Hawaii Five-0 Classic "Skinhead" 1/25/1972 5.5 stars ⭐

A psychologically valid premise…

Hawaii Five-0 Classic "Skinhead" 1/25/1972 5.5 stars ⭐ 

…with lessons we should all pay attention to.

BASIC PLOT: 

Victim blaming

Nora Kayama (Miko Mayama), a tiny Oriental lady, goes to a bar full of men, and is accosted by a menacing, bald a-hole. Instead of seeking help, or waiting in the public part of the bar for her date, she runs into a dark parking lot, and is raped.

McGarrett quickly finds the a-hole, a soldier named Mitch Kenner. He has scratches that

Lee Paul as
Mitch Kenner

match her fingernails, she has fibers from his shirt on her person, and he is identified by the bartender, and the victim, as the man who followed her into the parking lot. The only problem, (other than the victim was sexually active with her boyfriend, and was in a bar alone) is Kenner knocked her out before the rape. 

Can McGarrett discover the truth of who was there that night, and what really happened, in time to get justice for Nora?

Lee Paul & Murray MacLeod

WHAT WORKS: 

*MITCHELL KENNER'S PENIS PROBLEMS ARE PSYCHOLOGICALLY VALID The story of an impotent soldier, who beats women as a substitute for sex, and who would rather go to jail instead of having his fellow soldiers find out he can't get it up, is psychologically valid. I had the plot figured out, but with my background in psychology, it wasn't hard (no pun intended), and I was glad they used a pathology from the real world, instead of something fanciful and fictitious (like they usually do).

Jack Lord as
Steve McGarrett 

*MCGARRETT SAYS MANY GREAT THINGS IN THIS EPISODE He says he doesn't understand murder, but he gets the impulse for rapists. He says they are "rabid, and need to be put down." And to Mitch Kenner, the soldier with penis problems, who would rather go to prison for rape, than have his fellow soldiers realize "he's not a man anymore,"  to which McGarrett responds, "You have no clue what it means to be a man. No clue."

WHAT DOESN'T WORK:

*MEN ALWAYS INJECT VICTIM BLAMING INTO THEIR STORIES ABOUT RAPE When men write stories about rape, they always include victim blaming. This way they can, and the other men watching can, feel their women are safe. It happens so often, it's a truism, and one we should work on, even today. 

Jack Lord & Miko Mayama

*YOU DON'T HAVE TO LOOK AT ME IF YOU DON'T WANT TO Why would McGarrett say this to a rape victim? Why not say, "You don't have a reason to feel ashamed. Find your strength, you survived, never hide your face!"

*NEVER SAY YOU KNOW HOW DIFFICULT SOMETHING IS, UNLESS YOU ACTUALLY DO McGarrett says to a rape victim, "I know how difficult this is for you." NO YOU DON'T, SO DON'T SAY IT!

SOCIAL COMMENTARY: 

People may say this is from 1972, what does it matter? Why is a tv show, made a year before I was born, important? Well, it is, because not a lot has changed. Most entertainment (what there is left of it) is made by men. It's from a male perspective, and I can't tell you how many reviews I've written for Lifetime movies, supposed to be made for women, that I could tell was written by a man, before I even looked. There are subtleties that men inject into their projects, that women never do. 

Men, more than women, have trouble with rape. For ages, men couldn't even say the word, instead calling it "being attacked." That dulls the horror of it, waters down the meaning, and none of us should do that. 

RAPE LAWS: 

You'd better have
injuries if you want
your rapist convicted

Another important thing that most people don't realize, and that McGarrett highlights in this episode, is the draconian rape laws that are still on the books in the USA. McGarrett says to the victim, "Did you fight him? It's important." The reason he's asking, (and it's a reason most people are unaware of), is rape laws in many states, even today, say a woman has to be bloodied, or it's not rape. In other words, if you don't have visible signs of resistance, your rapist can walk away, unprosecuted. Chew on that for awhile.

Why do we allow for that type of prejudice in today's society? Why do we allow statue of limitations in rape cases, when we have DNA? Why not have historical prosecuting, like in the UK? We need to grow up as a society, and get more female lawmakers, because we all know, if we're honest with ourselves, if rape was as big of problem for men, as for women, the laws wouldn't be written this way.