauma was actually enabling that behaviour to continue and escalate.
Do we allow people with an alcohol addiction to get away with harming people through drink driving or family violence ? In theory we do not, the Police are required to act in these matters although again what the general attitude is towards these behaviours and who is doing them, seems somewhat questionable and should be open to scrutiny. On 3 occasions I have advised the Police of violence against women concerns, not just on my own account, but each time the Police are either extremely reluctant to act or have failed completely to follow up. This is also something identified by refuge workers.
It seems in this country that the Police are the only ones able to bring criminal cases for prosecution and therefore if misoygnist attitudes towards women exist in the Police , then cases, like this one, will never even reach a criminal charge, never even proceed to Court and this is clearly what initially happened in the Polkinghorne trial whether directly as a result of David Seymour’s political influence or not. They chose only to intervene after substantial pressure from Pauline’s family over a year after her death.
The differential treatment of people with influence compared to those without influence by the Police also raises questions about how this comes about. ie is it through emotional intimidation such as Seymour’s communication to Police or rather is there a financial bonus in overlooking certain criminal acts by certain people, perhaps failing to produce all evidence ? These are criminal acts in interfering with Justice. Are they ever brought ? Was detective Mark Franklin charged with creating false evidence in the Stone and Maney case ? It’s an easy out for Police to drop any complaint on the pretext of not enough evidence when the complaint is against one of their own. Richard Chambers behaviour in this press conference simply enables this culture further.
However this situation has been dealt with by Police, it has been driven partly by how society as a whole views sex workers as immoral and therefore unreliable human beings. Anyone entering the sex industry knows that they run the risk of societal shame associated with that profession from long standing religious doctrine of the fallen whore. Sometimes this will even be directly expressed to them by the very punters paying for their services. But it is often held by other women and for an example, it’s worth revisiting the discussion between Marie Dyhberg and Michael Laws following the publication of videos made by the escort who was “employed” by Philip Polkinghorne.
And yet as with child pornography, we focus on shaming those providing the service, without fully examining those responsible for demanding these services. By doing that we do not illuminate the full problem and therefore we can not address why thousands of children end up being sexually abused, many of them later making their way into the sex industry as adults.
We don’t identify the role of economic need, the untreated trauma in sex workers, the ongoing uplifting of children as part of the trafficking industry and why sexual abuse by white male influential men is occurring at such a concerning rate. We don’t consider the role that elite education might play in male priviledge as well as the deficits in socialisation with females. We don’t consider how male domination impacts how we think about everything from a male perspective in the same way that white colonialism controls the narrative in Parliament and how our institutions work on English Westminster lines. The fact that boys are never educated in sexual restraint in the same way that girls are, makes women far more responsible than they should be for men’s sexual behaviour and men far less responsible. Combine this attitude with the entitlement of priviledge, grievances against women who haven’t behaved in the way they have wanted, and instead of mature self responsible men capable of sexual intimacy in relationships, the world seem to be run by sexually immature resentful boys in mens bodies who objectify sex and use it to manage emotions.
And so the option of damming up the Oranga Tamariki pipeline in producing child sexual abuse victims appears to be unpalatable particularly to the ACT party leader. Despite the Auditor General concerns about this department and the appalling results of the pilot boot camp, ACT are determined to roll this intervention out. Against all evidence of its effectiveness in reducing crime it is difficult to see any reason to maintain boot camp culture other than to cultivate more young vulnerable angry people who will consume drugs to cope and then have to pay for drugs by selling their bodies to men who have never learned true sexual intimacy without being in control.
The volumes of evidence provided by survivors in State and Faith based care not only describes a pipeline to prison but it also describes another pipeline of sexual abuse, addiction and sex worker for many women. We have all the evidence to see what has happened over and over again when these abuses are identified. Over and over again, there has been barriers to investigation and opposition to criminal charges by Police and Crown Law. This is yet another example of that.
Recently there is one startling difference in both the survivor and the sex worker communities. That change is that there is a level of understanding that the shame belongs elsewhere just as in France with Giselle Pelicot. For too long women have accepted the abuse and shame heaped on them and believed the gaslighting that they are somehow intrinsically bad. As with Pelicot there is a recognition that they have been severely wronged.
Sex workers usually comply with an ethics of privacy about who uses their services and how they are treated. It is heartening to see their willingness to speak out when that contract of mutual privacy was broken by the other party. It is a step in reclaiming personal mana as members of a society entitled to challenge contractual law breaches that suggests they have, unlike Michael Forbes, seriously addressed the trauma which would have them believe they are not worthy of respect, privacy and equal treatment before the law.
The worms are turning…
