CJ System

Just to clarify my argument in class today, I'm saying that it is not fair to blame the criminal justice system for a lack of prosecutions pertaining to rape. The system is not flawless I know but it is set up in a way that demands evidence or at least witnesses for prosecution. If it wasn't, anyone could accuse anyone of anything! I'm not comparing rape to a smashed windsheild either. I'm simply saying that a crime is a crime and they are all processed in a similar manner. If someone were to walk into the police station and say I was just mugged the police officer would say what was stolen? Do you know who the perpetrator was? What did he look like? Well if the victim does not have answers to these questions, then what are the police to do? Yeah sure they'll look into it briefly but there are plenty of other cases that have better leads that need to be followed. Unfortunately our system is one of priorities and cases with little or no evidence are pushed to the bottom. It's not fair to say that rape is treated this way as a result of no one believing women. If you looked at how far other crimes are pursued, you would see a similar pattern. It's unfortunate that these crimes do not usually yield much physical evidence and that victims are not so forthcoming but to blame the system for this is not right. Say this is a male on female rape. Why is the male any less credible than the female? If there is no evidence to point either way, how can anyone make that decision? They can't. For if they did, they would have to keep it consistent, so it's either always believe the alleged victim or never believe the alleged victim (in the absence of evidence that is). The fact that some women (albeit it not many) make false accusations, prevents the system from exclusively believing the victim. It does not matter if it is 5% or 45%, if people make false accusations, it diminishes everyone's credibility. Again, this is unfortunate but a fact of our system. I as well as anyone will advocate for change in our system, I recognize the mistakes and the unfairness of it but the fundamental principles are not in place to target any one particular gender. They are in place to ensure justice in the most efficient way possible. We have due process as the fundamental principle in order to give everyone a chance in our system but we cannot go around prosecuting people on the basis of hearsay! The Sandusky case is a rare example and we all know that the media played as much of a role in this case as anything. By blaming the system, women are buying into the rape culture. We read about "the blame game" well isn't that what we're doing if we blame the criminal justice system?? How about we look at the real issue..people who commit rape. If we can change the cultural view of rape and deter people from committing it, the criminal justice system will follow. For now we can educate women (and everyone for that matter) on what to do in the case of an assault and hopefully this will lead to more prosecutions and sebsequently, more justice.

Human Sexuality

Yesterday in class I noticed something that was very interesting to me. In human sexuality, we learned about the communication differences between men and women. So in class I started paying attention to these subtle differences. For example, one of the women answered a question in class and said "correct me if I'm wrong" but blah blah blah. None of the men who answered questions or participated used these speech disclaimers. Why is this?? In human sexuality we learned that women engage in more "rapport" talk while men engage in more "report" talk. Women use tag questions such as "that was really weird, wasn't it?" They use hedge words such as kind of and they use disclaimers such as "I may be wrong but.." Men don't use any of these speech tools! Why is it that women feel the need to diminish their own authority when they speak? Taking what I've learned from this class I am convinced that the need to act this way stems directly from male dominance. Men have made women feel that they can't possibly know more than men do. Taking it further, men have convinced women that they can't possibly be right! Why else would women feel the need to say things like "well I may be wrong?" We really need to take a closer look at little differences like this and realize that they are not so little after all.

Feminity in Action

Ever since taking this class I can't help but notice how females (and males) interact. Before it was something that I just didn't notice. Now it's all I pay attention to! For example, when I was at the Hartslog Festival this past weekend all of  the women were huddled together gossiping and oozing over the crafts while the men were engaging in "hearty" conversations full of archery talk and slaps on the back when one of them shared a story about shooting a deer. Don't get me wrong, I hunt, but looking at the population as a whole men are much more engaged in this activity. It's not only that I've noticed these differences but it's also deeper than that. What does it mean to be proud of killing? What does it mean to be content with knitting? (not that knitting is a bad thing) Until now I have never given these comments a second thought...until I realized that they mean something more. They mean something more about our society as a whole. Who dictates that killing is okay for men and knitting is okay for women? Initially it is our parents but who influences them? Their parents? Society as a whole? Where does it begin and more importantly where does it stop? Throughout this course we have contemplated this but I'm not sure I'm any closer to understanding it. Then again, it is one of those things that is so blatantly obvious that it had to be pointed out to me! Therefore, my thoughts on the subject are young..hopefully throughout this class I'll form more complex opinions about this subject.

Masculinity in Action

Although we have officially moved on to femininity, some things in court sparked my thoughts about masculinity. I intern part-time with an attorney in town and sometimes we attend criminal court. Today I spent a significant amount of time in court and noticed a lot of things. For one, there were a couple of men who were definitely the embodiment of "masculinity." One man literally looked like Steve Austin. I also noticed that there were many more men being adjudicated for DUI and boating under the influence than there were women. This could be because heavy drinking is considered a "masculine" thing to do. There was also a case involving a man who allegedly beat up his girlfriend. However, there were no cases in which the opposite was true. I know that the majority of criminals are men but it's interesting to see what general type of men. The ones who commit physical crimes are often the ones who look like Steve Austin. The ones who commit check fraud are much less buff and exhibit less of a "tough guise." It's neat to be aware of these differences and ponder why our society has forced these distinctions. If masculinity wasn't taught from a young age would there be such a thing as Stone Cold Steve Austin?? Would people commit crimes in the way that they do today?? Somehow I doubt it.

Gender Treachery

I never would have picked apart homophobia if I had not read this article. I know that it is a problem in our society but I never really contemplated the roots of it. I definitely agree with the author in that gender identities are the main cause of homophobia. Maybe if men weren't taught to be super masculine, they wouldn't feel so threatened by an alternative! We really do need to get rid of the binary system but there must be a simpler solution. We've been living with the same system for such a long time that I think it's unrealistic to propose such a change. As an end result, I like the idea but only baby steps will get us there. Maybe starting with parenting would be a good idea. The one major change that I would propose would be teaching boys to be more emotional and accepting. If we could change this one small aspect of parenting we would see significant changes in violence against others period! The reduction in homophobic violence would be a perk! Men learn their "tough guise" from their parents first and peers second so if it is taken care of inside the home, peers would not preach it like they do now. Hopefully someday soon we can make these changes and become that much closer to getting rid of the gender binary once and for all.

Boys Do Cry

This was an awesome article. I chose it because I generally enjoy Valenti's writing and I wasn't disappointed! She brings up a really good point; men are also affected by gender roles. Because feminism is usually seen as a woman-centered movement, we don't often think of men and how they are affected. Women are taught to act a certain way but so are men! Why don't men care that they are oppressed just as women are? Hmmm.. because men's roles are celebrated. The reason that there are feminist groups and not necessarily men's groups is because there is no social consequence of being a man. No one would dare dispute the idea of raising boys to be masculine. Although this is true, not all men grow up to accept these gender roles. What happens then? Well..they are penalized for not being masculine enough. No wonder men are scared of feminism. They only know one thing; MASCULINE. So when someone starts preaching feminist values, what are men to do? Change sides, or rebel? No man would risk the repercussions of changing sides so they rebel! I really do not know where this leaves us..getting men to respect and understand feminism is going to be tough.

Tong Chapter 3

This chapter offers a really interesting perspective on female oppression. Marxist's argue that class differences stem from economic differences and that capitalism fuels these differences. These differences are okay until both classes become conscious of themselves as classes. When this happens the system that created these classes collapses. So the question for Marxist feminists is, do women constitute a class? This is a difficult question. There is so much differentiation among women that it is hard to say they're a class. I would argue that they are not, however, in some respects they can act like a class. For example, they can come together and say that domestic work is productive work. This would allow females to be considered a class because this does not apply to anyone else. Also, Engels' view of marriage is notable. He considers marriage a purely economic arrangement and so for women to become "emancipated" from their husbands, they must first become economically independent. This relates to a class that I am currently in called Human Sexuality. The Professor makes this argument; marriage is a contract and is in turn oppressive. Because women are now technically "owned" by their husbands, they are restricted. I don't know much I agree with this. I think that this idea as well as that of Engels is a bit extreme. Hopefully in class other people will share their opinions!