“This Is a Maid”: Which Rape Accusers Are Worth Listening To?

by Cara on January 14, 2011

in assholes, class and economics, misogyny, patriarchy, race and racism, rape and sexual assault, violence against women and girls, work

Lenny Dykstra, a middle-aged white man with blond hair and wearing a blue suit, looks into the camera as he walks by. (Photo by Amy Sussman/Getty Images)Trigger Warning for rape apologism, brief descriptions of sexual violence

Former pro-baseball player Lenny Dykstra (left) was recently accused by a woman, his former housekeeper, of repeated sexual assault. According to the woman’s claim, Dykstra forced her to perform oral sex on him every Saturday. Earlier this week, prosecutors declined to file charges, apparently citing a lack of evidence that the sexual contact was forced.

No story that I could find on the topic provided many more details than that. Indeed, providing a stark insight into their priorities, more than half of the LA Times article (the longest article available) consists of information not about the rape charges, but about Dykstra’s recent financial problems. Nevertheless, with the information available, I cannot form an opinion on whether prosecutors made an ethical decision, though I do find it interesting that they seemingly accept that the sexual contact took place, and only dispute whether a housekeeper giving oral sex to her boss every week like clockwork was non-consensual. I also, of course, do not know whether or not Lenny Dykstra is guilty of the allegations made against him.

So while all of these things certainly matter, they’re not what I wish to discuss today. What I’m interested in is Dykstra’s comment to the LA Times denying the charges, and how exactly he chose to frame that denial:

In an interview with the Los Angeles Times, Dykstra denied the allegations, saying the woman was trying to extort him to buy drugs.

“If she was assaulted on Saturdays, then I’m a … ballerina dancer on Sundays,” Dykstra said. “This is a maid. That’s not even worth commenting on, are you kidding me?”

This is a maid. That’s not even worth commenting on. The allegations are not worth commenting on, apparently, because she’s a maid.

I probably don’t have to tell you that we live in a world where rape allegations are very rarely taken seriously. Rapes are glossed over, covered up, shushed. Victims are blamed, accused of petty ulterior motives, called liars or worse. Police dismiss complaints, hospitals refuse to do rape kits, and prosecutors decline to file charges — even when there’s video evidence or eye witnesses. If rape accusers aren’t working for the CIA (see: Julian Assange allegations), then they’re jealous or regretful, and always vengeful.

Rape allegations are very rarely taken seriously, but the fact is that some allegations are taken more seriously than others, some accusers defended more vigorously, and some attacked more vitriolically or dismissed more easily. Some accusers are seen as having credibility while others do not, and it is not a mistake that these accusers more often than not fall into camps according to relative marginalization and privilege. Some accusers are seen as being rapeable, are seen as having violence against them matter, and some are not. And it is still no mistake which victims tend to already be relatively valued by society. When Dykstra dismisses the allegations against him with nothing more than “This is a maid,” with an affirmation that she and her claims are not worth his breath, we see the heart of this matter.

It takes for granted a set of shared and oppressive cultural assumptions to say the words “This is a maid. That’s not even worth commenting on, are you kidding me?” You must be kidding Dykstra. Who would take anything a maid says seriously?

The word “maid” is intended here as a blatant insult. (Indeed, the more correct term is “housekeeper.”) And what, exactly, do we know about maids?

Firstly, we know that the word maid is specifically gendered. Maids are women. Unlike culturally gendered terms, such as “nurse,” most people don’t just (wrongly) assume the term to refer to a woman; they know it. “Nurse” is the term for both men and women who work in the profession. But men and women housekeepers are not both called “maid.”

We also know that maids are both economically and socially devalued. According to the 2009 wage data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the median wage for maids and housekeepers is a mere $19,250 — hardly a reasonable living wage. So, maids tend to be poor. But regardless of actual wages, housekeeping is still decidedly perceived as a “low status” occupation, not only because there is usually little pay and upward mobility available in the profession, but also because the work itself is not valued. Cleaning, scrubbing, picking up after people — these are all seen by most middle and upper class folks as submissive, degrading activities. Which is, of course, part of why they hire other people to do them. (It’s also no mistake that they are activities usually associated with women, or even called “women’s work.”)

We also know, or think we know, that maids are disproportionately women of color. I was unable to find statistics verifying whether or not this perception is accurate (if you’ve got them, toss them my way). But whether accurate or not, the fact remains that in the U.S., maids are understood to be more likely to be black, Asian, and especially Latina than the general female population. Maids are also commonly assumed to be immigrants, whether documented or undocumented.

Now, with the identify of Dykstra’s accuser rightly concealed, we obviously do not know her race, her immigration status, or even her wage. We do, however, know that even if she is white and U.S.-born and was paid handsomely, Dykstra was unequivocally playing into all of these assumptions about maids when he made his misogynistic, classist, racist comment and openly declared that their word does not matter, that violence against them does not matter, and that neither should be considered worth anyone’s time.

Saying “This is a maid. That’s not even worth commenting on, are you kidding me?” in a country where the term “maid” rightly or wrongly conjures up an image of a poor, migrant, Latina woman in a large number of minds is hardly a neutral act. Especially when poor, migrant, and non-white women are always more likely to have sexual violence against them be disbelieved or ignored. Abhorrently, in a culture that still links sexual assault to sexual attraction (and sexual attraction to social value), his words also suggest, “Who would want to rape a woman like that?”

I also can’t help but notice his syntax. It’s true that when speaking, especially when upset, few of us speak with perfect grammar. I don’t even write with perfect grammar. But in light of the rank misogyny, classism, and racism of his words, I find that it stands out. She is not a maid; this is. The dehumanizing sentiment is furthered by “That’s not even worth commenting on.” Presumably, Dykstra is using “that” to refer to the allegations, but coming right on the heels of “This is a maid,” it is jarring phrasing. If the spite of a dismissal framed as “This is a maid” did not transform the accuser into a thing quite starkly enough, “That’s not even worth commenting on” certainly does.

She is a thing. A thing to be raped? Perhaps. Certainly not a thing to care about, to protect, to value, to believe.

This has an impact on rape victims. Attitudes like this determine whether or not victims report, whether or not their friends and communities and judicial systems believe them, whether or not they blame themselves, whether or not rapists find themselves free to rape again and again. And attitudes like this do not harm equally, but discriminate against those already most disadvantaged on the social ladder.

I don’t know whether or not Lenny Dykstra committed the rapes of which he was accused. But I do know that his words, his defense, make life easier for rapists, and much, much harder for rape victims. Especially those marginalized rape victims who already are among the least likely to be acknowledged in our heteropatriarchal, racist, all-around kyriarchal system, who already have it much more than hard enough.

Bookmark and Share

{ 12 comments }

1 Shannon Drury January 14, 2011 at 2:33 pm

Ow ow ow ow, this news has just given me a headache. What a horrible, terrible person he is.

2 aebhel January 14, 2011 at 4:30 pm

Here via Shakesville.

I have been a housekeeper. I was lucky enough to be a housekeeper in a relatively nice hotel, and even luckier to have a management staff that was actually supportive of us peons. It was still standard procedure to use a buddy system when cleaning the rooms of college teams or single male travelers, and all of us had at least one skeevy guy try to proposition us at one point or another. The possibility of being sexually assaulted in our own workplace was an explicit reality that we lived with every day.

As for the demographics of housekeepers, I can only offer anecdotal evidence, but in a city that’s approximately 85% white, only three of the thirteen full-time housekeepers when I worked there were white. One of the three was an immigrant, and another was our supervisor. All of us were flat-broke, overstressed, and without a whole lot of options if we lost our jobs.

None of us deserved to be treated as less than people. Even if he is actually innocent of the charges, Dykstra is a disgusting excuse for a human being.

3 Kiri January 14, 2011 at 5:19 pm

Thank you.

4 checarina January 14, 2011 at 9:29 pm

Here via Shakesville. This is an excellent, powerful piece that ought to be widely read. I am so distressed to read about yet another instance of a powerful man so casually using his position to effectively disappear a woman. “This is a maid.” How utterly despicable.

5 snobographer January 15, 2011 at 2:04 am

The implication I’m getting from the second part of his statement, “That’s not even worth commenting on, are you kidding me?,” is that maids aren’t rapable, that whoever wants to do whatever to a maid – or a working class women – is entitled to do so. There’s a lot of history in that conventional wisdom.

6 Sheria January 15, 2011 at 2:29 am

Thank you for this on target assessment of rape and the reasons that far too much of the world still believes that the victim should be judged and if she is found wanting in any sense, then she is an unreliable witness to her violation.

7 QLH January 15, 2011 at 3:38 pm

Ugh. I grew up watching the Phillies and I really used to like him.

Thanks for this paragraph:

We also know, or think we know, that maids are disproportionately women of color. I was unable to find statistics verifying whether or not this perception is accurate (if you’ve got them, toss them my way). But whether accurate or not, the fact remains that in the U.S., maids are understood to be more likely to be black, Asian, and especially Latina than the general female population. Maids are also commonly assumed to be immigrants, whether documented or undocumented.

I’d assumed that she was white. It hadn’t occurred to me that she wouldn’t be, or that she’d be an immigrant. The classism here was super-0bvious, but I missed the racism, so thanks for poking me into awareness.

8 Joe Crawford January 15, 2011 at 6:07 pm

I remember seeing a story about Dykstra on 60 minutes. He went from knuckleheaded ballplayer to financial “savant” (during the bubble) and now been mostly bankrupted I thought. I think he was facing foreclosure, so how he was able to hire domestic help I’m not sure. When I saw the interview with him he struck me as a burnout case, possibly drug-addicted–I believe the story made reference to drug problems. he was largely incoherent.

9 nyb January 15, 2011 at 8:14 pm

Syntactically speaking, I read “This is a maid” as the beginning of “This is a maid we’re talking about.”

10 Katrina January 18, 2011 at 2:29 pm

I don’t get what he means with the first part of the quote. I copied and pasted the entire section below for any who doesn’t want to scroll up.

“If she was assaulted on Saturdays, then I’m a … ballerina dancer on Sundays,” Dykstra said. “This is a maid. That’s not even worth commenting on, are you kidding me?”

Is he suggesting that there isn’t a woman on earth who wouldn’t want him unless he was less of a man? I’m asking since that’s the way I read the statement. I don’t know if he’s trying to say there is no woman on earth who wouldn’t give him consent for sex because he plays a sport, but it wouldn’t surprise me. A lot of athletes seem to think that woman just can’t wait to get into bed with them. He may honestly think that being paired off with a maid of any race, gender, age, citizenship status, ect. is degrading because he can do better.

It still makes the statement as a whole classist, racist, mysogynistic, and the like because that is an extremely privillaged mindset. I think he was trying to say he can get consent from a woman so he wouldn’t bother raping someone beneath his social circle. Which is a very big problem in society. It perpetuates the myth that men with power don’t need to rape because they already have it all. Unfortunately most men with power who do rape do so because they know they can get away with it.

I will admit that I am assuming a lot after reading one quote. I mainly have this interpritation since male ballerinas are seen as feminine and homosexual while sports players are seen as masculine and heterosexual. So I found that perticular example to stand out since there are other professions he could have chosen off the top of his head for his qoute. I also want to make it clear that I am not saying every single sports star or man with power on earth is a womanizer. Nor do I want anyone to think that I only see male attackers and female victims. I just wanted to bring up another way to read his comment.

11 Cara January 18, 2011 at 3:33 pm

Katrina, that’s an interesting interpretation — I personally read it as a play on the old phrase “Then I’m the Queen of England,” which is used to frame as preposterous someone else’s (usually though not always self-congratulatory) claim. The point being that clearly I’m not the Queen of England. That would be absurd. What the other person said, therefore, is similarly absurd.

12 Anonymous January 20, 2011 at 4:03 pm

From the quote, I thought that he was implying that he wouldn’t “lower” himself to the level of having sexual contact with a maid. Which still makes him a disgusting hunk of waste.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: