Grabbing someone’s buttocks, over the clothes, is not currently against the law in Minnesota.
There’s actually specific language that excludes “the intentional touching of the clothing covering the immediate area of the buttocks” from the state’s sexual conduct statutes.
On Wednesday, a state Senate committee unanimously approved getting rid of that exception, which would make grabbing the buttocks in an aggressive or sexual manner an offense of fifth-degree criminal sexual conduct.
That’s the same level of offense for groping other private parts, trying to pull off someone’s undergarments, and masturbating or exposing oneself in front of a child younger than 16. A first offense would be a gross misdemeanor punishable by up to a year in prison and $3,000 fine, if convicted. A second offense could be upped to a felony punishable by up to seven years in prison and a $14,000 fine.
The bipartisan proposal comes amid the continuing #MeToo movement, raising public awareness of sexual harassment against women, as well as two specific examples of male Minnesota lawmakers grabbing women’s backsides.
Former U.S. Sen. Al Franken resigned in January amid allegations from multiple women of sexually inappropriate behavior — including several women who said he grabbed their buttocks while posing for photos with him at public events in Minnesota.
And former state Sen. Dan Schoen, a Cottage Grove police officer, resigned from his elected post last year after allegations that included grabbing the buttocks of a female candidate at a political event.
It should be a crime, say some women who have endured it — and their numbers might be legion.
“I bet if you asked, the vast majority of women have had this happen,” said Caroline Palmer, public and legal affairs manager at the Minnesota Coalition Against Sexual Assault.
It happened to five women in a suburban Minneapolis health club in November, according to one of the women, who was taking her children to swim lessons and was holding a 1-year-old in her arms at the time. The man “fully groped my buttocks” and continued walking, turning around only to smirk at her.
The woman went to the police station and provided a statement — before learning it was irrelevant because that specific grope wasn’t against the law. The man was arrested and charged with disorderly conduct but only because he also entered the women’s locker room.
“Unfortunately, this experience at (the health club) was not my first experience with sexual assault and I can tell you that being groped on the buttocks is just as demeaning, violating and traumatizing as the other forms of assault I have endured,” the woman said in written testimony to the Senate judiciary and public safety committee. The committee is chaired by Sen. Warren Limmer, one of three lead sponsors of the bill.
The original clothed-buttocks exception dates back to 1988, when the criminal sexual conduct statute was put into law. The exception was a late change whose origins are unclear.
Sens. John Marty and Carolyn Laine, the other lead sponsors of the bill, said the only explanation they can find was the notion that football coaches could somehow be implicated by giving players encouraging pats on the behind. Some prosecutors refer to it as the “coach’s exception,” they said.
But a coach’s pat on the butt wouldn’t be illegal under their proposal unless it was done in with aggressive or sexual intent.
“County attorneys and city attorneys aren’t going to prosecute this frivolously,” Marty said.
