"Where can I go for help if no one sees me as a victim?" Thank you for making this class so engaging. As you read in the readings there are few to no resources for the LGBT DV victims within that community. As you saw in your 'Looping' exercise, it's easy to say one thing but feel another. How can we separate what Professor Stein brought up about the 'Feminist Theory' of DV and the challenges of how to address these very real issues about DV within this specific population? As Cynthia pointed out; HIV and LGBT victims of DV are not qualified for the services that the organization provides. How can we as a society say that one life is greater than the other based on the sex of the batterer? It all goes back to how we perceive victims to be and how we "like" our victims. As Dani suggested, some educational classes to the NYPD on how to address these calls would be great. As you think of those looping words you jotted down, what ways can you think of in regards to changing your own mindset so that DV victims regardless of their class and sex can get free of both the batterer and the LGBT community expectancies?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
During class, we were all going back and forth on 'who's the victim.' It's human nature for survival of the fittest, but how do we choose when it's two guys who are just "playing around" in the police officers opinion. I had a police officer as a neighbor who always came to our BBQ's and he used to always comment that "lesbian dv house calls would ruin his entire week." Lesbian fights are so much more violent then homosexual fights, why? Because women are more sadistic and men just fight versus disfigurement like women go for? I still stand by the fact that every state (besides the 5 exception states) should start required classes for Gay Domestic Violence cases and what the police officer should do. There's no way to create equal rights when it comes down to DV situations because it automatically forces the officer to look for the one who's more bloody or weak so the answer to me is work with law enforcement on ways to handle it and ways to not be biased.
Let me start off by thanking Ruby for picking such an interesting topic with so many controversies. I learned so much especially when Ruby mentioned about the case if one woman decides to go to the shelter her partner can as well enter the shelter. So what protection right does the battered woman have?
I feel like society does not respect the LGBT community and sees them as abnormal people. The reason perhaps for such view is because we live in such a diverse society. Living in a diverse society means different cultures, traditions, beliefs, religion, and customs which affects an individual's point of view. In my case, my parents are old school and they are mostly likely not to support the LGBT community. I do not blame them because they were raised in a different country (Ecuador) where it is not as open-minded as the society we live in. Culture and religion are the most important factors in shaping the way we think. They are also strong believers in Catholicism. On the other hand, I was born here so my mindset is different.
I do not know if there will ever be a solution for LGBT violence because of the society we live in just as the view on immigration. In order to make a change, we would have to aware the public first that the LGBT community is nothing out this world.
I was very surprised at what I had to say about the different groups in my looping exercise. For the LGBT community I put that there was confusion and style. Every time I hear about problems in gay or lesbian relationships, it always involves the uncertainty of one of the partners. Since the partner still has trouble blending into the community, they don't know what to expect. On top of this issue, there is the confusion of what signs reflect love or care in the relationship. I think that the response to LGBT DV should be the same way to respond to heterosexual dv. Unfortunately, the way that any dv situation is handled is by word of mouth from the people involved. Even when the woman doesn't speak when the police is present, the husband can appeal to the police and nothing will be done in regards to the safety of the woman. I think that LGBT DV can be handled as this, but the only awareness that should be raised is the fact that DV is the same in every case and should be addressed as is.
I agree with Cynthia, that all DV cases should be dealt with in the same manner. Of course identifying the batterer and battered is harder to do in the LGBT community, ideally I think they should be treated the same way as heterosexual DV cases.In my mind, the way to get DV victims in the LGBT community to be free of their community expectancy, I guess people need to first stop thinking of a LGBT person as different because of their sexual orientation. During the looping exercise, I also thought that the LGBT community was a better community to be in compared to the normal one, but clearly they are also susceptible to the same violence behind the curtains too.
This class and the previous has been really interesting for me, because I had to do a few papers about DV recently. When I think about the LGBT DV cases we have to deal with in the developed world, I also think about the problems the developing nations will also have to deal with in the future. Even now they're still struggling to deal with heterosexual domestic violence.
Wow, Simon. You are right. We have not even skimmed the surface when it comes to grappling with D.V. in the developing world, where the “right” to batter one’s wife is sometimes codified in law and the State may choose to imprison or even execute practicing homosexuals. It seems that in the U.S., we have at least evolved beyond that.
I am moved but also disheartened by the well-meaning voices that insist that LGBTQ victims receive the same services as straight victims, even though we have conceded that these solutions do nothing to stem violence, only offering Band-Aids after the injured limp into a shelter. Needed remedies, to be sure, but not preventative. The feminist perspective rooted prevention in the need to dismantle patriarchy; women’s equality would lessen the violence against them. This has probably held true to some extent, especially in the area of economic empowerment, which may allow more women to leave abusive relationships. But again, it’s mostly an after-the-fact solution, at least so far.
A different perspective is more socio-psychological. To shift back into Professor Reitz’s point-that violence and family go together like peanut butter and jelly-poses a whole new set of questions. If force and intimidation are woven into the fabric of family life, then we are merely talking about degrees when we discuss physical abuse. Victims can come in many sizes, shapes, and sexual orientations because so many children are raised in a developmental arc in which some kind of assault (verbal, emotional, physical, etc.) is an approved method for getting your way. We tolerate spanking and all manner of bullying in the home. I have always argued that the “it can happen to anyone” rhetoric is weak; in fact, people raised in violent households are more vulnerable to both perpetrating and experiencing violence in their adult relationships. Of course, considering how many people grow up in homes like that, maybe it is close to “anyone”; not because abuse is some strange, random thing but because we raise our kids to accept a frightening level of it in their lives.
In the case of gays and lesbians, intimate violence may be even more relevant. Many grow up having been terrorized outside their homes and perhaps rejected, demeaned, and even beaten for their orientation, inside it. With this assault on mind and body in the developmental past, is it any wonder that abuse in adult relationship seems the acceptable price of love?
What a class! Thanks you, Ruby! During the looping exercise, I learned so much about my inner-self. I’m really more accepting than I have ever been in my life. This growth is really amazing. I’m also happy that sometimes when I stir up negative feelings inside, I am about to stand back and question them.
Dani, I completely agree with your ideas on training law enforcement officials on how to communicate with the gay and lesbian community. I’ve always thought that police officers are undertrained. 60 credits and 3 comprehensive exams aren’t enough to deal with the complex issues that society offers on a daily basis.
Simon, we share the same sentiment. I also think that the LGBT community should be treated like any other DV victims. It’s a pity how the LGBT community is treated like second-class citizens because of their sexual orientation.
Cynthia, it really touched me last week when you mentioned that a client was denied services because she was HIV positive. This goes back to all of our pervious class discussions, “We want out victims to look a certain way.” Funds and resources are only fixed for a defined group of people. I still cannot get over the fact that there’s less than 10 DV sites for men to respond to.
Professor Stein, I usually try to be conscious of the words I select. After some reflection, I can better explain why I chose the word "welcome" when referring to some women in regards to domestic violence (DV). Some women actually "invite" and passionately request that their companion resort to physical abuse during a relationship. As we both alluded to, there are woman who equate physical violence with love due to the physical discipline that they were subjected to as children. As children, some women were being spanked and physically disciplined by their fathers. What were their fathers saying while beating them? "I love you. If I did not love you, I would not be beating you for your wrong doing right now." As a result of this physical/psychological abuse, a female may grow up feeling that if a man does does not beat them then that man does not love them. The woman may even go as far as provoking an argument in hopes that their male companion will physically "discipline" them. In their mind, "if he does not hit me then he does not love me." Some even may attach physical abuse to a male's manhood. Although some of us are raised to never put our hands on a woman, to respect and protect them, these same women who were raised subjected to corporal punishment as children may feel at times that a "real man" will put a woman "in her place" by use of physical abuse, if necessary. This is why I will use the term "welcomed" with it being synonomous with "invitation", "requesting" or a preferred action.
The psychological abuse in a relationship is far more powerful but much less detected. That is why it is difficult to identify who is the abusee when on the outside looking in. Although not preventive, I like Dani's suggestion of classes for officers on how to deal with LGBT dv situations. It should be mandatory. I also think on all dv calls, it should be mandatory classes for both parties, the abuser and the abusee (I obviously haven't considered the economic costs).
I do think we have to recognize the progress that has been made. Years ago, who would have thought that there would be an acceptance in this society for same sex marriages? I say that is a victory in one of the many battles.
Q: If a group of homosexuals or lesbians assault a heterosexual individual, is that group of homosexuals or lesbians charged with a hate crime?
Thank you, Ruby, for a wonderful class!
Like Timothy, Simon, and Professor Stein, I want to stress that the U.S. has made significant strides towards understanding the LGBTQ society that many countries are well behind. If the information is already out there, and the media has become more “politically correct” then why do some people not want to help these individuals? I wonder who is playing the real role in shaping the minds of U.S. citizens. Is it the media? Is it religion? I always wonder just how much religion plays. How many devoted religious individuals actually read religious text and can point to the exact passage to explain their behavior? It would seem that their belief is based on an interpretation of what another person thinks should be the right. If that is true then who is to say whose interpretation is correct? Is it like the “Facebook” mentality where if it is on Facebook then it must be official/true? If it is on the news then it must be true, right? Has society become conditioned to not question authority figures?
Cynthia and Simon, I often wonder if we can treat all DV cases the same because we know how different they are by nature of the relationship. Some relationships are simply more abusive then others. Should those individuals get more help? An undocumented immigrant, a poor individual, a LGBTQ victim, a child, or a mentally disabled person all get affected by domestic violence differently. Can we truly separate ourselves from those specific circumstances that define their relationships? Homosexuality has been documented throughout history since ancient times, yet we discuss this as a recent phenomenon. Homosexuality was historically seen as an act, but through time it has developed into a culture or even an identity. One’s sexual orientation now defines a person. I think this argument is a foundation of Simon’s point on how society views LGBTQ individuals as an Other. Will we ever come to accept people’s differences? This is very much shaped by gender-norms or other stereotypes.
Timothy, I think in New York prosecutors can only charge an individual with hate crime if at the time of the encounter he/she said something about the victim’s characteristics that could be seen as racist, sexist, discriminatory, etc. I think it is very possible that if an LGBTQ individual beats up a heterosexual individual while screaming, “I f___ing hate you straight people!” that it could be considered as hate crime.
If this hypothetical angry homosexual were to say something discriminatory against a straight person while attacking him/her, and was charged with a hate crime, would that be justice? Is that how a truly blindfolded Justice operates?
Again, I feel like we are dancing around the question raised in Roberto's class about affirmative action. We want our LGBTQ brothers and sisters to have equal rights, the same "protections" provided by visiting police, opportunities for refuge in shelters, etc. And yet we also need to understand what is different/unique about their lives that make such across-the-boards application of justice less satisfactory. Similarly, we want to recognize race as a factor in miscarriages of justice (Trayvon), and yet we don't want it to be a factor in the CJS. How do we work towards the ideal represented in blind Justice while recognizing the profound complications of the diverse and always changing world we live in?
I tend to agree with the traditional feminist perspective, with some qualifications, on the issue of DV. When we talk about DV, as we all seem to agree, we're talking about power and control, and when we talk about power, I don't see how we can escape the notion of gender. As Cynthia's readings point out, most opp-sex DV is perpetrated by men against women. Ruby's lesson complicated the issue by introducing same-sex DV. The problem for me is how to conceptualize same-sex DV, which in my view is the first step in figuring out how to respond to it. The fact that all of the major institutions we're socialized into--the family, religion, school, e.g.--are all authoritarian and all historically created and ruled over by men for most of human history cannot be taken out of the equation when we consider interpersonal relations in domestic situations. I am utterly unsatisfied with the argument against the gendered approach given by Nancy Knauer (Ruby's reading) under the heading "Battering as 'Male' Behavior.'" This is an entirely convoluted section. She acknowledges "the fluidity of gender and the fact that gender specific (or expected) behavior need not track biological sex," which means we could think of DV as "male" behavior. The main argument she presents against this approach is that it is potentially politically damaging to lesbians and could reinforce stereotypes about butch dikes as batterers and fems as victims. This is admittedly a concern, but it isn't evidence that the theory of DV as "male" behavior is useless. But this is the part that gets me: "the continued reliance on gender seems a misdescription. It maintains gender difference where there is none--at least none that is respected or acknowledged by larger societal institutions...[and] it fails to question how power is mediated and deployed in the absence of gender difference." In other words, without saying how gender is irrelevant she concludes that it is. Same-sex couples exist in and have been socialized into a gendered world the same way everyone has been. Homophobia is rooted in gender. This explains why men can define themselves as "straight" if they only pitch rather than catch. It explains why "straight" men get off on lesbian sex but recoil at fag sex. It also makes sense of Timothy's argument that some women "welcome" DV: the violence constructs gender for these women and likely these men--makes real men out of the batterers and real women out of the victims. In Kulik's book Travesti, he explains that the Brazilian transvestites he studied "became" women by receiving anal sex from their "straight" boyfriends. Like the women Timothy is talking about, some trannies I've known have thought that getting beaten up by a boyfriend made them more of a woman. The problem with the traditional feminist theory is that it tries to construct a feminist utopia of egalitarianism, but it is BASED ON GENDER. How can something based on gender, existing in a gendered world expect to escape gender? The idea that any of us can escape gender is absurd. We have to recognize it in same-sex and other DV, and we have to realize that it isn't "natural" or "biological," which means we can change it.
Not to sound to repetitive but I do agree with everyone here. A relationship is a relationship no matter the individual you choose to peruse it with. A homosexual relationship should be recognized as equal and receive the same benefits that a heterosexual relationship receives. When people fail to realize that all relationships are the same, there will be some relationships which will not be protected in the eye of the law and also be looked down upon in society.
A good example of this is something that a classmate/friend of mine told me when I told him about Ruby’s interesting lesson. Although I was not even born when it happened I was still disgusted to the degree evil this man had. He told me of the atrocities committed by Jefferey Dahmer. For those of us who are too young to remember Dahmer he is an American serial killer who murdered 17 men and boys in a 13 year time span. Although most of his murders occurred sporadically and couldn’t be stopped, there’s one murder which stands which could’ve been stopped but due public perception and lack of education of police officers in 1991 and even now wasn’t avoided.
Two young women found a fourteen year old boy in the streets wandering naked and heavily under the influence of drugs and bleeding from the rectum. When they found him they immediately called 911. Dahmer followed the Youngman and even chased his victim down and tried to take him away but luckily both of the women stopped him. When police finally arrived on the scene he told the two officers that the young man was 19 years old and his boyfriend and that they only had an argument while drinking. Although the two women protested for his arrest the police officers eventually turned Sinthasomphone over to Dahmer. The police even went into Dahmer’s apartment where they reported smelling a strange scent but didn’t even try to investigate. Amongst the other things the police officers failed to do was any attempt to verify Sinthasomphone’s age and failed to even run a background check which would’ve shown that Dahmer was a convicted child molester still under probation. Later on that night the young boy was killed and body was dismembered. In this situation following simple procedures could’ve revealed that Dahmer was lying and Sinthasomphone’s life was in danger.
Even though the police officer’s error was a procedural one, a case could be made that Dahmer got away because in the police officer’s eyes homo-sexual relationships weren’t equal and didn’t deserve the same treatment. This makes me want to go back to what Popy said police training that “60 credits and 3 comprehensive exams aren’t enough to deal with the complex issue[s]” in our society. Many of the issues police departments face today because of ignorance to certain issues, situations and even people. Although it is not fair to say that a four year college education would’ve automatically led to better knowledge on the equality of relationships, it is fair to say that they would’ve been aware. Their ignorance to the situation of homosexual relationships as a whole could be seen when the two officers were heard making homophobic statements to the dispatcher and making jokes about reuniting lovers. This was an issue we were all highlighting in class on what kind of training or programs could make pol;ice officers more sensitive and aware to issues of domestic violence as a whole. I feel that four years of college with certain mandatory classes which deals with gender identity and racial/ethnic awareness would definitely improve how police officers respond to these issues.
To extend my point and finally arrive to a conclusion I think the Dehmar situation says a lot about our society. I like to think if this was a fourteen year old girl the police officers would’ve definitely questioned Dehmar’s claims and handled this issue a little more seriously. They probably would’ve saved the girl by some simple questions. Dehmar’s crime displayed the same cannibalism and monstrosity of Grendel. For some reason his actions did not receive the same questioning or punishment Beowulf dealt to Grendel. Beowulf didn’t question Grendel’s monstrosity, when he saw his men being eaten and killed he simply reacted. Although this is not clear depiction of how our criminal justice system should work, but when people are in a relationship and one partner is battered the situation should be questioned and handled with fairness and equality across the board.
Post a Comment