FYI.

This story is over 5 years old.

Vice Blog

A Neurobiology Expert Explains Why Don Lemon's Suggestion to Bite a Rapist's Dick Is Profoundly Stupid

CNN host Don Lemon somehow deemed it acceptable to a​sk Joan Tarshis, one of 16 women to accuse Bill Cosby of sexually assaulting her, why she didn't just bite Bill Cosby's dick. An expert in neurobiology of trauma explains why that's stupid.

​To anyone with even the most minuscule shard of common sense and decency, it would be fucking preposterous to ask a sexual assault victim why she didn't think to stop her attacker by biting his penis.

And yet, CNN host Don Lemon somehow thought it was acceptable to a​sk—thought he "had to ask"—Joan Tarshis, one of 16 women to accuse Bill Cosby of sexually assaulting her, why she didn't shake off her drug-induced stupor and gnaw Bill Cosby's dick until he stopped forcing it into her mouth. "You know, there are ways not to perform oral sex if you didn't want to do it," he told her.

Advertisement

He continued, "Meaning the using of the teeth… as a weapon." Oh, seriously? You can just use your teeth as a weapon and the assault stops? If only we'd known that earlier, we could have spared millions and millions of humans from sexual violations over the course of human history! (Lemon has since apologized, saying "If my question to her struck anyone as offensive, I am sorry, as that certainly was not my intention.")

"I was kind of stoned at the time, and quite honestly, that didn't even enter my mind," Tarshis responded to Lemon, who had apparently forgotten about the part where Cosby allegedly slipped something into Tarshis's drink.

According to Tarshis's  writte​n account, which was published two days before the CNN interview, she visited Bill Cosby in 1969. She was 19 at the time. He made her a drink; the next thing she remembers is waking up on his couch as he undressed her.

"Through the haze I thought I was being clever when I told him I had an infection and he would catch it and his wife would know he had sex with someone," she wrote in an essay about the assault. "But he just found another orifice to use." She added, "I was sickened by what was happening to me and shocked that this man I had idolized was now raping me."

In addition to being cravenly insensitive, Lemon's line of questioning shows a remarkable ignorance to how trauma affects people, as well as to how journalists should speak to survivors of sexual assault.

Advertisement

"Telling a survivor of any crime that it could have been avoided is not only disrespectful, it's offensive," Katherine Hull Fliflet, the VP of Communications for the Rape, Abuse and Incest National ​Network (RAINN), told VICE. "It's really disheartening to see an interview like this."

She added that there are several easy ways for journalists to be sensitive to the needs of sexual assault survivors. "Don't make assumptions or define the survivor's experience," said Fliflet. "The other thing I think is really worth mentioning is, before the interview, ask the survivor if there's anything they'd prefer not to discuss."

Another suggestion: Try and put a little effort into knowing what the hell you're talking about. As it turns out, implying that a survivor of sexual assault could and should have used her teeth to fend off her attacker is not merely offensive—it's also "just not neurobiologically reasonable," as Dr. Rebecca Campbell, a professor of psychology at Michigan State University, told VICE.

Lemon's question is particularly obtuse—not only because Tarshis was drugged when Cosby allegedly assaulted her, but also because many rape survivors report feeling passive or paralyzed during their attack. This is because humans react to trauma in many unpredictable ways. Some freeze up entirely, a phenomenon known as tonic immobility. Research​ shows that between 12 and 50 percent of rape victims experience tonic immobility during sexual assault; in fact, most data suggests that the percentage is closer to 50 than 12.

Advertisement

"It's not reasonable to expect a victim of any major trauma to [fight back]," Dr. Campbell told us. "It's not something a victim consciously decides. It's often the body's physiological reaction to the trauma, to the threat that determines how they behave. It's not within their conscious, cognitive control."

According to Dr. Campbell sexual assault is "no different from any of the other major traumas in terms of how the brain and body respond do it." What is different is the "societal victim-blaming" surrounding victims of assault.

Tellingly, the phenomenon of tonic immobility is only exposed to intense scrutiny when it occurs as a result of rape. Which makes sense, I suppose, because, "Why couldn't she have just overcome her body's physiological reaction to trauma?" is about as reasonable a question as "Why didn't she wear a longer skirt?" or "Why didn't she try biting her attacker's genitals?"

The only person to blame for a rape is the rapist. Holding rape victims accountable for failing to process their trauma in the manner you deem most appropriate is both re-victimizing and wildly oblivious. And, while such a response is perhaps to be expected from the throngs of rando rape-apologists swarming on the dark underbelly of the internet, we should expect more from members of the media.

Follow Callie Beusman on ​Twitter.