I saw this article “Police Teach Bartenders to Avert Sexual Assault” and got really excited: bartender bystander training! What a great idea! Then I actually read the article…

After a number of rapes were reported in Pacific Beach, CA, local activists and government took action:

Police have now collaborated with the San Diego City Attorney’s Office and the Center for Community Solutions, a sexual assault prevention group, to train Pacific Beach bartenders and staff to recognize and possibly stop potential sexual assaults and rape in a bar or nightclub.

“We’re showing them ways to where – if you’re observing inappropriate behavior – how you can appropriately intervene,” said Angela Geisler, deputy city attorney for the criminal division.

Sounds good, right? Now look at some selections from the rest of the piece:

Called the No Bystanders program, bartenders and servers are taught to recognize intoxicated people who may be putting themselves at risk of being sexually assaulted by leaving the bar or club with a person they don’t know.

The training includes situational role-playing in which representatives from the Center for Community Solutions train bartenders and staff to separate potentially intoxicated people and ask them if they know the person with whom they’re leaving.

[...]“It happens a lot in a nightclub,” said Estefanìa Vila, a server at Johnny V nightclub on Garnet Avenue. “Girls get a little tipsy and don’t always make the best decisions.”

Police encouraged servers to protect intoxicated males as well. But while the local government and agencies attempt to prevent sexual assault, Johnny V manager Emily Chambers has a different piece of advice for patrons.

“Take care and responsibility for yourself and don’t drink too much, because ultimately it’s your own responsibility,” she said.

Now, I don’t want to talk shit about Community Solutions or even the police or local gov., because I don’t really know the details of what this training consists of, and CS sounds like they do good work in the community. But man, the framing of this article sucks. Look at how the bartenders are being asked to intervene—by recognizing “intoxicated people who may be putting themselves at risk of being sexually assaulted by leaving the bar or club with a person they don’t know.” Wasn’t the point of bystander intervention to focus on stopping/influencing the attitudes of a perpetrator or potential perpetrator, and not saving the potential victim from their own decisions? Again, (again again again I’ve typed this so many times!) language like this reinforces the idea that women are to blame for their own assaults, that certain behavior can be interpreted as “asking for it.” I’m not entirely opposed to a bartender checking in with a woman (or a man) who looks smashed before s/he heads out the door, but there is also a really problematic layer to that—there is this nagging element of “what self-respecting woman WOULD go home with a stranger unless she was too drunk to know any better.” Or maybe I’m reading into it.

But either way, the manger and server quoted in this article do the people they are being trained to protect an incredible disservice by focusing on the “poor-decision making” of their patrons. Ultimately, Ms. Chambers, it’s absolutely not my responsibility if I am assaulted. My decision to drink should not open the door for someone else’s decision to assault me.

For more on bystander trainings, read this post of Nora’s. She links to a lot of good work on the subject.