Saturday, December 11, 2004
paper backup2
Introduction
America purports, internationally and to its own citizens, to champion equality as a bedrock of its society. Today’s increasingly stratified and diverse culture, however, is creating facts that very much problematize this claim of equal opportunity. For example, how is it that African-Americans constitute 65% of the prison population (while the represent less than a third of total population) while women constitute only 5.7% of the prison population (even though they represent more than 50% of the total population)? In America’s highly individualistic society, the comfortable response is that there is something intrinsic to these segments of the population that result in their disproportionate incarceration rates (i.e. African-Americans are inherently violent and women are inherently peaceful). This response has guided many United States crime enforcement policies as well as the social structure of entire societies (such as Greece or Rome). Although it is comfortable, it is also dangerous (resulting in discrimination and hate), untrue (one need only remember Lizzie Borden, Joan of Arc, Martin Luther King understand that fact), and self-fulfilling (by assuming that woman are inherently peaceful and African American’s inherently violent the criminal justice system will suspect and seek out the latter rather then the former when resolving a crime and skew arrest rates). These, largely, are the conclusions of sociology concerning disproportionate prison populations.
What is Sociology?
Sociology is the study of human behavior with a special emphasis on “social structures, institutions, classes, groups, and the social consequences of that behavior”. These institutions included in the definition of sociology are “organized entities that are established to meet specific needs for the overall society”. These entities include societal services like religion (which grants common purpose), education (which trains future members of society) and health services (that ensures that future members of society even exist). It is clear that these institutions affect in a significant way human behavior. Western religion has been used to justify certain laws and family structures. What is included in public schooling prescripts the way in which many individuals will approach and understand the world. This paper will focus on the way in which patriarchy (“the manifestation and institutionalization of male dominance”) relates to the institution of criminal justice and its effects of the behavior of society as a whole. It’s also important to note, however, that a society’s relationship to these sort of institutions is a two way street. Although it is true that patriarchal institutions will create a society that fosters and justifies (through biased education practices etc.) male dominance, if those in the society are sexist patriarchal institutions will arise. Put another way, although the individuals in a society (are in some ways) constituted by the institutions with which they interact, individuals also constitute (very literally) those institutions with their mindsets and actions. This is important because it means that sociology is more than analyzing how individuals are (in a sense) ‘controlled’ by larger societal structures, it allows individuals (with that knowledge) to change those institutions. The change most often advocated by sociologists, since the French revolution, has been one towards social justice. A socially just society is one in which “all groups are able to take part in the shaping of the society that will ultimately be equitable and in which all members are physically and psychologically safe and secure”.
The Need for a Sociology Perspective and Social Justice today
Sociology is largely a matter of how one interprets history and current events. For example, instead of assuming that women are inherently peaceful to explain their disproportionate incarceration rates, a sociologist will analyze larger social institutions that prevent women from committing crime or encourage law enforcement to ignore female crime. As another example, instead of assuming that an unemployed individual has a personal problem (like they aren’t working hard enough or aren’t intelligent enough to hold down a job), a sociologist will look to the economy (a larger social institution) which may not be creating enough jobs (so no matter how hard that individual works s/he will not succeed). This way of viewing a situation has been termed the “sociological perspective”.
The sociological perspective is especially important when analyzing certain groups (such as women) who have an uncommon correlation with crime because by assuming that something is inherently different about the group (that women are peaceful) the criminal justice system is given justification for discriminatory enforcement policies (like assuming that a woman did not commit a particular crime or that an African American did). What’s more is that discriminatory enforcement policies create statistics (such as the 5% female incarceration rate) that justify the view in the first place. This cycle has been disempowering women though out history because it has created the common assumption that women do not choose to commit or not commit crime, rather it is something in their nature (which revokes much of their autonomy and justified much discrimination). In this way, the law, courts, prisons, and systems of criminal justice have (through discriminatory policies and worldviews) historically served and currently work to reinforce women’s traditional gender roles as dependant, passive, and irrational individuals. Only through a sociological perspective can these forces be elucidated and eventually changed. Until this perspective is taken into account all sex-equality movements will be stunted by a system of justice and other patriarchal institutions that re-enforce stereotypes and assumptions that prevent that movement from being taken seriously.
History
Throughout world history the dominant ideology concerning women has been based in a variety of biased assumptions (that women are “the pawn of biology, passive and weak, impulsive, impressionable, and ultimately non-masculine). This concept has determined how systems of punishment have been developed for women.
One of the first examples of a structured system of criminal justice (and not surprisingly one of the first to favor men over women) comes from Ancient Greece and Rome. In both of these societies only men were considered citizens and only men were allowed to act publicly. Women were treated much like property and almost all female discipline was enacted in the home (it was not considered a suitable case to bring to public trial, you wouldn’t bring your dog to court for misbehaving would you?). The only exception to this rule is if a woman were to commit adultery or kill her husband (it’s important to not that if a man were to kill his wife the sentence would be quite lenient). These offences were not only dealt with publicly but almost certainly meant death for the accused. These societies established two important precedents for criminal justice concerning women. The first is that female misbehavior should be dealt with in the home (this will be seen later in history with the privitization of female criminality). The second is how notions of what is criminal can be used to enforce a discriminatory world view. Women, in these societies and today, had a decidedly passive gender role. As long as they maintained that role, did not even enter into the court process. But, when they became sexually or physically aggressive (breaking their gender role) punishment was especially death. This is one way in which society very literally eliminate those that did not fit into accepts ways of being.
This process continued into the Middle Ages during which women that committed adultery or killed their husbands were still sentenced to death (although their husbands, if they had committed the same crimes, were not). But, a new form of punishment and social control saw a rise. This was the process of institutionalizing the criminal. Women, even if they did not commit any crime in particular, not married at a late age or rejected by their husbands were sent to cloisters with the “mentally defective”. Women that were not in their assumed sexual roles (married and with child) were now considered mentally ill. This is the basis for the medicalization of female behavior and a byproduct of a view of the “irrational women” (if women have something in their nature that makes them good/peaceful then when they do not fit that corporal punishment did not make any sense – something at a deeper “spiritual” level was considered wrong, necessitating institutionalization to resolve it).
But, perhaps the paramount example a system of criminality enforcing gender roles is the process of witch hunting in 16th and 17th century Europe. Almost all of those that were killed during the “witch hunts” (80%) were women and, not surprisingly, they were almost exclusively outside of their assumed gender roles. Those that were at risk for being accused of being a witch were women that were not married, assertive in public spaces, especially old, or those with money (and therefore didn’t need a man to support her). Each of these characteristics directly countered the view of a passive and dependant woman and thus had to be eliminated. That elimination occurred through the system of criminal justice.
America purports, internationally and to its own citizens, to champion equality as a bedrock of its society. Today’s increasingly stratified and diverse culture, however, is creating facts that very much problematize this claim of equal opportunity. For example, how is it that African-Americans constitute 65% of the prison population (while the represent less than a third of total population) while women constitute only 5.7% of the prison population (even though they represent more than 50% of the total population)? In America’s highly individualistic society, the comfortable response is that there is something intrinsic to these segments of the population that result in their disproportionate incarceration rates (i.e. African-Americans are inherently violent and women are inherently peaceful). This response has guided many United States crime enforcement policies as well as the social structure of entire societies (such as Greece or Rome). Although it is comfortable, it is also dangerous (resulting in discrimination and hate), untrue (one need only remember Lizzie Borden, Joan of Arc, Martin Luther King understand that fact), and self-fulfilling (by assuming that woman are inherently peaceful and African American’s inherently violent the criminal justice system will suspect and seek out the latter rather then the former when resolving a crime and skew arrest rates). These, largely, are the conclusions of sociology concerning disproportionate prison populations.
What is Sociology?
Sociology is the study of human behavior with a special emphasis on “social structures, institutions, classes, groups, and the social consequences of that behavior”. These institutions included in the definition of sociology are “organized entities that are established to meet specific needs for the overall society”. These entities include societal services like religion (which grants common purpose), education (which trains future members of society) and health services (that ensures that future members of society even exist). It is clear that these institutions affect in a significant way human behavior. Western religion has been used to justify certain laws and family structures. What is included in public schooling prescripts the way in which many individuals will approach and understand the world. This paper will focus on the way in which patriarchy (“the manifestation and institutionalization of male dominance”) relates to the institution of criminal justice and its effects of the behavior of society as a whole. It’s also important to note, however, that a society’s relationship to these sort of institutions is a two way street. Although it is true that patriarchal institutions will create a society that fosters and justifies (through biased education practices etc.) male dominance, if those in the society are sexist patriarchal institutions will arise. Put another way, although the individuals in a society (are in some ways) constituted by the institutions with which they interact, individuals also constitute (very literally) those institutions with their mindsets and actions. This is important because it means that sociology is more than analyzing how individuals are (in a sense) ‘controlled’ by larger societal structures, it allows individuals (with that knowledge) to change those institutions. The change most often advocated by sociologists, since the French revolution, has been one towards social justice. A socially just society is one in which “all groups are able to take part in the shaping of the society that will ultimately be equitable and in which all members are physically and psychologically safe and secure”.
The Need for a Sociology Perspective and Social Justice today
Sociology is largely a matter of how one interprets history and current events. For example, instead of assuming that women are inherently peaceful to explain their disproportionate incarceration rates, a sociologist will analyze larger social institutions that prevent women from committing crime or encourage law enforcement to ignore female crime. As another example, instead of assuming that an unemployed individual has a personal problem (like they aren’t working hard enough or aren’t intelligent enough to hold down a job), a sociologist will look to the economy (a larger social institution) which may not be creating enough jobs (so no matter how hard that individual works s/he will not succeed). This way of viewing a situation has been termed the “sociological perspective”.
The sociological perspective is especially important when analyzing certain groups (such as women) who have an uncommon correlation with crime because by assuming that something is inherently different about the group (that women are peaceful) the criminal justice system is given justification for discriminatory enforcement policies (like assuming that a woman did not commit a particular crime or that an African American did). What’s more is that discriminatory enforcement policies create statistics (such as the 5% female incarceration rate) that justify the view in the first place. This cycle has been disempowering women though out history because it has created the common assumption that women do not choose to commit or not commit crime, rather it is something in their nature (which revokes much of their autonomy and justified much discrimination). In this way, the law, courts, prisons, and systems of criminal justice have (through discriminatory policies and worldviews) historically served and currently work to reinforce women’s traditional gender roles as dependant, passive, and irrational individuals. Only through a sociological perspective can these forces be elucidated and eventually changed. Until this perspective is taken into account all sex-equality movements will be stunted by a system of justice and other patriarchal institutions that re-enforce stereotypes and assumptions that prevent that movement from being taken seriously.
History
Throughout world history the dominant ideology concerning women has been based in a variety of biased assumptions (that women are “the pawn of biology, passive and weak, impulsive, impressionable, and ultimately non-masculine). This concept has determined how systems of punishment have been developed for women.
One of the first examples of a structured system of criminal justice (and not surprisingly one of the first to favor men over women) comes from Ancient Greece and Rome. In both of these societies only men were considered citizens and only men were allowed to act publicly. Women were treated much like property and almost all female discipline was enacted in the home (it was not considered a suitable case to bring to public trial, you wouldn’t bring your dog to court for misbehaving would you?). The only exception to this rule is if a woman were to commit adultery or kill her husband (it’s important to not that if a man were to kill his wife the sentence would be quite lenient). These offences were not only dealt with publicly but almost certainly meant death for the accused. These societies established two important precedents for criminal justice concerning women. The first is that female misbehavior should be dealt with in the home (this will be seen later in history with the privitization of female criminality). The second is how notions of what is criminal can be used to enforce a discriminatory world view. Women, in these societies and today, had a decidedly passive gender role. As long as they maintained that role, did not even enter into the court process. But, when they became sexually or physically aggressive (breaking their gender role) punishment was especially death. This is one way in which society very literally eliminate those that did not fit into accepts ways of being.
This process continued into the Middle Ages during which women that committed adultery or killed their husbands were still sentenced to death (although their husbands, if they had committed the same crimes, were not). But, a new form of punishment and social control saw a rise. This was the process of institutionalizing the criminal. Women, even if they did not commit any crime in particular, not married at a late age or rejected by their husbands were sent to cloisters with the “mentally defective”. Women that were not in their assumed sexual roles (married and with child) were now considered mentally ill. This is the basis for the medicalization of female behavior and a byproduct of a view of the “irrational women” (if women have something in their nature that makes them good/peaceful then when they do not fit that corporal punishment did not make any sense – something at a deeper “spiritual” level was considered wrong, necessitating institutionalization to resolve it).
But, perhaps the paramount example a system of criminality enforcing gender roles is the process of witch hunting in 16th and 17th century Europe. Almost all of those that were killed during the “witch hunts” (80%) were women and, not surprisingly, they were almost exclusively outside of their assumed gender roles. Those that were at risk for being accused of being a witch were women that were not married, assertive in public spaces, especially old, or those with money (and therefore didn’t need a man to support her). Each of these characteristics directly countered the view of a passive and dependant woman and thus had to be eliminated. That elimination occurred through the system of criminal justice.
