Good Girls: Gender-Specific Interventions in Juvenile Court

F. Gamal
{"title":"Good Girls: Gender-Specific Interventions in Juvenile Court","authors":"F. Gamal","doi":"10.7916/CJGL.V35I2.2770","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the juvenile legal system, many jurisdictions are adopting interventions that target girls for specialized treatment. The proliferation of so-called Girls Courts—or specialty courts designed to address the specific challenges faced by system-involved girl—is one such intervention. Girls Court rejects gender-blindness in the juvenile justice system in order to address the unique needs of system-involved girls. This Article enlists Critical Race Feminism to argue that, although well intentioned, these gender-specific juvenile courts enlist harmful gender stereotypes to guide girls towards an antiquated and hegemonic form of femininity. By examining the underlying assumptions that drive Girls Court, this Article assesses the line between gender-consciousness and gender stereotyping and critiques the role of law in entrenching harmful notions about what “good girls” ought to be. Lifting ideologies from problem-solving courts, Girls Court purports to serve the most at-risk girls, with some jurisdictions placing special emphasis on holistic intervention for child victims of sexual exploitation. Girls Court targets girls, mostly girls of color, for enhanced scrutiny and surveillance. Although heightened services are needed for girls battling intersecting forms of oppression, this Article argues that Girls Court exemplifies important limitations to gender-specific reform. While the court’s approach rightly acknowledges the role of gender in shaping outcomes for young people, it also targets girls for intrusive and punitive methods of social control. Girls Court funnels girls towards a very specific notion of girlhood—one centered in white, middle-class notions of femininity. Through criminalization, an emphasis on sexual purity, and a desire to instill obedience, Girls Court advances certain subordinating stereotypes about girls, particularly girls of color. At its core, this Article argues for an increased duty of care when it comes to programming for girls. It urges a careful examination of all the messages we send, and the values we promote, when we target young girls for intervention.","PeriodicalId":84468,"journal":{"name":"Columbia journal of gender and law","volume":"35 1","pages":"228-263"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Columbia journal of gender and law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7916/CJGL.V35I2.2770","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

In the juvenile legal system, many jurisdictions are adopting interventions that target girls for specialized treatment. The proliferation of so-called Girls Courts—or specialty courts designed to address the specific challenges faced by system-involved girl—is one such intervention. Girls Court rejects gender-blindness in the juvenile justice system in order to address the unique needs of system-involved girls. This Article enlists Critical Race Feminism to argue that, although well intentioned, these gender-specific juvenile courts enlist harmful gender stereotypes to guide girls towards an antiquated and hegemonic form of femininity. By examining the underlying assumptions that drive Girls Court, this Article assesses the line between gender-consciousness and gender stereotyping and critiques the role of law in entrenching harmful notions about what “good girls” ought to be. Lifting ideologies from problem-solving courts, Girls Court purports to serve the most at-risk girls, with some jurisdictions placing special emphasis on holistic intervention for child victims of sexual exploitation. Girls Court targets girls, mostly girls of color, for enhanced scrutiny and surveillance. Although heightened services are needed for girls battling intersecting forms of oppression, this Article argues that Girls Court exemplifies important limitations to gender-specific reform. While the court’s approach rightly acknowledges the role of gender in shaping outcomes for young people, it also targets girls for intrusive and punitive methods of social control. Girls Court funnels girls towards a very specific notion of girlhood—one centered in white, middle-class notions of femininity. Through criminalization, an emphasis on sexual purity, and a desire to instill obedience, Girls Court advances certain subordinating stereotypes about girls, particularly girls of color. At its core, this Article argues for an increased duty of care when it comes to programming for girls. It urges a careful examination of all the messages we send, and the values we promote, when we target young girls for intervention.
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
好女孩:少年法庭的性别干预
在少年法律制度中,许多司法管辖区正在采取干预措施,针对女孩进行专门治疗。所谓的“女孩法庭”——或专门为解决涉及系统的女孩所面临的具体挑战而设计的法庭——的激增就是这样一种干预。女童法院反对在少年司法系统中存在性别盲目性,以解决涉及该系统的女童的独特需求。本文引用了“批判种族女权主义”(Critical Race Feminism)的观点,认为尽管出发点是好的,但这些针对特定性别的少年法庭利用有害的性别刻板印象,引导女孩走向一种过时的、霸权式的女性气质。通过研究推动《女孩法庭》的基本假设,本文评估了性别意识和性别刻板印象之间的界限,并批评了法律在巩固“好女孩”应该是什么的有害观念方面的作用。女孩法庭将意识形态从解决问题的法庭中解放出来,旨在为最危险的女孩服务,一些司法管辖区特别强调对性剥削儿童受害者的整体干预。女孩法庭的目标是女孩,主要是有色人种女孩,以加强审查和监视。尽管需要加强服务,帮助女孩对抗各种形式的交叉压迫,但本文认为,女童法院体现了针对性别的改革的重要局限性。虽然法院的做法正确地承认了性别在塑造年轻人的结果方面的作用,但它也把女孩作为侵犯性和惩罚性的社会控制手段的目标。《女孩法庭》将女孩引向一个非常具体的少女时代概念——一个以白人中产阶级女性气质为中心的概念。通过定罪,强调性纯洁,以及灌输顺从的愿望,《女孩法庭》推进了对女孩,尤其是有色人种女孩的某些从属刻板印象。这篇文章的核心是,当涉及到为女孩设计的程序时,要增加注意的责任。它敦促仔细审查我们在针对年轻女孩进行干预时发出的所有信息,以及我们所提倡的价值观。
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
Day 2 Panel 3: Self-Care as Self-Preservation: Understanding Vicarious Trauma & Enhancing Support for Providers Justice For Survivors of Intimate Partner Violence Conference Report Day 2 Panel 2: Promoting Equity From the Bench: Judicial Selection, Oversight, and Training Day 1 Lunchtime Speaker: Stephanie McGraw CEO W.A.R.M - We All Really Matter Day 1 Panel 2: How Bias Manifests in New York State's Family Law System
×
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