I ultimately disagree with your characterization, but I do understand and empathize with that position. As a matter of principle, I believe that people are capable of change and growth. I think that is, in fact, critical to my entire belief in the project of building socialism. That includes people who have committed acts of sexual violence. I think it's also true that Eugene's position on the CC made the situation more sensitive. I personally think that his initial resignation should have been accepted. I'm glad he resigned when the issue was re-litigated. But I don't think it's an irredeemable mistake, nor is it tantamount to concealing sexual abuse or protecting a predator, for the party to have chosen a rehabilitative process instead when that is what the affected victim herself declared would be her preference. I think we both understand that the trauma of sexual abuse makes it difficult to advocate for yourself, especially in the immediate aftermath. But isn't it true that if the party's policy was an immediate expulsion (let alone execution/castration) no matter what, that a victim in that scenario would be even more unwilling to come forward? Marissa didn't want him expelled immediately, and the fact that she was empowered to be part of the investigative and disciplinary process made for a safer environment for her to come forward. I believe the disciplinary process that PSL has gives agency to survivors of sexual abuse, and I think that's genuinely important.
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
replies: