Tag Archives: rape

Refelction, Not Influence

Posted by Amy in Women, Writing and tagged with , ,

Courtesy of Lifejackets.com

Warnings: Mentions of rape, violence against women, objectification, and domestic abuse.  Description of a rape scene.

As some of you know, I do some unpaid work proofreading.  I love it, because I’ve been able to work on some incredible pieces.  I’ve also met some terrific authors (and even got a signed copy of a book out of the deal–win!).  It’s a way for me not only to make connections like that, but to improve my own writing as I learn what’s good–and what’s not.

Over the weekend, I had the misfortune to have a chapter land in my lap that made me feel sick and violated.  The writer sent what, on the surface, appeared to be an interesting combination of mystery and either urban fantasy or science fiction (this was the first chapter; it was hard to tell).  It turned out to be some kind of erotica, supposedly with “BDSM” themes.  Yeah, not quite.

After the first two pages, I started to feel uncomfortable, though I couldn’t pinpoint why.  At first, it just sounded like the main character was imagining what it would be like as a dom.  I’ve seen that before, but this just read…differently.  After a second read-through, I figured it out.  This guy wasn’t just thinking about being a dom in a particular relationship, he seemed to be applying this fantasy to all women.  That is, he liked the idea of women–not exclusively a partner–being incapable of movement and unable to speak.

I set that thought aside, though, because I’m not well-versed in BDSM lifestyle/culture and figured perhaps the writer was expressing things badly.  It’s been known to happen (ahem, Fifty Shades, anyone?).  That is, until I read further.  A strange woman appears at his door, looking for someone else.  In the process of “comforting” her, he begins to fantasize about what he wants to do with her.  Again, this made me uncomfortable, that a man would be incapable of meeting a woman without sexual interest.  Clearly this is a person who sees women as existing solely for the purpose of fulfilling his sexual fantasies.

In the last scene of the chapter, the main character is waiting in a reception area and begins fantasizing about the secretary (of course).  He imagines himself hauling her across her desk and assaulting her with a knife, slicing her nipples, and forcing her to have sex with him.  The way the scene is written, it’s clearly intended to be erotic rather than terrifying.  Let me tell you, it absolutely scares the shit out of me to think that a strange man would come into my workplace and imagine himself brutally assaulting me.

There are a number of people who will probably tell me that it’s “just fantasy” or that it’s okay because it’s fictional and no one’s really going to imitate that behavior just because they read it in a book.  I’ve heard the same arguments about Fifty Shades, and they don’t hold any water for the same reason.

Stories like Fifty Shades or the rapey fiction I read last weekend are not cultural influencers.  It’s probably true that no one’s going to first read the book and then act in the same fashion.  Rather, these books are a reflection of what’s already happening.  Women are already in abusive relationships, being manipulated and led to believe their partners love them or that they can “fix” their partners if they do all the right things.  Women are already being objectified and raped.  These are not things that are caused by reading a book.

The real problem is that books like these condone the behavior; they make it seem acceptable under certain circumstances.  When abuse is sold as romance, it makes the abuse appear to be acceptable.  Domestic abuse is okay, as long as a woman understands it’s because her partner only did it because he loved her.  When rape is sold as eroticism, it justifies a view of women that we are playthings.  It’s all right to fantasize about tying up and raping strangers at knife point, as long as one doesn’t actually do that in real life.  It isn’t a matter of life imitating art, it’s the other way around–and not in a way that points to the behavior and says, “This needs to stop.”

If either of these stories were clearly defining the abuse and fantasy-rape as Very Bad Things, I would champion them and demand everyone read them.  It’s entirely possible to point out societal ills in a manner that condemns the behavior, while still allowing the characters to see things differently than the readers.  To Kill a Mockingbird does this perfectly in the narrative of the rape trial woven throughout the story.  We can see the racism, but many of the town’s residents are incapable of such insight.  The important thing is that we’re not supposed to side with them.  We’re not supposed to see them as the heroes of the story, and we’re rightly indignant when people in real life also fail to understand why it’s wrong.

It’s a far, far different thing entirely to create characters who enforce violent, abusive behavior.  What a difference it would make in both of the stories I mentioned if the end result were for the abusers to be recognized for what they are.  Unfortunately, that’s not the case, and the consequence of both is reinforcement of a culture that is violent towards women.

Writers, this is my challenge to you: Don’t fall into the trap of believing your words have no subtext.  Words mean things, and not just individually.  Collectively, we can send messages that perhaps we don’t consciously intend.  Be purposeful with your words; examine yourself and your work for ways in which you’ve upheld stereotypes or reflected cultural norms that might be best left in the trash where they belong.  You, writers, are better than the ugly violence that some are selling as acceptable.

50 Shades of saying NO

Posted by Amy in Books and tagged with , ,

Warnings: The Fifty Shades series is extremely sexually explicit and involves BDSM. Because of that, and because they are not exactly well-researched or high-quality literature, I will mention things such as abuse, rape, rape culture, male dominance, sexism, relationship violence, and consensual BDSM. Also, the books began as Twilight fanfic, so I will be mentioning Twilight (which is a major squick for a lot of people just by itself).

Additional warning: This chapter contains a rape scene.

When we left Ana and Christian, he was carting her off to his parents’ boathouse so he could “spank and then fuck” her.  Her reaction:

Oh no…this is not good, my subconscious is quaking at the knees. He’s mad about something–could be José, Georgia, no panties, biting my lip. Jeez, he’s easy to rile.

Aside from the lack of proper editing in that paragraph, there are so many things that disturb me here.  What in the world would possess anyone to take off in the middle of a dinner party to get it on while the rest of the guests remain in place?  It makes me feel really, really uncomfortable.  I don’t want any guest in my home–even (or perhaps especially?) family–to take a sexy romp out in my shed during a visit.

We also get the requisite admonition from Ana’s subconscious.  Just about every time she has sex with Christian, we get to hear her internal debate.  She wants him, but he’s angry and menacing.  He’s screwed up, but he belongs to her.  Whatever.  I’m just plain tired of Ana putting this track on repeat.

What follows, though, is quite possibly the most horrifying thing I’ve read in this book so far.  You want to see how pervasive rape culture is?  Here you go:

Christian: You said no.

Ana: What? [thinking] No to what?

Christian: At the dinner table, with your legs. [He was feeling her up during dinner.] . . . No one’s ever said no to me before. And it’s so—hot.

The word no—when used for what it means [NO; don't do that; stop; I don't like it]—should not ever, ever, ever be “hot.”  You see how much emphasis I placed on that statement?  Yeah.  That.

I understand that in the context of some sexual relationships, the meaning of “no” can change; that’s the reason for safe words.  When Ana said “no” at dinner, however, she actually meant “no.”  She didn’t want Christian’s hands all over her in his parents’ dining room.  Inexplicably, he found her act of setting a firm boundary arousing.  Worse still is the fact that we are supposed to gloss over that part in order to get to more hot, kinky sex.  Instead of Ana being frightened by this incredibly rapey comment, she is enthralled by his ubersexiness.

That’s disturbing.

What happens next is, in my opinion, actual rape.  Ana never consents to what Christian does to her in this scene.  She mentions being aroused by how hot Christian is, and she appears to enjoy the sex to an extent, but she doesn’t ever give any indication that what he’s doing is acceptable to her.  She tells him she doesn’t want him to spank her (she uses the word “hit”) because they are at his parents’ place.  So he tells her that if he can’t punish her that way, he’s going to have rough sex with her on the couch in the boathouse.  He says it’s for his pleasure and not hers and tells her that she is not allowed to have an orgasm.  He proceeds to do exactly what he’s said he will.

Without her permission.

And before someone gets all up in my face about this being a BDSM book, here’s a tip: Fuck right off.  Even if you want to go with the whole contract thing (which she still hasn’t signed), there is no clause in there that says Christian can stick it in her because he feels like it, whether she wants it or not.

Folks, there are not two interpretations here.  It’s pretty clear that he rapes her.  It’s also clear that the author has intentionally written this to arouse readers, but doesn’t have the skill to pull it off correctly.*  I am disgusted.  I keep hearing about how Fifty Shades is empowering women to explore their sexuality because it’s being read far and wide and women are getting off on it.  I would love to celebrate that, but I cannot find it in me to do so.  I simply can’t condone the conflation of romance and rape.

It makes me particularly angry because my fellow feminists and I spend so much time talking and writing about what lies underneath rape culture.  We fight this kind of thing every day.  We rage against towns that cover up rape by athletes and news outlets that pity the perpetrators.  We study the relationship between purity culture and rape.  We fight institutionalized gender-based bias and power structures.  We have worked too hard to have everything undermined by a woman who thinks it’s a good idea to outright state that getting turned on by rejection is okay and that rape is sexy.

Rape culture in action, people.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

*There are actually stories written (often by rape survivors) in which the authors toy with consent.  The difference is usually that skillful writers understand that conceptually, rape is not arousing.  There is an acknowledgement of the disturbing nature of enjoying rape or falling in love with one’s rapist.  I typically find those stories as distasteful as Fifty Shades, but I understand that it can be cathartic for some people to write them.  The main difference is that in those stories, readers are intended to find the characters’ actions troubling.  E. L. James wants us to find the characters’ actions romantic.

Our natural state is not “rape-worthy”

Posted by Amy in News, Social Justice, Women and tagged with

Have you ever woken up and thought, I’m going to write about this today, only to have your inbox or social media change your mind?

I was going to write a great post about grace and love and what happens when those things collide with actual people.  Don’t worry, I’m still going to write that one; two blog posts yesterday reminded me that we sorely need it.  But today, I can’t.  I can’t because the warmth I felt reading about when real, Christ-like love happens was overshadowed by what I read this morning.

I knew, of course.  Who hasn’t heard about the brutal gang rape of the woman in India that resulted in her death?  It’s been splashed all over the news since it happened.  But that’s not what made me stop this morning as I perused my feeds at the kitchen table, sitting with my son while he nibbled his toast.  No, what hit me was this article (warning: graphic rape).  This quote stood out to me:

A culture in which women are expected to remain virgins until marriage is a rape culture. In that vision, women’s bodies are for use primarily for procreation or male pleasure.

E. J. Graff has gotten to what I believe is the heart of the matter:  That rape culture, and purity culture as a contributor, have lumped rape, sex, and women’s bodies into the same category.  Autonomy is for men; submission and purity are for women.  The same culture that insists that a woman do everything within her power to prevent male “lust” is, if not overtly then at least complacently, accepting of rape as a means to control women.  It becomes the “natural” consequence of “inappropriate” conduct.

  • If only she hadn’t been wearing that outfit
  • If only she had remained sober
  • If only she hadn’t been alone at night
  • If only she hadn’t been alone with a man
  • If only she had learned to defend herself better

In American culture, where women are free to dress and behave in any manner they choose, we find excuses for rapists because, in some way, we believe she was “asking for it” (or at least behaving in a foolish manner likely to result in her assault).  Yet if it were even remotely true that the woman is at fault, we should not see any rapes in cultures where women are covered head to toe or who are expected to remain only among other women.  This is clearly not the case.

The problem is the conflation of rape and sex.  Rape is not primarily about an inability of men to control their surging hormones.  If that were true, far more men would be rapists, including spousal rape.  The brutalization of a woman by means of violating her vagina is about controlling her.  It is a demonstration of power, whether it be power over her specifically or a display intended to prove power in general.

What I find interesting is that the vast majority of people who excuse rape, or at least minimize it, on the grounds that a woman is “asking for it,” would not ever be likely to rape anyone.  A couple of years ago, I had a conversation with a young man from the church we were attending at the time.  He said,

What a lot of girls don’t realize is that if they dress a certain way, guys are going to treat them a certain way.

I knew what he meant, particularly when he said that he tries to show girls respect no matter how they are dressed.  I tried to gently get across the point that it isn’t about a girl’s clothes, but about how a boy feels about girls in general that is the problem.  I don’t know whether he believed me or not; we haven’t discussed it since then.  I hope he took that conversation to heart.  At any rate, his primary concern was for the girls, that they might find themselves facing unwanted contact.  It is admirable that he didn’t (and presumably still doesn’t) want to see anyone victimized.  I see this as one of the reasons why (misguided though they may be) that some people try to look at it as primarily a problem of inappropriate sexuality.

Unfortunately, the belief that rape is sex is what is at fault.  There is no amount of changing the way a woman dresses or acts that will prevent rape.  I’m not convinced (short of the kind of thing found in Minority Report that would weed out potential rapists) that there is anything we can do to prevent rape in its entirety.  We can, however, change the way we view rape and the women (and men) who are violated in this way.

The picture that appears at the top of this post came from a friend who put it on her Facebook page.  I believe this is the other side of the same coin, though I think the picture misses the mark in continuing to equate rape and sex in a sense.  One way in which I think we can move forward is if we ask men to consider exactly why they would not violate a woman.  I doubt that most of them would say that it’s merely because they can get all the sex they want consensually or because they possess “self-control.”

The other way that we can begin to make the necessary changes is to stop equating a woman’s vagina with her worth as a person.  This is an antiquated view that stems from the concept of women as property, first of their fathers and then of their husbands.  That is not to say that it is not admirable (or even “best”) for both women and men to refrain from sex until marriage (or, if one is more progressive, until in a committed, healthy relationship).  But tying a woman’s value to what has or has not been inside her vagina creates a place of shame.  It is what leads women who have been raped (including rape by family members) to believe they are unacceptable because they’ve had “sex.”  Both men and women should be taught that their value comes not from the undefiled state of their genitals but from their hearts.

I want to add one last note of hope.  I believe that the young people in our churches today are crying out for this message.  I am so blessed to have an ongoing relationship with several adolescents and young adults who are already working to change the attitudes within the church.  We need to hear their voices over the din of our culture and we need to encourage them to speak out.  They are the antithesis of the morally bankrupt youths who actively and passively encourage situations like the rape of an Ohio teen.  We can do this, Church.  We can be the change we want to see.

We deserve better

Posted by Amy in Politics, Sexuality, Women and tagged with , ,

Trigger warning for mentions of rape and stupid politicians.

In the last several months, we’ve heard a lot about “legitimate rape,” how women’s bodies are supposed to have magical properties to prevent pregnancy from rape, and that babies resulting from rape are ordained by God.  There’s also an ongoing battle over women’s reproductive rights, which is no longer about abortion but about birth control and women’s health services generally.

There is a clear link between the denial of reproductive care to women and the denial of women’s sexual agency.  When we feel the need to ask whether or not a rape was legitimate, or whether a woman is making up a story for revenge/attention, or what her state of being was at the time of the rape, then we are essentially saying that women don’t have any power over their own bodies or choices.  It becomes okay to suggest that a woman is responsible for the crimes committed against her.  “Legitimate rape” becomes “legitimized rape”—not a criminal act but a justifiable act.

In the same way, the denial of care and reproductive services to women is a refusal to acknowledge that women have choice and sexual freedom in the same way men do.  The people arguing that women should have to pay for their birth control are failing to understand one simple thing.  If women had access to inexpensive, over-the-counter birth control, we wouldn’t even be having this argument.  Anyone can walk into the drug store and buy a box of condoms*.  Heck, you can buy them just about anywhere, and they aren’t particularly expensive (even the “fancy” kinds).  Spermicide is also readily available.  But nearly all birth control for women is available only by prescription, and it’s costly.  When I was on the pill, I was shilling out $25 per month, and that was for the generic kind, with the bulk of the cost covered by insurance.  Semi-permanent birth control, such as IUDs, can cost as much as $1000.  That’s in the range of $100-$200 per year, but it must be paid up front.

I’ve been pondering this because the reality is that there is no escape from biology.  Human beings are capable of reproduction in the same way that all living things make more of themselves.  We happen to reproduce in a way that is (supposed to be) mutually enjoyable.  And unlike non-humans, we don’t just engage in mindless sexual activity driven by instinct.  We have the ability to choose our mates based on more than who’s in heat or has some feature required for the survival of the species.  That means that we can think about and choose our partners.  It also means that we can make choices about what we do with our bodies within those relationships, which includes the choice to have or not have children.

I have yet to hear anyone raging about the morality of anyone picking up a box of Trojans during their weekly shopping run.  But the outcry against women having birth control readily available to them has been huge and public.  I can’t help thinking that this has more to do with the continued forced control of women’s bodies than with any moral viewpoint or freedom of religion.

Without access to birth control, it makes it easier for those in power to control abortions.  If prescription methods are too costly, and abortions become legally unavailable, then what we have are women who are forced back into an era in which women have no sexual agency.  (And for the record, this includes married women.)  We are left with few options:  Rely on men to use condoms (good luck with that when he’s a rapist); accept pregnancy as often as it results (there are a number of problems with this); attempt to use some form of natural birth control (which can inhibit satisfying intimacy between partners); or resort to dangerous and illegal abortions.  In any case, women are no longer in control of our own bodies and sexuality; we are still at the mercy of someone else making choices for us.

I hope that the end result of this will not be to continue to spin our wheels talking about whether or not insurance should cover birth control.  It would be far better if we found a way to make women’s reproductive care more accessible and affordable.  We deserve better.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

*If you’re in a non-monogamous relationship, or even engaging in serial monogamy, you should be using condoms anyway, regardless of the availability of other forms of birth control.  I know too many people who have gotten sick from partners who swore up and down that they were clean.  Public service announcement over.

Illegitimate rape?

Posted by Amy in Social Justice, Women and tagged with ,

Warning: Discussions of rape, rage-inducing comments about what constitutes real rape.

Missouri Senate nominee Todd Akin managed to offend a lot of people with the following comment:

It seems to me, from what I understand from doctors, that’s [pregnancy from a rape] really rare. If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down. But let’s assume that maybe that didn’t work or something: I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be of the rapist, and not attacking the child.

He tried to backpedal later, but his “apology” for his comments wasn’t much better.  You can read the whole article here.

There’s been enough backlash that I don’t want to waste my time (and yours) attacking Mr. Akin.  I don’t believe that his comments are a political thing; there are plenty of Republicans who disagree with him and have gone out of their way to say so publicly.  I don’t believe Mr. Akin is the real problem here.  The real problem is the underlying belief that there is such a thing as “illegitimate” rape.

I care far less about arguing over whether or not a woman should terminate a pregnancy if she was raped.  That’s not the real issue.  The real issue is the phrase “legitimate rape.”  On another article regarding Mr. Akin’s remarks, someone posted this comment:

There are illegetimate [sic] rapes, It’s sad but there are many women who lie about being raped for various reasons. It is mean, awful, and worse even when proven false and admitted false that other person is forever branded a rapest [sic].

That wasn’t an isolated comment.  There are far too many people who hold this view.  (I’m sure some of them will find their way to the comments on my blog; rest assured, any comment defending the concept of “illegitimate” rape will be deleted.  You’ve been warned.)  This underlying belief about what is or isn’t rape is what contributed to Mr. Akin’s thoughtless words.

It isn’t just about people supposedly lying about rape.  There is also an element of victim-blaming.  Some actual things I’ve heard people say about what might make the rape “illegitimate”:

  • She knew her attacker
  • She had previously been intimate with her attacker (he thought he had “permission,” even if she said no)
  • He was her husband (i.e., no such thing as marital rape)
  • She didn’t yell for help, say no, or attempt to fight back
  • She was dressed provocatively, therefore inviting unwanted contact
  • She was drunk
  • She was out alone late at night (and ought to have known better)
  • She “puts herself in these situations” and “creates drama”
  • She didn’t prove it in court (he wasn’t convicted)
  • She was lying about it, which happens “all the time”

Apparently, I can now add, “she got pregnant” to that list.  I admit, this is the first time I’ve heard that one.  But I’m not really surprised.

What disgusts me even more is that it’s people who claim to be Christians who have said all of the above.  The very people who are supposed to be standing up for and protecting the marginalized and the victimized.

Church, changing these attitudes has to start with us.  We have to start with mercy and compassion for the victims, without resorting to blame and disbelief.  We need to lay aside any judgmentalism toward those who have been raped and first care for them.  We need to stand up for them and protect them.  Most Christians I know pride themselves on being “different” from ordinary social culture.  Let’s prove it.  Let’s start by removing all traces of victim-blaming/shaming from our language and actions.

We can be the change.

Women are not the problem

Posted by Amy in Morality, Sexual Morality, Women and tagged with , , ,

Warning: This post contains subject matter which may be triggering for some people.  Things I will mention include rape, sexual assault, harassment, abuse, molestation.  Also, I use some strong language (read: swearing).  Read at your own risk.  If you choose to comment on this post, please show respect by providing a trigger warning for sensitive topics each time you include them.  (Posts with potential triggers that don’t include a warning will be removed within 24 hours.)  Thanks!

Last night, I participated in an animated discussion on Twitter regarding the 2005 book Sex Is Not the Problem: Lust Is by Joshua Harris.  One of the people I follow is reading it for research and was live tweeting her reactions.  I won’t take up space with all of the horrifying quotes she tweeted, but I will tell you which two I found the most disturbing:

When you dress and behave in a way that is designed …to arouse sexual desire in men, you’re committing pornography with your life.

and

Ask God to help you see how selfish and uncaring it is to want to use your body to encourage your brothers to lust.

Those two statements, right there, are exactly why we have a problem with boys and men who act as though they have the right to take whatever they want from girls and women.

You may not be able to see it.  You almost surely won’t see it if you are a straight, white, cis-gender man.  You probably won’t see it if you’re a woman who buys into purity culture and have never been victimized.

But the rest of us see it.

It’s especially bad for those of us who have been harmed by it.  We’re the survivors.  We’re the ones who have had to deal with years of shame because we believed that what we suffered was our own fault.  We’re the ones who…

  • were raped by our innocent, safe boyfriends with whom we never even shared a kiss.
  • dressed in baggy clothes and pretended we didn’t have breasts because we were sure that they wouldn’t have raped us if we’d been more modest.
  • were licked, leered at, and taunted by our classmates because using sexuality was a way to make us feel small.
  • had boys write “slut” and “whore” and “bitch” on our homework, then had friends tell us we should be flattered because “he likes you!”
  • had our fathers demand chastity with our boyfriends while themselves finger-fucking us in bed at night.
  • got felt up by boys, without our permission, and then were ashamed because we kind of liked it.*
  • had boys ask to touch our bodies, and said yes because we were scared, and never told anyone because we hadn’t said no.
  • thought something was wrong with us when we felt sexually aroused, because that wasn’t supposed to happen to girls who weren’t married.
  • were virgins when we got married and endured years of painful intercourse instead of real lovemaking because the first time was so painful and scary, and no one ever taught us that it didn’t have to be—even if we’d never had sex before.
  • continue to live with shame over our non-marital intimacy because we’ve been labeled as “sluts.”

And through every single moment, we heard the message loud and clear that whatever we were doing was the cause of our misery.**

So you can sit there in your self-righteous bubble and tell us how we should dress or act so that we don’t attract the “lust” of boys and men.  Or you can choose to use your own feelings of guilt and shame to do more damage to other people.  Either way, though, you need to keep it to yourself.  You need to stop using your words to continue the cycle of blame and guilt that has been inflicted on too many women.

If I sound angry, it’s because I am.  I’m angry that we spend our energy demanding that women take responsibility for both their own and men’s sexuality, instead of doing what we should be doing: going after the actions of the people who victimize others directly, without blaming those they’ve harmed.  I’m angry that anyone gave Joshua Harris a platform for his douchey attitude toward women.  I’m angry that the message that what women wear causes uncontrollable urges in men is still being spouted in churches everywhere.  I’m angry that because this message is so prevalent in Christian culture, my children will someday hear it, even if it isn’t explicitly preached to them at church (the same message appears in music, books, devotions, and educational material for Christian teens).

I have two messages.  First, for men like Joshua Harris and other men who call themselves Christians: Shut up.  Just shut up.  We women don’t need you to tell us how we should dress or act.  And we don’t need men to “protect” or “rescue” us from the fairly uncommon random stranger that attacks women.  No, we need you men to keep your damn pants zipped and stop being the ones who rape and molest us, and then trying to blame us for being immodest.

Second, for those of who have been abused and assaulted, stop believing the lie that it’s your fault.  Stop believing that there is something wrong with you.  There isn’t.  And you don’t need Jesus to heal you from whatever sin caused your pain, because it wasn’t your fault at all.  You don’t need to recover from your own fall, but from the shame placed on you by other people.  You have absolutely nothing to be ashamed of.

This has to stop somewhere, and I’m determined that, at least in my own household, it stops with me.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

*It’s not uncommon for children who are molested or people who are sexually assaulted to feel some degree of arousal.  Those parts of our bodies are designed to respond to stimuli.  The shame comes both from the confusion that it’s simultaneously unpleasant and yet stimulating, coupled with the belief that anything sexual is bad until marriage.

**Yes, everything on that list has happened to someone (or multiple someones) that I personally know.  Yes, some of them happened to me.  No, I’m not going to tell you which ones.