Envisioning Solutions

It is always much easier to identify the problem than thinking of solutions. What is even harder is implementing the solutions. This week we focused on violence against women and violence perpetrated by women. In focusing on the case of a group of women banding together to kill their batterer and female suicide bombers, we touched on the intersections between the society, the political environment, the opportunities available to women, the construction of womanhood, and culture. In addition we saw how the line between being a victim and a perpetrator blurs.

Therefore I am interested in ways that all of you think we may be able to counter the recruitment of female suicide bombers or prevent women from picking up the gun and shooting their batterer. Is the answer in assessing the needs of the community? Is it reconstructing gender? Is the answer to countering the recruitment of female suicide bombers in South Asia and the Middle East in educating the communities on sexual violence. Should the focus be on using women to reconstruct the society and then integrating them and giving them an active voice in the political process? If a particular community holds on to strict gendered roles, then should the international community or individuals from other societies step in?

How do we counter intimate partner violence? I just read that Chris Brown and Rihanna have reconciled and are back together. Statistics tell us that it takes women eight times before they leave. How do we intervene and prevent violence in intimate partner relationships. Obviously not every woman is going to leave their batterer, so should we put the focus on the male and treat him or punish him for inflicting the violence. Then how do we deal with cases in lesbian and gay relationships where intimate partner violence is also very high. How about male rape? Maybe the solution is not in gender but remodeling human psychology for wanting total power and control over others.

P.S. On a side note, I would like to invite all of you to check out and become followers of a blog by Students for A Greater CUNY. Last semester we spoke of how the 23 CUNY campuses do not have a sexual assault policy. Some of you took the survey on whether the campus you attended had a Sexual Assault Policy and 60-86% of the students reported they had no idea of their campus's sexual assault policy. This blog has been set up to have a transparent process for students and place pressure on CUNY officials to pass the sexual assault policy. Please help us and let your voice be heard. (http://cunypolicy.blogspot.com/ )

Embracing Research

In Tuesday’s class we touched upon many flaws of the U.S. legal system. Essentially, American courts operate via an adversarial system where truth is sought by opposing sides presenting evidence to a neutral jury. As we know, this is not how guilt is determined in all countries. France, for example, runs on an inquisitorial system where the judge plays a more active role in the court room. Though I am no expert on Islamic Law, Ridhi brought up they also conduct criminal proceedings quite differently. Since it seems inevitable that these proceedings will always be flawed in some way, I would like to focus this discussion on how and why certain suspects make it to trial to begin with.

In my social and experimental psychology class (the class in which I wrote a study proposal using the assigned reading), my professor informed us that one of the major differences between the United States and Europe (and Canada as well, I believe) is that Europe is more willing to allow academics to do legal research “behind the scenes”. Not only this, but they are also more willing to embrace the findings of such studies if it means that it will improve their legal proceedings. Knowledge of this makes our country appear corrupt and rather primitive. In the U.S., the same types of research tend to be viewed as an intrusion, an invasion of privacy. One of the hardest fields to conduct research on in the U.S. is in the area of interrogations and confessions, as American’s police force happens to be the most unwilling to let people conduct research on their techniques. Unfortunately, such confessions are viewed as a strong indicator of guilt by a jury.

Prior to this process of interrogations and confessions is the arrest itself. I recently have been learning about issue of “consensual” searches (In the book Speaking of Crime, by Solan and Tiersma, 2005). The authors go into great detail as to how a search could never be consensual based on the nature of the relationship between suspect and law enforcement (the officer being in a high position of power, and the suspect often unaware of their rights). They point out that in this area, even the Supreme Court is unwilling to acknowledge this power dynamic, stating it “impractical” to inform drivers of their right to refuse a search (even though some states have required this). Adding to this issue is the fact that these searches happen as a result of race. According to one study done in Florida on a freeway in Volusia County, “Their analysis of over one thousand police videotapes revealed that even though only around 5 percent of all drivers on that freeway were African American or Hispanic, over 70 percent of traffic stops involved drivers of those two ethnic groups… approximately half of all stops were followed by a search, and 80 percent of all searched automobiles belonged to black and Hispanic drivers”.

I think one of the major issues with our system happens before any formal legal action takes place. Police look for people who they believe to look like “criminals”. Why do you think these types of issues exist despite knowledge of such? What do you think the United States has to gain by maintaining a flawed legal system? Lastly, how can we tie this in to our recent discussion on physical attractiveness? I am sure we all have heard of situations of people (especially females) not getting arrested or “getting off easy” as a result of being attractive. Feel free to follow any of these avenues or other thoughts!

All in Favor of Socialism?

Yesterday Professor Waterston mentioned the Kibbutz system in Israel. When she brought this up I was reminded of these small communities in Scotland that I learned about several years ago (I believe they were called Shets) where the people in the community worked together and lived off the land. Next I thought of the Canadian family I work for, who cannot seem to go a day without mentioning how wonderful socialized medicine is. I’ve even been pondering the socialist ideals held by the Amish. While each of these communities has unique qualities (and perhaps flaws) they all claim to be working for the common good, and aim to improve the quality of life for everyone. The Jewish Virtual Library describes a Kibbutz as “a society dedicated to mutual aid and social justice.” Well, who wouldn’t want to be a part of a community working towards social justice? This got me thinking about the fear a lot of Americans have about socialism. We complain about social inequities but yet we are afraid to move towards a system that seeks to alleviate the stresses of social hierarchies. I’m wondering, specifically what types of people you think are drawn to communities like the Kibbutz, or the Shets, or even to socialist ideals? What are the characteristics of these people? Who is afraid of these systems? Are their fears legitimate? Who would benefit and who would lose out if our country were to turn towards a more socialist system? Please feel free to take this in any direction!

All Topics Large and Small

The beginning of the semester always feels like standing in the ocean, bracing yourself for a big wave and then the next thing you know you're on your hands and knees looking for your sunglasses and coughing up saltwater. Maybe that wave is the Blackboard snafus this week, registration woes, bookstore lines, confusing first weeks -- or the Vera Fellowship! Please use the few days you have to blog this week to bring up anything that is getting you down so far. Difficult transitions to new agencies? Issues with syllabi (including ours)? Unrealistic expectations of your various stakeholders? Share your first week concerns.

We also did not get a chance to talk about larger issues, such as what the new Obama administration might mean to the work of social justice, or how the ailing economy will affect the work that your agency is trying to do, the lives your clients are trying to recover, or your own thoughts on your future educational and career options. Share your comments on this exciting/troubling historical moment!

Last but not least, did anyone have a moment in class the first week when you thought "I'm glad to be back!" I did. I had a student last semester who ended up failing the course because of absences. This semester she is back, on time and incredibly well-prepared. I feel energized by how she managed to take the tough lesson of last semester and use it to turn things around. Resilience! Please share a positive first-week experience.