{"title":"会议报告:犯罪和越轨模式:暴力和创伤研究中的边缘案例","authors":"Laura Cater, Juliane Dyroff, S. Köthe","doi":"10.21039/JPR.2.1.14","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In very different ways the Stanford Prison experiment, Pierre Bourdieu’s concept of symbolic violence, and the intensified media coverage of the prevalence of sexual assault reveal that perpetrators are neither the ‘other’ of a society often perceived to be non-violent, nor are they to be found only at its margins. How can we develop a transgressive concept of perpetration that does not essentialize, stigmatize, or symbolically dehumanize perpetrator figures, but instead allows for perspectives that reflect the appropriate level of complexity? What is needed is a notion that describes perpetration in terms of implicatedness in violence , e.g. as something that can grow out of a victim’s position, or as a capability to carry out violence that can in certain situations develop in “perfectly normal people” . These questions were at the focus of the multidisciplinary conference “Models of Perpetration and Transgression. Borderline Cases in Violence and Trauma Research” (“Tatermodelle und Transgression. Grenzfalle in Gewalt- und Traumaforschung”), organized by Julia B. Kohne and Jan Mollenhauer, held on 19th January 2018 in the Jacob-und-Wilhelm-Grimm-Zentrum at Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin. Talks were given by a wide range of international researchers, each of whom drew on their expertise to call into question crucial elements of how we understand perpetration and perpetratorship. These talks generated a discussion that encompassed the notion of perpetration in its broadest sense, starting with the psychology of victimhood and perpetratorship at the individual level, expanding to media representations that contribute to public discourse on perpetrators, both in terms of smaller-scale acts of violence, e.g. murders, and mass-scale perpetration of political violence, the effects of this discourse, (cultural) historical genealogies and contexts, as well as the traumatic consequences of perpetratorship. The following reflections upon the discussion should serve to inform current research on perpetration in the context of political violence by providing some helpful guidelines for approaching present challenges in this area.","PeriodicalId":152877,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Perpetrator Research","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Conference Report: Models of Perpetration and Transgression: Borderline Cases in Violence and Trauma Research\",\"authors\":\"Laura Cater, Juliane Dyroff, S. Köthe\",\"doi\":\"10.21039/JPR.2.1.14\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In very different ways the Stanford Prison experiment, Pierre Bourdieu’s concept of symbolic violence, and the intensified media coverage of the prevalence of sexual assault reveal that perpetrators are neither the ‘other’ of a society often perceived to be non-violent, nor are they to be found only at its margins. How can we develop a transgressive concept of perpetration that does not essentialize, stigmatize, or symbolically dehumanize perpetrator figures, but instead allows for perspectives that reflect the appropriate level of complexity? What is needed is a notion that describes perpetration in terms of implicatedness in violence , e.g. as something that can grow out of a victim’s position, or as a capability to carry out violence that can in certain situations develop in “perfectly normal people” . These questions were at the focus of the multidisciplinary conference “Models of Perpetration and Transgression. Borderline Cases in Violence and Trauma Research” (“Tatermodelle und Transgression. Grenzfalle in Gewalt- und Traumaforschung”), organized by Julia B. Kohne and Jan Mollenhauer, held on 19th January 2018 in the Jacob-und-Wilhelm-Grimm-Zentrum at Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin. Talks were given by a wide range of international researchers, each of whom drew on their expertise to call into question crucial elements of how we understand perpetration and perpetratorship. These talks generated a discussion that encompassed the notion of perpetration in its broadest sense, starting with the psychology of victimhood and perpetratorship at the individual level, expanding to media representations that contribute to public discourse on perpetrators, both in terms of smaller-scale acts of violence, e.g. murders, and mass-scale perpetration of political violence, the effects of this discourse, (cultural) historical genealogies and contexts, as well as the traumatic consequences of perpetratorship. The following reflections upon the discussion should serve to inform current research on perpetration in the context of political violence by providing some helpful guidelines for approaching present challenges in this area.\",\"PeriodicalId\":152877,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Perpetrator Research\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-12-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Perpetrator Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21039/JPR.2.1.14\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Perpetrator Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21039/JPR.2.1.14","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
斯坦福监狱实验、皮埃尔·布迪厄的象征性暴力概念,以及媒体对性侵犯的广泛报道,以截然不同的方式揭示出,犯罪者既不是社会中通常被视为非暴力的“他者”,也不是只在社会边缘被发现的人。我们怎样才能发展出一种犯罪的越界概念,既不将犯罪人物本质化、污名化,也不象征性地非人化,而是允许反映适当复杂程度的观点?我们所需要的是一种概念,即从与暴力有关的角度来描述犯罪行为,例如,作为一种可以从受害者的立场中生长出来的东西,或者作为一种在某些情况下可以在“完全正常的人”身上发展起来的实施暴力的能力。这些问题是多学科会议“犯罪和越轨模式”的焦点。暴力与创伤研究中的边缘性案例”(“性模式与越界”)。由Julia B. Kohne和Jan Mollenhauer组织的“grenzfallle in Gewalt- und创伤”,于2018年1月19日在柏林洪堡大学的Jacob-und-Wilhelm-Grimm-Zentrum举行。广泛的国际研究人员发表了演讲,他们每个人都利用自己的专业知识,对我们如何理解犯罪和犯罪行为的关键要素提出了质疑。这些谈话引发了一场讨论,从最广泛的意义上涵盖了犯罪的概念,从个人层面的受害者心理和犯罪者心理开始,扩展到媒体表现,促进对犯罪者的公共话语,无论是小规模的暴力行为,如谋杀,大规模的政治暴力,这种话语的影响,(文化)历史谱系和背景,以及肇事者的创伤性后果。以下对讨论的思考应有助于为当前关于政治暴力背景下的犯罪行为的研究提供信息,为应对这一领域目前的挑战提供一些有益的指导方针。
Conference Report: Models of Perpetration and Transgression: Borderline Cases in Violence and Trauma Research
In very different ways the Stanford Prison experiment, Pierre Bourdieu’s concept of symbolic violence, and the intensified media coverage of the prevalence of sexual assault reveal that perpetrators are neither the ‘other’ of a society often perceived to be non-violent, nor are they to be found only at its margins. How can we develop a transgressive concept of perpetration that does not essentialize, stigmatize, or symbolically dehumanize perpetrator figures, but instead allows for perspectives that reflect the appropriate level of complexity? What is needed is a notion that describes perpetration in terms of implicatedness in violence , e.g. as something that can grow out of a victim’s position, or as a capability to carry out violence that can in certain situations develop in “perfectly normal people” . These questions were at the focus of the multidisciplinary conference “Models of Perpetration and Transgression. Borderline Cases in Violence and Trauma Research” (“Tatermodelle und Transgression. Grenzfalle in Gewalt- und Traumaforschung”), organized by Julia B. Kohne and Jan Mollenhauer, held on 19th January 2018 in the Jacob-und-Wilhelm-Grimm-Zentrum at Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin. Talks were given by a wide range of international researchers, each of whom drew on their expertise to call into question crucial elements of how we understand perpetration and perpetratorship. These talks generated a discussion that encompassed the notion of perpetration in its broadest sense, starting with the psychology of victimhood and perpetratorship at the individual level, expanding to media representations that contribute to public discourse on perpetrators, both in terms of smaller-scale acts of violence, e.g. murders, and mass-scale perpetration of political violence, the effects of this discourse, (cultural) historical genealogies and contexts, as well as the traumatic consequences of perpetratorship. The following reflections upon the discussion should serve to inform current research on perpetration in the context of political violence by providing some helpful guidelines for approaching present challenges in this area.