Category: DB10

while watching the film “Out in the Night”, there were gender violence present it showed how men verbally harassed these women. The women were African-American lesbians and were violently and sexually threatened by a man on the street. Unfortunately, they had to defend themseldves and stab the man. they were being incarcerated for what they did, it’s sad to know that they had to plead guilty, because of defending themselves they were charged with criminal possession of a weapon and gang assault. If they would have never defended themselves they would have not been charged but they would have either been raped or killed.

This film made me realize that not only men go through these legal systems but also women, the legal system let these women down with how they handle the situation. Especially failed Renata, she got sentenced 8 years but her rapist only got 5 years. The headline, they really made it seem like these women were in a “gang”, and when people start to see and hear about gang they automatically think about drugs and guns. Stuff like “attack of the killer lesbian” was said and I just don’t think that was right. It was basically their word against everyone else, they only showed how the girls were beaten up by the man, they didn’t show/say why the women were beaten up for it.

• What forms of gendered violence are represented in this film? What do we learn about this violence and its impacts?

In the film “Out in the  night” The gendered violence are presented how the man verbally harrased these women telling them “i will fuck you straight”. Kept harassing these women until these women had to stab him because he did not understand what “no ” meant. They were looking at charges with criminal possession of a weapon in the 4th degree assault in the 3rd degree, assault in the 2nd,1st degree, gang assault in the 2nd & 1st degree.  I feel very astonished on how they have to plead guilty for literally defending themselves.

• What do the victim-survivors say about their experience and how are their stories received– by their family/friends/colleagues, the legal system, the media?

The way the news would headline the indecent is very disgusting example “attack of the killer lesbian” and also in the article theres a sentence that saids “beaten and knifed…- by seven bloodthirsty young lesbians.” As a survivor you would not like to see that on the news or papers for a traumatic incident where you felt the need to defend yourself since you are a woman. Plus the media only showed how they were beaten up by the man only. Not how the women were beaten up for it to get that. I believe the legal system failed them when holding them in trial. Especially failed Renata, she got sentenced 8 years for defending herself but her rapist only got 5 years. 

Sexual harassment in any form is considered gendered violence. In the film “Anita: Speaking Truth to Power” sexual harassment from Clarence Thomas was shown towards many women like her through gendered violence. Anita was a victim like many others who were afraid to set up and come forth with the truth but she believe that in order to be true to the Supreme Court nominee, she knew she would have to speak up on the subject of power.

Anita raised concerns of Thomas’ acts due to the morals of being in a high position in which she knew that he could abuse her power even further than he already has. Little did she know that her testimony would be a huge part of civil rights and how sexual harassments is preserved in the workplace. Anita herself was able to create a powerful movement and change that she herself did not see, “I was not raising a legal claim in either of my statements. I was not raising a legal claim. I was attempting to inform about conduct” (Anita). Her soul purpose on coming forth with Thomas’ actions was not initially for justice, but for the evaluation of the wrongly behaviors that this man has projected onto others as a Supreme Court nominee. Anita believed that although she wanted to stay silent and live a simple life, she knew that she needed to speak truth to power.

This testimony has changed her life as it did others. She and her family received threats along with her colleagues regarding her job as a college professor. Although many around her including herself have been threaten and talked down on she continues to promote others to have the same strength that she herself wants to give others.

“Women who have experience the same thing, who have written and said now for the first time they can talk about it. And that’s important. What I hope is that non of this will deter others from coming forward. This is an important issue and the dialogue should not stop here.” (Anita)

Anita has been able to do a lot regarding the issues of sexual harassments due to her actions on coming forward to the public and receiving her testimony

“But it wasn’t my testimony that caused change. What allowed us to move forward. What allowed a record number of women to file complaints against employers. What allowed employers to change their workplace policy. What allows the election of record numbers or women in the Congress, in the Senate. That was you, that was your voice, your voices.” (Anita)

Her voice drives others to be strong as her, it is as if she is lending her strength to those who need it. She is lending her knowledge to those who are unaware what sexual harassment really is, and that is Anita, speaking her truth to power.

The question I would like to bring to class for discussion is about the issue of gender-based violence. What are some of the challenges that might happen when developing responses that do not rely on sexist, racist, classist, and homophobic criminal justice? Survivors of sexual violence must be protected and make sure that their safety is guaranteed. Criminalization has led to many women finding themselves in conflict with the law,especially women of color, from poor backgrounds, lesbians, sex workers, among others, and this brings the question of what strategies can be fronted to make sure that women who suffer from gender-based violence are safe and not in conflict with the law. There are numerous side effects to this, like funds being overly channeled to policing and prisons yet minimal reaches women welfare programs such as shelters and public housing. 

When we rely too much on the criminal justice system,women do not get the power to organize themselves because they become disempowered and alienated collectively. The reliance on criminal justice has brought in individualistic approaches in the fight against violence. How can we end the endless and rampant forms of harassment like street harassment, harassment at workplaces, and intimate abuse? Which are the best strategies apart from policing and prisons, which can end gender-based violence? There are other groups like LGBT that face brutality, and there have to be ways to make them safe. What are some of these strategies that can be used?

• What do INCITE/Critical Resistance say about why prisons are not the solution for gendered violence? Based on Crenshaw’s talk and (if you watched it), Out in the Night– what evidence can you offer to support their argument?
• Based on the film(s) you watched, using Crenshaw’s framework of intersectionality, what do you see as the  the role of racism, or other structures of oppression like homophobia, in these stories of misogynistic violence?
• Based on the film(s) you watched, what do the victim-survivors say about their experience and how are their stories received– by their family/friends/colleagues, the legal system, the media?
• What questions do YOU want to bring to class for discussion?

Prisons are most definitely not the solution for gendered violence because correctional officers do not meet the highest requirements to do their job as educated as possible. Just as in the film “Out In The Night” one of the women who became an inmate did not feel comfortable in the clothes that the prison deemed for females. For instance the inmate was penalized for wearing shorts underneath. It just proves that gender is institutionalized and in certain places it is censored. Also INCITE provides clarity just like Out in the nIght at the end when one of the women says “Im incarcerated because I protected myself and she is also at risk without carrying a weapon because where she is from the police only arrives when the harm has been done.” It is not fair for these women because society still is very ignorant and if people are against each other and close minded then how are they supposed to protect themselves if they will be punished for it.

Using Crenshaws framework of  intersectionality, the trauma each women has is unique because of different circumstances. One POC does not have the same trauma as another POC just because they share one similarities it is not the blueprint for all.

Based on the film I watched the victims are truly sadden for being incarcerated. They are frustrated because if they would not have defended themselves they would’ve been killed or raped. Their environment had set them up to be on high alert, due to that they lived in Newark. Their friends and family were saddened that they had to serve time. Some of the women lost family members and were not given the proper time or resources to deal with their grief. The legal system definitely let these women down, with technicalities for example the term gang. Three or more people in a fight are considered a gang. The media seemed to have a blast when speaking about these women too. The terms, the headlines, they used gang as if the women were connected to drugs and guns.

Why does society have a hard time accepting we need more human services and social workers in many fields?

Why do people of color not receive the same or consistent resources as their white counterparts?

Based on the film(s) you watched, what do the victim-survivors say about their experience and how are their stories received– by their family/friends/colleagues, the legal system, the media?

“What do you call being impacted by multiple forces, and then abandoned to fend for yourself? Intersectionality”. This is a quote stated by Kimberlé Crenshaw in the Ted Talk The urgency of intersectionality, where she touches base on the reality of race and gender bias; and how the two combine and end up creating even more harm than one itself. She uses the term intersectionality to deal with the fact that many of our social justice problems like sexism, and racism are often overlapping.

In this video she talks about an African American women, working wife, and mother named Emma Degraffenreid who sought out better employment for her family and others. She applied for a job but wasn’t hired because she was a black women, so she ended up taking her complaint to court based on the race and gender discrimination towards her in a work place. The judge rudely dismissed her case not acknowledging what Emma was trying to say. It wasn’t just because of her skin color, it was the double discrimination that was happening. The discrimination being that she was an African American WOMEN! Gender and race are being separated, when they both should always be considered in cases like this. It just doesn’t make sense to me how people could be so close minded and not take notice in the bigger picture of these issues.

I watched the film Anita, Speaking Truth to Power, where I was immediately brought to tears the moment her family walked into the senate room. From how she spoke about her families’ consistent support, to the friends that spoke out as a witness and stood beside her. Even while the white men who sat behind the table and their status, Hill never wavered from what she came there to do. Her sole purpose what to speak her truth, to make the public aware of who would be representing them, and ultimately creating a space for not only women but Black and marginalized women to feel as though they too could speak out.

Anita Hill speaks briefly to say that women should not view her story as a loss or be discouraged. Still, I believe that in viewing her story it allows one to ignite a fire, force change and eliminate stigmas crowding sexual assault issues. (In the workplace or domestic.) As we were made aware, Anita’s story at the time had been a taboo subject among men in Washington. They were not well equipped or, as Anita puts it, not well informed to handle such a nuanced issue in the public eye. They continually tried to use Anita’s experience to humiliate her and tamper her reputation in the public/media. Even after her 9 hr “interview,” which seemed more like an interrogation. Hill would have preferred to go back to Oklahoma, go back to teaching; however, the media and reporters had other plans. Even though this seemed like something that would completely shift the trajectory of Hill’s life, she used this as an advantage to speak loudly about what can be done to change the legal system and help sexual assault survivors.

In class, I would like to talk more about the prison system. Even though I have yet to watch the film Out in the Night, prison systems mishandled many issues, not just violence against women, specifically Black and marginalized. I believe the way it is used causes more harm, such as how prison is experienced for those with disabilities and the lack of mental health support to those who more often than not lack the resources elsewhere.

Based on the film(s) you watched, using Crenshaw’s framework of intersectionality, what do you see as the  the role of racism, or other structures of oppression like homophobia, in these stories of misogynistic violence?

After watching Crenshaw’s framework of intersectionality, I think the roles of racism and other forms of oppression really just go hand in hand with misogynistic violence. Not only are the victim’s experiences similar, it’s really sad that the government and the police (whos job is to protect the people) really works against bringing justice to marginalized people. In the Ted Talk, Crenshaw touches on the subject of women who are oppressed by racism and sexism but only gets justice based on one form of oppression. Not only is it disheartening for those who are oppressed to not get justice, its not really “real” when the oppressor only gets half the punishment. Its like Crenshaw says, those who are hurt by multiple forms of oppression really doesn’t get real justice because the government only focuses on one aspect of oppression. This is also applicable for homophobia and discrimination against the LQBTQ community. Many homosexuals get assaulted because of their sexual orientation but this is especially true for minorities. These cases usually get dismissed but even if they are put on trial, the court only focuses on the assault, not accounting that it doubles as a hate crime. All in all, its important to spread awareness for misogyny and hate crimes but its equally as important to bring actual justice for individuals who have suffered from these social oppressions. We as a community can do better and for the safety of everyone, we have to do better.

INCITE/Critical which stated that arresting individual for gender violation has also brought many women into a struggle with the law, especially different individuals who identified as women of color, poor women, lesbians, sex workers, immigrant women, women with disabilities, and other marginalized women. For example, following the mandatory detention laws, there have been numerous events where police officers were called to domestic situations and have arrested the woman who is being battered. Notwithstanding an exponential rise in the number of men in jails, women are not any safer, and the rates of sexual crime and domestic violence have not decreased in the community.

While watching Crenshaw’s she talks about how women’s violation is something the society is not aware of or doesn’t care about. She presented a game where the audiences should stand up and listen to names they recognize. If Crenshaw’s say a name they not familiar with they can be seated. The first few names she said were male individuals who were killed by cops brutality and not a single person seated. But once she started naming females who were killed by cops brutality, almost the whole audience is sitting down.

Based on the film(s) you watched, what do the victim-survivors say about their experience and how are their stories received– by their family/friends/colleagues, the legal system, the media?

The story was about an African American name Emma who was discriminated at an environment she wanted to work in and felt as if she should take action by bringing a complaint to the court. During her case, she stated to the judge that her conflict in that particular environment, and what the judge did next was mind-blowing. He dismissed her stating that the workplace does not discriminate against individuals base on their skin color. I truly understand where Emma is coming from, the judge having kept in mind that Gender also plays an important role in her case which makes his not being understandable.

“So if we think about this intersection, the roads to the intersection would be the way that the workforce was structured by race and by gender. And then the traffic in those roads would be the hiring policies and the other practices that ran through those roads. Now, because Emma was both black and female, she was positioned precisely where those roads overlapped, experiencing the simultaneous impact of the company’s gender and race traffic. The law — the law is like that ambulance that shows up and is ready to treat Emma only if it can be shown that she was harmed on the race road or on the gender road but not where those roads intersected.”

I think Crenshaw’s metaphor for intersectionality here is absolutely spot-on. When it comes to marginalization, it is as if the more oppression you connect with the less visibility you receive, which leads to further injustice.  This was definitely apparent in the Anita Hill documentary. Where could she go for protection and support? Would white women defend her? Would black men defend her? Obviously the old white men who were basically putting her on trial weren’t going to.  However, the way she was spoken to and treated displayed characteristics and both racism and sexism. Watching was definitely a little disheartening, seeing some familiar faces on Judiciary Committee who are still playing some pretty big roles 30 years later, and wondering if anything would actually go any differently today.