After only reading a couple of pages (I like to read, to make sure my comments aren't totally redundant), I have to make a couple of comments.

Yehudi, your post resonated with me. I have several people in my community who have screwed me over and apparently feel fine about it. My friends shrug and say, Get Over It. I curtail some of my activities in order not to be in the same space as them - I don't need the aggravation. So I practice avoidism.

Still, in this case, I'd say to the LW to go to the damned party, it's your old parents' (they'll be dead soon) special event.

Then I thought, holy crap, 50th anniversary? I'm of an age I could have had a 50th anniversary (instead of two 25's), and I don't need no coddling (nor do I ["get over it"] get much). I'm not different than I was at 50 or 30 (okay, in some ways - but I'm not some Totally Different Creature, no longer responsible for my past). So I think perhaps the thing to do is say to your mother, sorry, I will not be in the same room as my brother (and leave floating in the ether the idea - that she may be too dense to pick up on - that she's damned lucky you're on speaking terms with HER).

While I groove on flyover52's advice, I think that if you go to the party, you should keep a dignified silence - well, unless and until you're pressed too far. Your brother surely will know you're carrying a live grenade and (unless he's a total psychopath, which is possible) he'll be, if not guilty, at least wary. (He might be watching in alarm as you have a bit of wine and then propose a toast...)

In fact, you could look at things this way:- YOU now have the power. You could humiliate him at any moment. The idea that he might be sweating might be a good one.

Another person (sorry, didn't make note of name) asked if you know whether your brother is even going to come. He might well be wrestling with the question himself ("Can I face her? Will she blow? Can I cope with my own feelings?")

(Also, everyone's assuming the LW is a woman. Oddly enough, when I read it I assumed the LW was male. Whatever - it hardly matters.)

Another thought - you could say to your mother, "Do you REALLY want him and me in the same room?" But no, that would be mean to an old person who doesn't look like having the capacity to learn anything...

Oh, wait a minute about that old person thing...

What everyone is missing

is that this is not a triangle of LW, brother and mother. She tells us that there is another brother and his wife, and obviously the father. Why aren't they involved in all this? If she decides to attend, then certainly she needs to make sure that all these people are aware, on her side, and ready to support her. They should also be involved in the negotiations about all this. Just because the mother has played her trump card doesn't mean the LW is left with a simple binary decision. Remember, this is how you were taught to control children, right? Give them a binary decision that you control... well, you are no longer a child. Many people have suggested that you not hide the problem, no matter what, at the party. I say you should force everyone to look at it before the party and make commitments to ensure that you are not pushed toward those "family pictures and forced hugs". If you can't get universal support on that, before the party, don't go.

Finally, the LW says that her mother knows about the rape. Do the others know? Certainly, if the other brother's family includes children, the LW is obligated to tell them, isn' she?

Of course, as a last-resort insurance measure, I'd keep electro robot's advice in mind. If things go sideways on you, apply that bat to the rest of the family, too.

-- rayinkorea

"Poignant" letters, yes. So much pain, so much empathy, so much righteous anger, so much understanding. This letters section restores my faith in humanity (which gets a little ragged reading some of the other letter sections...)

You said, "Where does this quirk of human nature come from that people instinctively side with the more powerful, even if they're evil?" (Warning - a plonk to follow.) It comes, I think, from our most primitive, tribal aspects (acting on the second chakra, for you new agey types), where the herd or pack drives out the weak and wounded for the health of the group. Fortunately, for many of us, we have evolved past this and realize that the offender is the one who must be isolated, at least in broader society - but family too often still elicits those old pre-human reactions.

But see how the tribe of wounded comfort each other, survive, and vow not to do repeat those blind, primal injustices. Nor (for the most part) submit to further humiliation from the offender.

You people who do not like the way Joan Walsh (or anybody else on Salon) expresses opinions and observations should go elsewhere. If you must stay, how about disagreeing politely and without personal attack.

The amount of foam and spittal being wiped off computer screens is impressive. Milk, cookies AND valium needed, and then perhaps people can say, Hey, I don't agree with what you say because, instead of YOU TERRIBLE PERSON JOAN WHO HAS OPINIONS I DON'T SHARE. There would be a lot less of it if people weren't able to hide behind anonymity. It would make for smaller and less exciting "discussion", but I think it should be set up so that only people who signed their real names could post.