Inescapable Networks
On Witnessing, Judgment, Care and Possibility
What We See—and What We Do About It
Hello and hope you are well.
This is a rather roving piece where I’m sharing some of my recent contemplations of what we can glean of others through observation, whether this is a wise practice that might help protect oneself and/or others, or it is wasteful attention towards others whom we have no control over.
At the same time, recently, I’ve been thinking about the individual and community cost of abuse, and the options for intervention, which feel limited. How might we expand routes for intervention?
Is anyone else feelin what I’m feelin?
Quick Update
My thanks for your patience as I’ve proposed a Monday, Wednesday, Friday posting schedule and — here we are — and it’s Saturday. I’m often thinking about our growing community, and trying to be of greater service, to be better in the various ways this endeavor might require. This is terrific practice for cultivating consistency, and I’m always grateful to you.
Recently I listened to a newsletter creator interview, she said something that impressed me and stuck with me— that, as the writer/creator putting out work into people’s hands, “you are a part of their day.”
So I’ve got this in the back of my mind and it motivates me to keep going. That maybe I am a part of someone’s day, and I don’t want to let them down. And maybe I’m not yet a part of your day, and that is OK too, that can be something I work towards.
In any case, I am so glad and so grateful that you are here. It’s a privilege to write for you. And hey guess what? We are growing quick— we’ve grown by 78 subscribers over the past month, and currently are at 384 subscribers. Huzzah! Hip hop hooray.
Could we try to reach 500 subscribers by July 11th?! It’s a date of some significance to me, which I’ll write about in a future post. If you’ve found value in this publication— could you share with your friends, post your favorite article to social media, or email to other protective parents? Send carrier pigeons, send smoke signals, post billboards.
We’ve also gone from 4 paid subscribers to 6 paid subscribers— which is a 50% increase— wowza! I’m truly grateful for your support. Over a long enough timeline, years even, I’ll be able to transition to spending more time in supporting protective parents and working on ever more impactful advocacy. This is my niche, this is the stake I claim.
Ok, on to what I wanted to discuss with you. Again, I’m so glad you’re here. Thank you for being my reader; I’m honored to be your writer.
Fiction, Forensics, and False Certainty
Recently I read a short story by Neil Gaiman, “A Study in Emerald,” a Sherlock Holmes pastiche (a literary, artistic, musical, or architectural work that imitates the style of previous work). I’d never read anything by Gaiman, but had understood that he’d achieved some degree of literary renown, and vaguely remembered there’d been some scandal about him. The book was free, I did not purchase it. I reckoned I might try to learn from a strong writing sample, albeit while having unclear concerns about the author, and then to find out a bit more about him. Ostrich puts head in sand.
There’s a recurring debate around when a creator does something socially / morally abhorrent, how do consumers respond? Some propose “separating the art from the artist.” Don’t know bout that.
In the Allen v. Farrow docu-series, which I wrote about in several posts, there was one commentator who pointed out that— to continue to watch Allen’s films gave him box office dollars, to review his films gave him continued attention, and this would expand his power, which he’d been shown he would use to coerce and abuse. And thusly, she’d not watch his films until he was dead (Allen is 89 now). I generally subscribe to this view, that we ought not to support individual’s creative outputs if they are a controller / abuser. As when we contribute to their empire, they shall conquer. And aren’t there many other movies and books for us to read, made by individuals who chose to use their platform for some positive social benefit, rather than to harm? Is this too much of a goody-two-shoes plea?
Also, what about the ways we evaluate success and acheivement? There’s so much social cache, and dollars, dollars, dollars associated with making box office hit or best seller status. We laud fame, and overlook what ought to be basic human decency, IMHO. What does this say about the culture we have all co-created.
As I do, I’ve digressed.
In “A Study in Emerald,” the detective, as was always Holmes’ wont, helps to identify the killer through a constellation of keen observations, overlooked by always less observant, less keenly attuned crime scene colleagues. One detail was the unique tobacco ashes discarded in the fireplace, another was the footprints left at the crime scene, although mostly obscured (ruined) by the officers who’d arrived at the scene prior to the detective. Like Sherlock, the detective’s perceptiveness is so incisive, like the tip of a blade, that he could salvage crumbs of clues and follow the trail to the killer.
Shortly after reading the story, I also happened to read an article in Scientific American about what kind of evidence is used in criminal courts, some of which actually distorts the course of justice (rarely a direct route, often a long and arduous one— le sigh!).
The crux of the piece is: in 2022 alone, 233 people were exonerated in the U.S. Misleading forensic evidence and expert testimony contributed to 44 of those wrongful convictions. Footprint analysis, fire debris interpretation, and exaggerated statistical claims were among the leading culprits.
Thus, here was a work of fiction that incorporated what we might call “bad science” or “junk science.” Not sure about you, but sometimes when I’ve read Sherlock Holmes works, it could feel as if you were learning something about the investigation process. Yes, I get it that it’s fiction; but I also believe that fiction and nonfiction exist on a spectrum, rather than in separate, clearly delineated camps.
Reading through “A Study in Emerald” the narrator describes some shoe sole imprints faintly tracing their marks in the dust, and the reader (or at least me) thinks “ah ha, a clue!” But we’ve trained our eyes on a detail which studies have shown are disproportionately associated with wrongful conviction. As J. Cole said, “the good news is you came a long way; the bad news is you went the wrong way.”
This context had been on my mind as I’ve observed details about “Jay” (psuedonym), the local cafe barista who I wrote about in this post, “Jay, Are You a Pedophile?” (To note, based on further research, I believe that Jay would not be characterized as a pedophile, someone who “seeks sexual gratification from children.” The American Psychological Association (APA) Dictionary of Psychology defines pedophilia as “a paraphilia in which sexual acts or fantasies involving pre-pubertal children are the persistently preferred or exclusive method of achieving sexual excitement.” Instead, he is someone who engaged in a “relationship” with a minor.”)
For context, Jay is approximately 35-38 now, and Sparrow is now 20. They’ve been “dating” for the past three years. Per Sparrow, they began to date when she was 17. Which would have made Jay, let’s say, 35-ish. So a 35-year-old and a 17-year-old. For additional background, Sparrow was the babysitter for Jay and his then-wife’s two young children. Sparrow also worked for Jay at his coffee shop. Simply put, pretty problematic. I’ve also learned that Sparrow was, at the time struggling to finish high school and at times confronting housing insecurity; her and her mom (and I guess, her younger brothers) living out of a car. Sparrow’s mother was young when she gave birth to Sparrow, and as Jay told me, the father was not indicated on the birth certificate.
Due to her age, family situation, socioeconomic status, and relation to Jay (boss, elder, business owner), there’s a significant power/agency imbalance. I’d initially been concerned about their relationship, although perhaps it’s none of my business?— but then again, shouldn’t we be concerned about the fellow human beings around us, especially when we might be in a position to observe troubling signs, and to reach out and offer resources?
Maybe it’s everyone’s business when a young woman’s vulnerability is exploited.
To Intervene Or Not
Years ago, when I’d just graduated college, I saw a woman getting harassed in public by who I’d presume was her abuser. A large crowd gathered around. The police looked on. She was being yelled at by a man who appeared enraged. She was kneeling and clinging to the railing. I wanted to intervene but my friend said it was too dangerous to do so, and that, ultimately, our obligation was to our own families, and that we return home safe (we were studying abroad at the time). We walked across the highway overpass, and I stopped halfway. I went back. I walked through the crowd and knelt down next to the woman, looked into her fearful eyes and handed her tissues. I talked to her, encouraged her to stand. The guy began yelling at me, I think I gave him a glare and kept talking to the woman, tried to put a barrier between her and him. I recall I wanted to get her in a taxi, send her somewhere far. That didn’t happen, I was not able to extricate her from this scene. Ultimately I had to walk away. But I like to think that this woman could remember that someone, a stranger, saw her and did not leave her there alone, crouching like an animal, terrified. Other people cared. Other people did not align themselves with this beratement.
Maybe I’m always walking into other people’s rooms. But we are all fundamentally connected, across geographies and sufficient timelines.
An Inescapable Network of Mutuality
In 1963, MLK Junior wrote in a letter from a Birmingham jail:
“I am cognizant of the interrelatedness of all communities and states. I cannot sit idly by in Atlanta and not be concerned about what happens in Birmingham. Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly.”
Judgement, Responsibility, Potential
Back to Jay and Sparrow. When I’d just known them to be two people working at the coffee shop, I’d noticed Jay braiding Sparrow’s hair and this seemed off. Then, I’d seen then playfully having a water fight after the shop had closed, and again I thought it was a bit off, for what I thought to be a married man, the boss of the shop, being so close with a young girl, his employee.
Then later Sparrow had told me that her and Jay had had an affair. Which, at 17, what a difficult experience to have as a youth in a small town.
Jay’s son is a toddler, just in preschool. The daughter is an infant, learning to walk. Sometimes I see their mother, Jay’s ex-wife, pushing the stroller up hills, with the toddler in tow. How difficult for her, to take on the primary care of two young children, and to have one’s husband cheat on you with the babysitter, who was below the age of consent when they’d began their….whatever to call it.
Should I just have no judgement about this? For lives that are not my own? Keep myself out of business that ain’t mine?
The harm that’s come to Boy and Ruth are also not my own. But it’s so wrong to me, for a boy to be repeatedly abused and the systems to fail them both, that I refuse to walk away.
I see Sparrow and feel she is at risk. That if it’s not happened already, by the very power/agency imbalance, that there’s the high possibility for coercive control to run like a cancer through her relationship with Jay.
Here is one man’s decision, and the fallout seems severe. A mother takes on disproportionate burden for child care. A grandmother will no longer regularly see her grandchildren. A teen is thrown early into complicated, messy relations, when it seems rather she should be dating a peer and getting the chance to enjoy (if it’s possible) a young person’s dating life. What direction might Sparrow’s life had taken if she’d not gotten caught up with Jay? What might she have learned or tried?
Yes, Sparrow was also a part of the decision to pursue the dynamic, but due to her age and vulnerabilities, I’d put more weight, more responsibility on Jay.
Lately I’ve observed details of Jay’s life. He told me he has filed for personal bankruptcy. Outside the cafe, I see smoking more often. In the past he’d always go to the edge of the property, and I’d heard him instruct others of the same, to keep the cigarette smoke away from patrons. His boundary seems to have receeded, he is lighting up closer to the patio.
Sparrow let me know that they recently moved upstairs, above the cafe. This might be where Jay’s mother lives (she owns the restaurant next to the cafe).
Last week I was having a conversation with Sparrow, happened to be about skincare, which Jay subtlely interrupted. To ask Sparrow, “who filled this box?” pointing to a box at her feet. Because he had thought the box was full, he’d not ordered more condensed milk.
I thought— this is your inventory tracking system? A box under the counter, empty or full? What about an Excel sheet? I also thought about how Jay is the proprietor / manager, so wouldn’t ultimate responsibility fall to him?
“Is Jay a loser?” I thought to myself. A man who cheated on his wife with a teen, under the age of consent, a father of two young children who now does not have primary custody of them, a manager shoving off responsibility, a man filing for bankruptcy.
It helps probably no one to make negative judgements about others.
“And why do you look at the speck in your brother’s eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye;’ and look, a plank is in your own eye? Hypocrite…” — Matthew 7:3-5
Instead of judging Jay, is there a way to see his potential? As a fellow human being who might be better? We all have ways we could be better. Might he be able to uplift Sparrow, to help her, instead of control her? Might he make amends for the pain his choices caused to his ex-wife, to his children, and his own mother?
How can society reintegrate someone who’s made deeply selfish, hurtful choices?
What might you do to help Sparrow? Would you try?