Constructing Race and Gender in Modern Rape Law: The Abandoned Category of Black Female Victims

Jacqueline Pittman Pittman
{"title":"Constructing Race and Gender in Modern Rape Law: The Abandoned Category of Black Female Victims","authors":"Jacqueline Pittman Pittman","doi":"10.36641/mjgl.30.1.constructing","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Despite the successes of the 1960s Anti-Rape Movement, modern state rape statutes continue to prioritize white male perspectives and perceptions of race, ultimately ignoring the intersectional identity of Black women and leaving these victims without legal protection. This Note examines rape law’s history of allocating agency along gendered and racialized lines through statutory construction and other discursive techniques. Such legal constructions both uphold and cultivate the white victim/Black assailant rape dyad primarily by making the Black male the “ultimate” and most feared assailant. Rape law’s adherence to a white baseline sustains stereotypes of Black men as criminals and predators, which ultimately relegates Black women to a category of lesser and undeserving victims. Re-focusing rape reform and feminist movements on Black female experiences, as well as a rhetorical restructuring of rape laws, can improve rape law uniformity and remove white normativity standards. A departure from the current rhetorical and realized white baseline can eliminate rape law’s delineations of femininity that silence women of color.","PeriodicalId":303089,"journal":{"name":"Michigan Journal of Gender & Law","volume":"233 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Michigan Journal of Gender & Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36641/mjgl.30.1.constructing","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Despite the successes of the 1960s Anti-Rape Movement, modern state rape statutes continue to prioritize white male perspectives and perceptions of race, ultimately ignoring the intersectional identity of Black women and leaving these victims without legal protection. This Note examines rape law’s history of allocating agency along gendered and racialized lines through statutory construction and other discursive techniques. Such legal constructions both uphold and cultivate the white victim/Black assailant rape dyad primarily by making the Black male the “ultimate” and most feared assailant. Rape law’s adherence to a white baseline sustains stereotypes of Black men as criminals and predators, which ultimately relegates Black women to a category of lesser and undeserving victims. Re-focusing rape reform and feminist movements on Black female experiences, as well as a rhetorical restructuring of rape laws, can improve rape law uniformity and remove white normativity standards. A departure from the current rhetorical and realized white baseline can eliminate rape law’s delineations of femininity that silence women of color.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
现代强奸法中的种族与性别建构:黑人女性受害者的被抛弃范畴
尽管20世纪60年代的反强奸运动取得了成功,但现代各州的强奸法规仍然优先考虑白人男性的观点和种族观念,最终忽视了黑人女性的交叉身份,使这些受害者得不到法律保护。本文通过法定构建和其他话语技术,考察强奸法沿着性别和种族线分配代理的历史。这样的法律结构主要通过使黑人男性成为“终极”和最可怕的攻击者来维护和培养白人受害者/黑人攻击者强奸的二元对立。强奸法坚持以白人为基准,这维持了黑人男性是罪犯和掠夺者的刻板印象,最终将黑人女性贬为不那么重要、不应该受到惩罚的受害者。将强奸改革和女权运动重新聚焦于黑人女性的经历,以及对强奸法的修辞重组,可以改善强奸法的统一性,消除白人的规范标准。脱离目前的修辞和意识到的白人底线可以消除强奸法对女性气质的描绘,这种描绘使有色人种女性沉默。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Gentlewomen of the Jury Title IX and "Menstruation or Related Conditions" Trek to Triumph Making Mandates Last: Increasing Female Representation on Corporate Boards in the U.S. Advancing Reproductive Justice in Latin America Through a Transitional Justice Lens
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1