PROJECT YOUR VOICE WITH YOUR VOTE: Katie Trout advocates for SA survivors ahead of Election Day
Earlier this month, The Justice Project invited Katie Trout to sit down with encore magazine publisher Shannon Rae Gentry for a live interview at the Brooklyn Art Center’s The Annex. With an intimate audience of a couple dozen people, Trout discussed her work for legislation to support sexual assault survivors in pursuit of justice in North Carolina.
This all began when Katie Trout’s life irrevocably changed after experiencing sexual abuse at a young age in her church here in North Carolina. Her pursuit of justice led her to her work now to support other survivors. Since sharing her #ChurchToo story publicly in 2017-2018, she has advocated for sexual assault survivors and for law reforms in North Carolina that protect children, hold institutions accountable, and ensure survivors receive support. In 2019, she advocated for the bipartisan Safe Child Act. She later worked to remove consent defenses in statutory rape cases involving clergy and church members.
The following Q&A has been edited for clarity, length, and readability. However, you can watch the conversation in its entirety here:
Shannon Rae Gentry: You’ve been an advocate for sexual assault survivors for many years, but many folks here probably don’t know your story specifically. Will you share it with us?
Katie Trout: I was born and raised in Charlotte and moved to Raleigh in 2010, but basically my entire upbringing was focused on church and faith. I was at church several times a week. I went to a Christian school K through 12, then to a Christian university, so I didn’t really know anything outside of that very insular world. I started volunteering for a drama group at the church we attended. That was at age 15. It was in that group that I met the man who would start abusing me at age 15. He was on staff at this church and was also a volunteer. He was very well known, very popular, very charismatic. That abuse continued for four years. It frequently happened on the church campus and off the church campus.
I eventually decided I needed to tell my parents, and I came forward the summer between my freshman and sophomore year of college. That kicked off the criminal legal process, which is an entire ordeal unto itself, and I basically navigated it on my own. He was charged and is now a registered sex offender. I had to go back to court in 2019 to keep him on the registry. [Not many] people know that you can petition to come off.
I tried to put it on the shelf as much as possible after that year, and I was getting by. But around 2018, the MeToo movement was going on and the ChurchToo hashtag started up, which is the evangelical version of MeToo. I started reading people’s stories on there in the morning, and something just said, I think it’s time for you to share your own. So I put my tweets out there and got good responses. Through those tweets, I found out about the Safe Child Act, which was starting to work its way through the General Assembly. I reached out to the bill sponsor and said, how can I help? That kicked off my whole legislative training.
Gentry: When you reached out, how long did it take to get momentum?
Trout: Once I got connected with the primary bill sponsor, Rep. Dennis Riddell, a Republican in Alamance County, he was all on board with having somebody willing to speak. So I said, tell me who I need to contact, and I started emailing different lawmakers as the bill moved through the legislature. Part of that process is quite a few committee meetings. Things go to the House and Senate floor, but there are many, many committees bills have to pass. The bill, I think, took six years to pass, and it had been killed in committee numerous times before that. That’s when I started hearing what the arguments were for and against this bill. I started reaching out and trying to refute the arguments I was hearing about the bill.
Gentry: What were some arguments that surprised you?
Trout: The first one was that it would overwhelm the court system, which you could claim about every single bill that goes through the General Assembly. So I thought that one was a bit null and void. There were quite a few things in the bill, but the primary issue I was lobbying for was a look-back window. That would let victims file civil lawsuits against their abusers, or the institutions they had been a part of, even if the statute of limitations had passed. My favorite argument against it was that we were in it to get rich.
Gentry: Who came up with that nugget?
Trout: That gem came from Rep. Sarah Stevens.
Gentry: Was there an opportunity to push back with her directly?
Trout: I never spoke to her one-on-one outside of my email communication. It was very clear what side she was coming in on. So I felt my time and energy were better spent speaking in person with folks where there was probably some space for more openness to what I had to say.
Gentry: Did it discourage you?
Trout: No, I’d say it more ticks me off.
Gentry: Do you think that kind of opposition discourages other survivors who might want to put themselves out there and be part of the conversation?
Trout: Any kind of blatant opposition like that can make people hesitant. Fortunately, I’d had a couple of years of my story already being out there. But I would not question why any other survivor would think, why would I want to talk if this is the resistance I’m met with at a very high level?
Gentry: She’s very powerful.
Trout: She has been very powerful at the legislature.
Gentry: And she is now running against Justice Anita Earls. When you can’t get legislators on board with this issue, is there one consistent reason or lobbying group adding to that blocker?
Trout: This is just my conjecture, but I know what goes on in other states with abuse reforms. Insurance companies are frequently down there meeting, roaming the halls, talking to legislators about why they shouldn’t do something like this. Money talks. I cannot speak for Sarah Stevens, but insurance companies are down there. You’ve also got organizations like the Boy Scouts of America that have had cases come forward. I think organizations like that are also part of it.
Gentry: So at the very least, it might be fair for constituents to ask their representatives about their relationships with lobbyists and special interest groups, whether they speak your language or not. I also want your perspective on the positive side of this work. Any positive outcomes?
Trout: Obviously the Safe Child Act did pass. There was quite a bit of delay in implementing it because it went to the state Supreme Court, and I think it took maybe two years to work its way through the courts. But it did pass. I will give credit where credit is due: there is bipartisan support at times for these reforms. We have a long way to go, but I hope and want it to not be a red or blue issue. I think we’re making steps. There’s obviously a lot of work that still needs to be done.
After the Safe Child Act, I went to work to pass some more bills. I worked for four years on the Public Safety Act that passed last summer. That was the one where I wanted consent to not be usable as a defense in statutory rape cases involving church volunteers, church staff, things like that. I found out the bill was on its last hurdle last summer, and it needed to go through the Judiciary Committee. Would you like to take a guess who chaired that? That’s Sarah.
Gentry: Why wouldn’t it be?
Trout: She was chairing that, and I knew I needed to go and speak in support. So I signed up, got there, and thought I was going to have about two minutes to give my story. Right before I went in, I found out it was down to 60 seconds.
Gentry: Sixty seconds. How did that go?
Trout: Besides the man who stands there with his little sign saying you have 30 seconds left, I’m up there talking, and Rep. Stevens was behind her podium. I thought she would be listening, but she started shuffling her papers, looking through the materials she had. She eventually walked off and started talking to somebody in the corner. All while I’m talking about four years of frequent sexual abuse and the impacts it’s had on my entire life. She couldn’t handle 60 seconds.
Gentry: That’s a testament to how hard this work is. Certain issues feel like they ought to be apolitical, neither red nor blue, and many North Carolinians agree with that sentiment. How can everyday folks help our elected officials understand that these issues shouldn’t fall along party lines?
Trout: As much as we hate to do it, we’ve got to call and email both sides of the aisle about these issues. I don’t agree with many Republican lawmakers on probably 99% of the other things they pass, but I can speak to them. I can thank them when they do get on board with issues like this, and I think they need to hear that. Let them hear from those who don’t always agree. Elevating those stories to them is key.
Gentry: Would you encourage survivors who may be here today, or reading or watching later, to share their stories or get involved? What are the steps there?
Trout: I don’t ever approach a survivor and say, I think you should do something. I always come at it from an “if or when you are ready” place, and I leave that door open to them, whatever that looks like. I always like to make sure they know that if they’re ready to talk, I’m here. Or find another safe person in your life you’re ready to speak with. Advocacy and sharing your story look different for everybody. I didn’t think I would be doing this when I tweeted in 2018, by any means. There are so many different levels of sharing and advocacy: sending an email, making a call. We just have to leave it open to whatever that individual feels comfortable with.
Gentry: What about folks who don’t have a story, or don’t believe they have one to add? What role can they play? Is it an ear? A phone call?
Trout: I would hope we are all looking for ways to become a safer space for those in our lives. When somebody does come to you and say, this happened to me, don’t try to sit there and fix them. Don’t give them advice on what they should be doing or what they should have done differently. Just learn how to become a better listener rather than immediately jumping into trying to fix somebody. With this issue, we need to become more comfortable with being uncomfortable, and this is obviously a very uncomfortable topic. But survivors just want to know that somebody will listen and not run away when we tell them a story with terrible things.
Gentry: We’re a society that, in some form or fashion, is addicted to comfort, whether physical or conversational. Has there been a time when you’ve seen folks successfully navigate that discomfort?
Trout: I’ve definitely had some family members who have had to figure that out. I wouldn’t say there was a great response from the onset. But over time, they’ve watched me share, work on my own healing and be open about what happened, and they have learned to better hold space for that discomfort. Everybody can learn and work on it.
Gentry: Let’s talk about the media and how it’s helping or hurting the conversation. How big a role has local media, or media in general, played in all of this?
Trout: Media makes up so much of our world at this point. I have had positive media experiences, but I have also definitely had negative ones. My biggest critique is when I come across articles or stories where the headline or the phrasing says a teenager was “in a relationship with” someone. I hate that phrasing because it implies consent. Consent cannot be granted when there’s a minor involved. And adult abuse happens as well: when there is a power imbalance, consent can’t exist in that space. So I would like to see the media really work on phrasing those headlines for what they are. It’s abuse, it’s rape, it’s assault. Don’t try to tie it up in this sensationalist kind of bow, because it minimizes what happened and frames it incorrectly.
Then there are other simple things. When media requests interviews, ask whether there’s a space where the survivor would feel comfortable talking. There are plenty of places I do not want to go sit and talk because of the triggers they bring up. It doesn’t help me give you a good interview, because I’m completely distracted or dissociating because of where we decided to talk. There is still a lot of education that needs to happen to help media become more trauma-informed.
Gentry: That’s a conversation people like me can have in our circles of writers, broadcasters and local media folks.
Trout: Let me know when I can come train you.
Gentry: I would love that. Anecdotally, I do see the overuse or misuse of phrases to describe children. Like “young woman” for a minor. Do you have other recommendations on how we can cover this difficult topic without harming survivors, or the conversation, even further?
Trout: Survivors would love to see more people engaging and supporting them in the comment sections on social media. I’m not saying get into a complete back-and-forth, because that doesn’t always go anywhere. But it gets a little exhausting when we’re always the ones having to correct the narrative and say, what you’re saying is completely incorrect. Seeing more folks be vocal in their support, especially with everything we’re seeing in the media right now, can say a lot.
Gentry: Especially with the news out of Cornell involving those seven [perpetrators and dozens of other] students. One thing that’s come up in my circles is that it shouldn’t always be survivors and women advocating for our protection and safety. We’d like to hear from men and other folks showing up to the conversation. However, we’re talking about progress in units of years on issues many of us would prefer were solved a lot sooner, and then the news breaks about the next Cornell seven. It’s almost like clockwork. What do you do? Does it feel like time has been reset?
Trout: The Epstein stuff has been in the news quite a bit, and I don’t think we’ve seen any real progress with that. Then the Cornell story comes out, and news cycles ebb and flow. But compared to even a few years ago, when this stuff was first really starting to get talked about, I am definitely seeing a change in how vocal women are with the Cornell story. I think women are just tired of it, honestly. At the same time, it’s exposing the gap: the lack of men who are speaking up. Sometimes I’m just like, where are all the men in this discussion? I’ve looked under every stone.
Gentry: We’re drawing near to time. Is there anything else you’d like to share about the upcoming election cycle and beyond?
Trout: I just want people to vote, and vote the whole ballot. I don’t doubt anyone in this room is going to vote or tell people in their circle to vote. But we really need to emphasize going in prepared and knowing who you’re voting for. Preview your ballot ahead of time: sit down with your coffee one morning and fill it out. Down-ballot races, especially for something like the state Supreme Court, are so important. It’s one thing for us to get people into the House and Senate, and they can pass things. But it can go nowhere if the state Supreme Court decides to overrule it later. It doesn’t just stop at West Jones Street.
Gentry: One more follow-up on the Earls versus Stevens race. Are you hearing any pro-Stevens talking points that folks might want to be prepared to respond to, if they feel comfortable?
Trout: I can’t say Rep. Stevens has done a great job defending herself. The main one I’m hearing from her folks is, well, she did support the Safe Child Act. But that was after she basically single-handedly reduced the statute of limitations period [in the bill]. Rep. Riddell wanted to give 20 or 30 more years past what it currently was, and I think she fought back and got it down. Maybe they added nine or 10 years to what it was. So she can say she voted for it, but it was after she neutered that part.
Gentry: For anyone curious, why is it important to extend it even further?
Trout: The average age of disclosure for abuse is actually 52. When you give somebody a couple of years to come forward, half of them haven’t even realized by that point that what happened to them was abuse. You’re just not giving them any time to come to terms with what happened. There are different stages. There’s coming to terms with what happened, and then there’s making the decision to do something legally. It was not an easy decision for me to say, I think I’m ready to pursue a civil case. That’s completely opening up the box you’ve worked to get closed. And then they dig in even more during discovery if it goes to trial.
