Baking Cakes in Kigali

Our library is more than a bit unreal and feels like a Spanish country club. I am always subconsciously concerned that someone is going to ask me to prove membership.

If the library rented rooms, I think Ben and I would live here.

Seriously, how can this place be free?

Sometimes I use the private study rooms as meeting places for work. The other day, I drove away from a work meeting and nearly stomped on the brakes from the sudden realization that I had not checked out the library book I selected. I pawed through my laptop bag and indeed found the tome tucked away. Turns out that I had unthinkingly swept away all of the items from the work surface and unwittingly deflected the library scanners from detecting my theft by placing the book next to the electric signal of my laptop. The book that I successfully lifted from the library?

Yes. How to Buy a Love of Reading. Sigh. Three generations of library employees just shuddered.

I also like studying here and roaming the aisles looking for books that have NOTHING TO DO WITH TRAUMA. Between social work classes and human trafficking research, my brain is pretty full up on tragedy. Unfortunately, the only "fairy tale" element of the last book I picked up from the fantasy section ended up being a coping mechanism of the main character who lived in death row. He poetically narrated a story filled with horrifically cruel child abuse, sexual assault, murder, torture, and perversion of justice. It was like "Shawshank Redemption" meets Ted Bundy. The Dungeon turned out to be the solitary confinement wing, the Lady was a private investigator of death row cases, the guilty Priest was a prison chaplain with a sordid past and so on. Yikes. 

I say all of that to preface a pretty fun read I found that you can buy for only $4 (including shipping) on Amazon. (Or, you know, borrow from your local Spanish country club.) The main character is a middle-aged woman who runs a cake-making business in Rwanda. She had a soft heart and a practical mind and always ends up kindly fiddling in the lives of her clients. What I enjoyed about this book was that it managed to touch on some pretty tough themes (poverty, aids, sexual assault, genocide, orphans, prostitution, stigma, first world interference, etc.) while highlighting the strength and joy that are also a part of life. Instead of crying, I ended up laughing aloud so many times that I convinced my husband to read it too. We have both traveled and were amused by the author's ability to relay the humor of cross-cultural interactions. Unlike my other blog posts, I'm not urging you to change the world through this one, but you might change a little if you read it and enjoy yourself in the process.

Baking Cakes in Kigali by Gaile Parkin

Exercise and Stress

Indeed.

Well, friends, I have done you a favor. My social work research class (which is indeed about experimenting on people but not really how it sounds) required us to conduct a "single-study research design" with a literature review on our project. This means that I picked a person, asked what he wanted to change in his life, came up with something to hopefully affect the specific change, and then measured whether or not that something was effective. And I had to spend a bunch of time looking up the journal articles of other more scholarly folk who have done similar experiments. The study question ending up being whether or not exercise improves a person's perceived stress level.

Here in are the articles I read. I put them in exceptionally tiny print so that you can scroll through them faster.

References

Blomstrand, A., Bjorkelund, C., Ariai, N., Lissner, L., & Bengtsson, C. (2009). Effects of leisure-time physical activity on well-being among women: A 32-year perspective. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 37, 706-712.

Brown, J. (1991). Staying fit and staying well: Physical fitness as a moderator of life stress. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(4), 555-561.

Brown, J., & Siegel, J. (1988). Exercise as a buffer of life stress: A prospective study of adolescent health. Health Psychology, 7(4), 341-353.

Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., & Mermelstein, R. (1983). A global measure of perceived stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 24(4), 385-385.

Gerber, M., & Puhse, U. (2009). Do exercise and fitness protect against stress-induced health complaints? A review of the literature. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 37, 801-819.

Kwag, K., Martin, P., Russell, D., Franke, W., & Kohut, M. (2011). The impact of perceived stress, social support, and home-based physical activity on mental health among older adults. The International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 72(2), 137-154.

Melinda, C., Denis, C., & Clare, M. (2010). Direct and buffering effects of physical activity on stress-related depression in mothers of infants. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 32, 23-38.

Roberti, J., Harrington, L., & Storch, E. (2006). Further psychometric support for the 10-item version of the Perceived Stress Scale. Journal of College Counseling, 9, 135-147.

Perales, F., Jesus, P., & Borja, P. (2014). Impact of physical activity on psychological distress: A prospective analysis of an Australian national sample. American Journal of Public Health, 104(12), 91-97.

Vasterling, J., Sementilli, M., & Burish, T. (1988). The role of aerobic exercise in reducing stress in diabetic patients. The Diabetes Educator, 197-201.

The conclusion of all of them is: exercise helps reduce your stress level. Turns out even a little bit every day or a moderate bit every few days helps. Drat. That's what the magazines in the check-out stand have been telling us for years! The trick is that when you are stressed, the thought of exercise makes you feel more stressed. I personally loathe exertion. Good news! If you exercise too much (i.e. "vigorously" at high intensity for prolonged periods of time) you actually lose some of the stress improving benefits. If you get too attached to exercising it becomes a project or an addiction and causes more stress. So, the take away is that something is better than nothing--even if it doesn't feel like it in the moment. 

And tying back in to our opening hook: Calvin wins again!

Who's crazy?

As part of my master's degree in social work, I recently finished a class on assessing and diagnosing mental health disorders. I had some familiarity with mental health disorders from a year spent working with families who were homeless, learning about the effects of trauma on human trafficking victims, and a 496 hour practicum at a school for children with emotional disturbances. Yet, I was still a bit confused about schizophrenia and mostly thought of it as multiple personality disorder, aka "A Beautiful Mind." I learned that schizophrenia is a mental illness centering around psychosis, which means that you don't understand or acknowledge reality. Sometimes the psychosis is ongoing and other times psychotic episodes come and go between more lucid stretches. People with schizophrenia have delusions (false beliefs such as thinking that they are secretly Russian royalty) and hallucinations (false sensory experiences that are like hearing voices or seeing people who are not really there). It turns out that having "multiple personalities" is a different disorder entirely.

My teacher shared about a sensitivity exercise she experienced in which she put on headphones playing recordings which mimicked the negative and condemning voices often heard by people with schizophrenia. The voices told her what a terrible person she was, cursed her, and threatened her harm. While listening to the voices, she was instructed to fill out some forms and do a couple of other simple tasks while a staff person stood by and expressed frustration that she was "taking so long" to complete what she had been requested to do. It was terrible.

Most of us focus on the "mental" part of mental illness and not the "illness" part. There is an undeserved stigma attached to any impairment of mental processing. How foolish to think that we are "better" than someone simply because they are unhealthy. I don't think I am better than someone with cancer or Lyme disease or a broken femur--though the contrast makes me grateful for my health.

In class we learned about an incredible woman who lives with schizophrenia and helps break the stereotypes associated with it. She attended Yale and is a legal scholar and law professor at USC. Her story is told best in her own words. Here is a 15 minute TED Talk. You can read the interactive transcript here. 

Life in the fast lane

This blog has declined in output ever since I ...

Married this guy

Started grad school for social work

Started working at Forever Found

My new series of blog posts will focus less on musings and more on the projects and lessons from these pursuits.

The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness

Review of The New Jim Crow

Caged. Locked up. Jailed. Imprisoned. Incarcerated. The English language has many words to describe the forcible segregation and confinement of a human. The number of people in American prisons has soared in past few decades, a phenomenon Michelle Alexander attributes to an insidious and largely unidentified form of race control which she terms “The New Jim Crow.” Indeed, this is the title of her controversial book published in 2010: The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. Despite the recent election of the nation’s first black president, Alexander’s work insists that racism is not only alive but thriving in the United States. Her research sheds light on a population literally hidden from society, and her provocative arguments boldly call for a complete overhaul of the entire criminal justice system.

Criminalized by Color

            The main argument of The New Jim Crow is that the criminal justice system in the United States has evolved into a mechanism of racial control rather than a response to crime. Indeed, the author asserts that instead of preventing crime, the system actually makes it more likely that people of color will be incited to crime because of discriminatory hurdles to living a stable life. The most convincing evidence for this argument is the grossly disproportionate rates of “black” and “brown” men currently incarcerated throughout the nation’s prisons[1]; “1 in every 14 black men was behind bars in 2006, compared with 1 in 106 white men” (p. 98). Alexander draws parallels between the current criminal justice system and overtly discriminatory practices against African Americans in the period between the Civil War and the Civil Rights movement. This system of racially targeted laws commonly known as Jim Crow successfully controlled the environments and quality of life of African Americans in the South.

            The book’s introduction claims that the number of prisoners in the United States dramatically increased from roughly 300,000 to over 2 million in the past thirty years (p. 6). The majority of these convicted criminals are black and brown men. The number of prisoners is just the tip of the iceberg, as the control of the criminal justice system extends to people who are currently on probation and parole. Alexander claims that “one in three young African American men” in the United States today is in one of these three categories (p. 9). Even after leaving the direct control of the criminal justice system (and regardless of the severity of their crimes) ex-convicts face discriminatory practices in housing, voting, public assistance, and job-searching similar to those experienced by African Americans under Jim Crow laws. Alexander succinctly describes: “The system of mass incarceration is based on the prison label, not prison time” (p. 14). Current prisoners and ex-convicts are “relegated to a permanent second-class status upon their release,” creating a sub-class of citizen or racial caste system (p. 14).

Alexander contends that throughout the history of the United States, powerful white men used race to secure their power, pitting poor white men against minorities so that they would not ally to overthrow the top class. After slavery was legally outlawed, powerful white men enacted convict laws that essentially re-enslaved freedmen in appalling working conditions. Vagrancy laws made it a crime to be unemployed. Of course, these laws were aimed at and applied to blacks (p.28). Incredible barriers such as poll taxes and unintelligible literacy tests impeded blacks’ ability to vote. Beginning in the Reconstruction Era, segregation laws begin developing and controlled where blacks could live, work, eat, and even sit on public transportation. The discriminatory practices looked eerily similar to those faced by men in the criminal justice system today. Once again, powerful white men were using race to control the poorer classes, assuaging the anger and frustration of poor white men further impoverished by the Civil War by lifting them just slightly above blacks—the absolute bottom class.

During the Civil Rights movement of the 1950’s and 1960’s, “conservatives systemically and strategically linked opposition to civil rights legislation to calls for law and order, arguing that Martin Luther King Jr.’s philosophy of civil disobedience was a leading cause of crime” (p. 41). According to Alexander, this wide-spread media portrayal of the black man as a criminal was “the birth of mass incarceration” (p.40). A couple of decades later, sneaky conservatives (aka powerful white men) once again enacted a “strategy of exploiting racial hostility or resentment for political gain without making explicit reference to race”—the War on Drugs, designed for racial control (p. 47). Evidence for racial motivation of the War on Drugs is not clearly described by Alexander, but the effects are well-researched, including the obscenely large payments the federal government bestowed to state and county governments who prioritized arrests of drug offenders. Federal spending skyrocketed: “Between 1980 and 1984, FBI anti-drug allocations increased from $8 million to $95 million” (p.49). Alexander goes on to provide multiple stories, statistics, and legal cases establishing that this campaign disproportionately targeted and ravaged communities of color. Incessant patrols, stops, and searches (and the enticement of asset seizures) ensured a steady supply of arrests. The Supreme Court has upheld these practices in a series of unrelated cases, raising the burden of proof of racial bias so high that even the sharpest lawyer could not clear a defendant—and most rely on public defense.

Once in the criminal system, people unknowingly face incredible restrictions on movement, behavior, voting, jury service, housing, and employment. People on probation and parole must also make payments to several government agencies, even for their own mandated drug testing (p.150). These restrictions and required payments are horribly similar to those existing against African Americans under Jim Crow. Another notable parallel is the physical segregation of people in color in prisons—an even harsher segregation than the racially segregated neighborhoods of Jim Crow. These prisoners are not included in poverty and unemployment statistics but are included in local population count, generally bringing more per capita allotted funding to rural, white communities (p. 216).

Aligning with Alexander

Although repetitive, Alexander’s arguments are compelling. She is strongest when describing the Supreme Court’s support of the New Jim Crow. Some of her other points are too thinly researched to be convincing, such as her claim that “The concept of race is a relatively recent development” (p. 23). She cites scant evidence for this extraordinary claim (one book and two pages of second book). More disappointingly, her description of the motivations behind the War on Drugs was not well-fleshed. Explanations of Reagan’s policies border on ludicrous and seem to depend on the near impossibility of proving a negative:

His ‘colorblind’ rhetoric on crime, welfare, taxes, and states’ rights was clearly understood by white (and black) voters as having a racial dimension, though claims to that effect were impossible to prove. The absence of explicitly racist rhetoric afforded the racial nature of his coded appeals a certain plausible deniability (p. 48).

Another area of disagreement came early in the book when Alexander compared the rate of incarceration in the United States to that of other countries and found that few other countries even came close. Without analyzing any reason for this phenomenon other than the racist-motivated War on Drugs, Alexander boldly declares “for reasons largely unrelated to actual crime trends, the American penal system has emerged as a system of social control unparalleled in world history” (p. 8). This statement is unnecessarily hyperbolic and distracts from her primary (and worthy) focus on the disproportionate incarceration rates of black and brown men. It is important to remember that most other countries do not have a responsive criminal justice system. Perpetrators can plunder, kill, and rape with impunity in many—if not most—countries It is plausible that the tremendous size of the United States penal system could be due in part to a just success in containing harmful people as opposed to countries where law enforcement is corrupt or nonexistent. Also, stating that the social control existing in the American penal system is unparalleled throughout history is simply false. One only needs to consider Soviet Russia, modern China, North Korea, or ancient Egypt. Surely a country such as China which institutes a “one child” policy over billions of people is more than a match for American prisons.

Despite these criticisms, I found myself aligned with Alexander’s ideology, if not her evidence. In particular, I resonated with her repeated emphasis of Dr. Martin Luther King’s warning: “…racial caste systems do not require racial hostility or overt bigotry to thrive. They need only racial indifference” (p 14).  Race neutral policy (or “colorblindness”) can easily turn into a default excuse for apathy. People’s hearts are more difficult to change than systems, but lasting change will be accomplished when men treat each other as having inherent value because of their humanity instead of race, gender, or even accomplishments. The myth that a person’s value is the sum of his or her actions is beguiling but deadly. As Alexander sagely notes:

Conversations about class are resisted in part because there is a tendency to imagine that one’s class reflects upon one’s character. What is key to America’s understanding of class is the persistent belief—despite all evidence to the contrary—that anyone, with the proper discipline and drive, can move from a lower class to a higher class (p. 13).

For African American men, the stigma of crime is a racial stigma in addition to a social stigma (p.193). It is easier to believe that they are somehow personally inclined towards crime than to admit the structural set-up that makes it nearly impossible for them to avoid it. In one of many examples of “blaming the victim,” an examination of juvenile sentencing reports in Washington State showed that prosecutors described blacks as having “internal personality flaws” causing them to commit crimes but described whites as committing crimes because of external conflicts in their lives (p.115). This bias is sad but not surprising.

Policy Practice

            The New Jim Crow reinforced my belief that racism is alive and thriving. Alexander’s call for changed hearts resonated with my priorities and the NASW Code of Ethics. This was how the book strengthened me. The two ways it changed me were introducing the concept of a racial caste system based on criminal history and softening my opinions on drug use.

            My library includes books on gangs and pimping—two crimes associated largely with minorities. Thus, I had some understanding of the barriers for people with a criminal history—barriers that increase recidivism rates. The social stigma of time in prison causes deep shame and pervasive hopelessness. Yet, I saw these barriers as social problems. After Alexander’s explanations of parole and probation, I agree that the system sets up convicts for failure. Her statistics were shocking: “About as many people were returned to prison for parole violations in 2000 as were admitted to prison in 1980 for all reasons” (p. 93). Alexander also educated me by listing an inexcusable number of rights that are stripped away from prisoners—practices more reminiscent of Les Miserables than imaginable in a modern country. My views on crime and punishment and effective methods for reducing recidivism rates have changed significantly.

            Prior to reading this book, I had no idea of the rates of people who were imprisoned for drug offenses and imagined that most people were imprisoned for violent crimes. Statistics such as a 1,100 percent increase in the number of people incarcerated for drug offenses since 1980 (up to half a million people!) completely changed the way I viewed incarceration (p. 59). Yes, the ravages of addiction on the user and his or her family are tragic and terrifying. Yet, I now know that the overwhelming majority of people in prisons are there not only for distributing drugs but also for simply using them (p.99). The contrast between the War on Drugs and the campaign against drunk driving (arguably a more lethal crime and committed primarily by white males) was insightful (p. 200). Alexander’s description of harsh mandatory sentences for even first time offenders was disturbing and sobering, especially her account of the harsher penalties inflicted for drugs culturally preferred by African Americans. The statistic that marijuana possession accounted for nearly 80% of the arrests in the 1990s is appalling (p. 59)! During the time I was reading this book, the (white) brother of a close friend was arrested and incarcerated for methamphetamine use. His time in prison was brief, and I wondered what the difference in sentencing would have been if he was black in the American South or an urban area. Although I believe The New Jim Crow would have benefited from acknowledging more of the harm committed by drug-funded gangs, this knowledge has made me more sensitive towards people who were convicted for drug use, an understanding I will carry in my social work practice.

Conclusion

            Describing the end of the Civil Rights movement, Alexander discerns: “Instead of a moral crusade, the movement became an almost purely legal crusade” (p. 213). In defaulting to lawyers, who admittedly drove major wins such as Brown v. Board of Education, people lost a sense both of urgency and of personal efficacy. We are still in this lull today and arguably in a worse state since most people do not realize or acknowledge the prevalence of racism. As another challenge, Alexander notes that even civil rights activists have been reluctant to advocate on behalf of criminals (p. 214). She concludes with a call to advocacy rather than concrete solutions. It is my belief that the most effective—though certainly not the most rapid—solution to deconstruct a racial caste system is a firm individual commitment to the value of every human being. As perhaps the most famous civil rights activist entreated: “Love your neighbor as you love yourself.” Alexander would agree with this, and I end with her words:

We should hope not for a colorblind society but instead for a world in which we can see each other fully, learn from each other, and do what we can to respond to each other with love. … That is a goal worth fighting for (p. 231).

---

[1]Throughout the book, Alexander uses the words “black people” and “brown people” to indicate African Americans and Hispanics. She gives no explanation for this habitual choice of phrase.

Intersectionality

Intersectionality

The Thousand Oaks Mall is located in one of the wealthiest areas in the United States and is the family friendly alternative to the high end fashion stores of Beverly Hills, Hollywood, and Malibu existing just a few miles south. The mall campus clearly displays wealth in the elaborate decorations, higher end flooring and other building materials, and outdoor seating areas centered around an elaborate firepit. A few of the stores are out of my price range, but I have been here many times, scouring clearance racks at my favorite stores and indulging in free samples from See’s Candy. On this particular evening, I was here for a social event: happy hour at the Lazy Dog restaurant with some coworkers in honor of my new intern. Although fully abled, my coworkers and I worked at a disability advocacy organization.  Our new intern was born with cerebral palsy – this disability does not affect intellectual functioning but primarily contorts and contracts muscular development. In our intern’s case, her lower body was primarily affected, and she had weak upper body strength, which meant that she used a wheelchair.

It was a Friday night, and the mall parking lot was packed. I was giving the intern a ride and had picked this location not only for its accessibility but also for the lower happy hour prices. Since, I did not have a blue placard for parking in an accessible place, I was forced to park perpendicularly to the only free parking space I could find in order to create a safe space for the intern to transfer from the front seat of my car into her wheelchair. After unfolding the wheelchair and positioning it next to the front passenger seat, I locked one of the breaks and held firmly while the intern transferred. Unfortunately, my neglect of locking the other break coupled with a clumsy transfer created a sudden shift in the wheelchair; the intern landed suddenly and swiftly on the ground in the parking lot, unable to rise to her feet. Although I tried to lift her, she easily outweighed me by fifty pounds and remained stuck on the ground.

Over the next fifteen minutes, the two of us helplessly peered around the parking lot, waiting for someone to stop and help. At least a dozen cars drove by, many slowing down because they wanted the parking spot I was blocking. No one stopped. I had picked this location specifically because it was wheelchair accessible and wealthy enough to be (in my mind) safe for someone with a disability. The minutes eked by slowly and painfully as more and more people stared from their cars without stopping to help. In the past, when I was in trouble or inconvenienced, people usually helped even when I did not want or need their assistance. Now when someone was literally grounded, people just drove by. My companion was white, female, and lower class, but her main distinctions from me were the presence of a wheelchair and an oddly shaped body. These crucial differences seemed to be the reason people persisted in ignoring us. Finally, a woman and her husband came hurrying up. She was a compassionate nurse, and it took all three of us to lift my companion back into her chair. I felt offended and abandoned, but the intern shared that these sorts of experiences had happened to her many times.

These long minutes in the mall parking lot underscored the validity of intersectionality for me. Were one to look at our demographic information, the intern and myself would be remarkably similar. Yet, her societal experience was completely changed by her disability; by associating with her, I too experienced a complete different reaction to distress. Every human being’s identity is comprised of multiple groups, the main ones centering on race, gender, sex, religion, ability, age, and so forth. In “The Complexity of Identity”, Beverly Tatum postulates that each of these groups is either dominate or subordinate within society at large (2013). Yet, our experience in life is never centered on merely one group. Intersectionality maintains that all of these groupings interact together to influence our human experiences and positions in society. We can be simultaneously dominant and subordinate, such as an Arabic male. It is this “overlapping” of “various forms of discrimination” that is the hallmark of intersectionality, in contrast to many social justice movements which isolate the experiences of one particular group and present group experiences as being parallel rather than simultaneous (African American Policy Forum, n.d.).

Intersectionality is a valuable tool for many reasons, not the least of which is to remind us that dominant groups and people in power often secure their power by fomenting contention over subordinate group distinctions—in other words, denying or ignoring the intersectionality of subordinate groups. One example of this is race relations within the United States. In The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in an Era of Colorblindness, Michelle Alexander contends that throughout the history of the United States, powerful white men used race to secure their power, pitting poor white men (“Crackers”) against African-Americans so that they would not ally to overthrow the upper economic class. After slavery was legally outlawed, these powerful men enacted convict laws that essentially re-enslaved freedmen in appalling working conditions. The ruling class assuaged the anger and frustration of poor white men further impoverished by the Civil War by lifting them just slightly above African Americans—the absolute bottom class (2010). Social commentator Audre Lorde offers a similar critique of the 1960’s: “…white America—racist and liberal alike—was more than pleased to sit back as spectator while Black militant fought Black Muslim, Black Nationalist badmouthed the nonviolent, and Black women were told that our only useful position in the Black Power movement was prone” (2007).

Intersectionality also warns us of the dangers of race neutral policy. The concept of “colorblindness” or the irrelevancy of a person's skin color to their treatment and experience as a human is perhaps most famously touted by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in his well-known “I Have a Dream” speech. This speech is taught to most children in public education schools today, which is one indication that overt racism is no longer tolerated in our society. Yet, Alexander repeatedly emphasizes Dr. King’s warning: “…racial caste systems do not require racial hostility or overt bigotry to thrive. They need only racial indifference” (p 14).  Race neutral policy (or “colorblindness”) can easily turn into a default excuse for apathy. People’s hearts are more difficult to change than systems, but lasting change will be accomplished when men treat each other as having inherent value because of their humanity instead of race, gender, or even accomplishments. This is the stance taken by Patricia Williams, who wrote a piece included in Readings for Diversity and Social Justice entitled "The Emperor's New Clothes" in which she posits: "While I do want to underscore that I embrace color-blindness as a legitimate hope for the future, I worry that we tend to enshrine the notion with a kind of utopianism whose naiveté will ensure its elusiveness" (p. 116). In other words, claiming that one does "not see color" and "treats everyone the same" denies the inherent privileges and oppression experienced by different races. 

With its emphasis on structural privilege and oppression, intersectionality is a crucial theory for social justice work. Yet that very emphasis may limit it as a social theory. Human beings certainly institute and experience distinction without experiencing structural dichotomies. Children in particular are excellent at exposing the “otherness” of individuals who do not conform to group norms, even for something as simple as not being aware of a popular television show. Intergroup theory was presented in my undergraduate instruction in Communications as a social theory examining individual behavior within groups (Tajfel & Turner, 1986).  Although it does also focus on stereotypes and prejudices, the broad premise of intergroup theory is that we are all members of hundreds and hundreds of “groups”—a group being simply two or more people who share something in common. During a communication interaction, one group identity generally prevails. Thus, when one attends a church service, the prevailing group would be religious affiliation. When one attends the family function following the church service, the prevailing group is the specific family or perhaps “mom” or “son.”

The largest group is human beings. Then major groups are broken down in order of common identification such as gender, age, ethnicity, religion, profession, politics, etc. Yet, in contrast to intersectionality, groups can be as specific as people who play World of Warcraft or people who like Thai food. When we interact with people, we are usually unconsciously interacting within the context of a handful of group identities. 

Intergroup theory is a helpful complement to intersectionality because it helps us to remember that people are capable of creating connection and distinction based on almost any characteristic, not just the groups which have evolved into structures of privilege and oppression.  Intersectionality benefits from this reminder of the overlapping complexity of human experience.

References

African American Policy Forum. (n.d.). A primer on intersectionality. Columbia Law School.

Alexander, M. (2010). The new Jim Crow: Mass incarceration in an era of colorblindness. The New Press.

Lourde, A. (2007). Sister outsider: Essays & speeches by Audre Lorde. Berkeley. Crossing Press.

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behaviour. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of Intergroup Relations (pp. 7–24). Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall.

Tatum, B. D. (2013). The complexity of identity: “Who am I?” In M. Adams, W. Blumenfield, C. R. Castaneda, H.W. Hackman, M. L. Peters, & X. Zuniga (Eds.), Readings for Diversity and Social Justice 3^rd (p. 5-7). New York: Routledge.

Williams, P. J. (2013). The emperor’s new clothes. In M. Adams, W. Blumenfield, C. R. Castaneda, H.W. Hackman, M. L. Peters, & X. Zuniga (Eds.), Readings for Diversity and Social Justice 3^rd (p. 116-121). New York: Routledge.

A Feminist Critique of Grand Theft Auto V

 A Feminist Critique of Grand Theft Auto V

Grand Theft Auto V, produced by Rockstar Games, is the most recent iteration of the most popular video game series in the world, earning $1 billon within a mere three days of its release in 2013. It has been universally lauded by game critics according to the criteria of their industry (Metacritic, 2013). Yet, even a cursory examination of the game from a feminist perspective reveals deeply troubling content promoting sexism, misogyny, and patriarchy.

Promoting and Upholding Negative Dominant Narratives

Much debate currently exists as to the definition of “feminism.” The author of this paper agrees with the perspective of activist bell hooks who contends: “Feminism is a struggle to end sexist oppression. Its aim is not to benefit solely any specific group of women, any particular race or class of women. It does not privilege women over men” (2013, p. 339). Sexist oppression permeates all layers and levels of Grand Theft Auto V; a complete listing of all examples would exceed the target length of this paper. In summary, the game promotes sexist oppression through the choices it gives to its players, narrow and overly sexualized depictions of female characters, and content such as advertising and talk shows that present women primarily as sexual objects.

The first evidence of oppression is the lack of “playable” female characters. Players can choose one of three male characters as the main protagonist. One of those three is a former pimp (Feminstborgia, 2014). The second level of oppression is the depiction of the few female characters as highly sexualized beings with little to no agency. As one female reviewer for a prominent gamer website summarized:

…it’s deeply frustrating that, while its central and supporting male characters are flawed and complex characters, with a few extremely minor exceptions …, GTA V has little room for women except to portray them as strippers, prostitutes, long-suffering wives, humorless girlfriends and goofy, new-age feminists we’re meant to laugh at (Petit, 2013).

It is worthwhile to note that although the reviewer gave the game an overall 9 points out of a total 10, male fans responded with rage to her protest of the game’s misogyny. Over 20,000 primarily negative comments were left response to her otherwise commonplace review, and a petition was started on www.change.org for her to be fired as a reviewer (Parfitt, 2013).

The third level of sexist oppression is the game’s representation of females in the sex industry. The game depicts women as (often gladly) choosing to engage in live “sexcam” websites, pornography, stripping, and prostitution (Feministborgia, 2013). Within several available strip club scenes, male players are encouraged to break the “no touching” rule and fondle the women’s private areas. If the player manages to accomplish this without being caught by the club security, the game designers ensure that the strippers will respond positively and might even offer to meet the player later for free sex (Feministborgia, 2013). Often throughout the course of their missions, players are offered the opportunity to solicit prostitutes, chose a sex act from a menu, watch the virtual sex, and then choose whether or not to murder the women to regain their money. Murder options include beating, running over victims a car, throwing a grenade, shooting, using a hatchet, etc. Players’ points go up for having sex with a prostitute, although not for murdering her (Cook, 2014). The game also contains countless crude, demeaning, and violent references to women from billboard advertisements to “entertainment,” including a (male) talk show host recommending a husband “drown” his non-submissive wife and a discussion on how women “enjoy” having their sternums crushed during sex (Feministborgia, 2013).

Patriarchy Silences Women

Some reviewers have dismissed feminist critiques of Grand Theft Auto V by noting that the game depicts violence to male and female characters alike. In the words of one British reviewer: “The game’s treatment of women – every female in the game exists solely to be sneered, leered or laughed at – is a real concern until you realise that it applies to the male characters as well” (Edge, 2013). What this and similar reviewers fail to realize is that sexist oppression is not only exerted through presence but also through absence. The lack of positive images can be just as damaging as the presence of negative ones. There is a conspicuous absence of women portrayed in healthy and varied roles: friend, boss, professional, intellectual, artist, etc. Women are not shown as being able to interact with men in nonsexual ways with the exception of a few weak family members who cause familial strife. The women in Grand Theft Auto are not shown to be strong, savvy, capable, or conscientious. Why then is this game so popular? Simple: Grand Theft Auto is a product and a perpetrator of patriarchy, a prevailing cultural system of male dominance. Patriarchal systems allow sexist oppression to flourish with impunity. Patriarchy has many components and manifestations, but author Allen Johnson summarizes it well:

Above all, patriarchal culture is about the core value of control and domination in almost every area of human existence. … To have power over and to be prepared to use it are defined culturally as good and desirable (and characteristically “masculine”, and to lack such power or to be reluctant to use it is seen as weak if not contemptible (and characteristically “feminine”) (2013, p. 334).

Real Life Victims

There are countless examples of women who have been harmed by the sexist oppression. The consistent pay gap between women and men in the United States is just one such significant example. Yet, in light of Grand Theft Auto V’s extensive content regarding the sex industry, it seems prudent for this paper to focus on some of the ugly truths about women in the sex industry. The majority of women in the sex industry have experienced some form of sexual abuse in their past (Farley, 2012). Many feel that they have no other viable income options and maintain that they are trapped into the industry due to circumstances. Most are under the control of a pimp (Farley, 2012), the former occupation of the main character in Grand Theft Auto V. “Pimp” is a common term for what the law terms “trafficker” as in a perpetrator of human trafficking. The Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 established that a person involved in the sex industry due to force, fraud, or coercion is a victim of commercial sexual exploitation or human trafficking, the fastest growing crime in the world today (United States Department of State, 2014). The International Labour Organization estimates that the majority of trafficking situations are labor trafficking, but also gives a best guess that sex trafficking generates a much greater profit than labor trafficking, garnering $99 out of $150 billion dollars gained from this illegal industry (2014). Moreover, victims are usually exploited in multiple forms within the sex industry. For example, a girl or woman who is forced into prostitution is often also filmed for the production of pornography.

Within the United States, most women entered the sex industry when they were minors. Sex traffickers (or “pimps”) usually prey on the most vulnerable: homeless runaways, “throwaways,” and very young children. The average age at which girls are first manipulated and forced into prostitution is a mere 12-14 years old (United States Department of Justice).  Although no one knows the true scale of sex trafficking in the United States, the Federal Bureau of Investigation has declared child sex trafficking a significant crime and maintains ongoing investigations through its Innocence Lost Task Force. In a 3-day operation in 2014, the FBI rescued 168 American children from sex trafficking and arrested 281 traffickers (Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2014). Once these young people turn eighteen, they suffer from the myth that prostitution is a “choice” and a “job” and receive jail time instead of victim services.

 During their exploitation, victims repeatedly undergo severe mental and physical trauma at the hands of their traffickers as well as their buyers, experiencing severe violence, humiliation, PTSD, sexually transmitted diseases, forced abortions, and other atrocities (Lloyd, 2011). A special report by the Child Welfare Council (CWC) found that “68 percent of victims of Commercial Exploitation of Children suffered from chronic health problems and post-traumatic stress disorder and likened the experience of victims to experiences of ‘hostages, prisoners of war, or concentration camp inmates.” The reality of sex trafficking victims is a sharp contrast to the women portrayed in Grand Theft Auto V. Sex trafficking survivor, major activist, and aftercare service provider Rachel Lloyd wisely ties sexual exploitation back into patriarchy:

Commercial sexual exploitation and trafficking are part of the continuum of gender-based violence, not a separate issue. How we view the rights of women and girls, (again particularly those who we view as “less than” based on race and class or some predetermined idea of their “purity”, blamelessness etc.) is absolutely part of the problem when it comes to commercial sexual exploitation and trafficking (2015).

A More Just Version of Grand Theft Auto V

            What would it take to create a more just version of Grand Theft Auto V? Is it possible, or should gamers boycott the franchise altogether? Social commentator Jackson Katz maintains that violence against women is not a women’s issue but a men’s issue, claiming that men’s actions towards women reveal more about men than they do about women (2013). In this vein, New York Times journalist Chris Suellentrop noted the rampant sexism in Grand Theft Auto V and had the chance to lightly query the co-founder of Rockstar games, the franchise creator:

When I asked Mr. Houser if he had thought about the portrayal of women in Rockstar’s games, he said, “Seemingly not as much as I should have.” He added: “These three guys fit with the story we wanted to tell. It would be hard to take one of them and replace him — I mean, I suppose we could have done it, early enough on — with a female character” (2013).

Mr. Houser’s response not only ignores the sexist oppression existing in his games but also denies any social responsibility to fixing the problems. His comments are a confirmation of Katz’s conclusion:

In spite of significant social change in recent decades, men continue to grow up with, and are socialized into, a deeply misogynistic, male-dominated culture, where violence against women—from the subtle to the homicidal—is disturbingly common. It’s normal. And precisely because the mistreatment of women is such a pervasive characteristic of our patriarchal culture, most men, to a greater or lesser extent, have played a role in its perpetuation (2013, p. 342).

In Grand Theft Auto V, men are literally playing a role in the perpetuation of violence against women. A more just version of this game would first create smart, capable, and confident female characters embodying a variety of female experiences. Women would be presented in relational roles that are not primarily sexual or subordinate. Although the depiction of sexist oppression in the game does often echo the unfortunate realities of this world, a more just version would also include emotional, mental, and physical consequences for sexist actions such as legal action, retribution, and—most importantly—decreased capacity for human connectedness. Finally, the game currently presents choices of whether or not to negatively engage with women in the sex industry. It should include choices of positively engaging with women such as befriending them without sexual contact, asking their advice or opinions, or even ascertaining whether or not they are under the control of a trafficker. In these ways, Grand Theft Auto V could move our culture towards a more egalitarian interaction between genders instead of normalizing sexist oppression.

References

California Child Welfare Council. (2013). Prevalence of commercially sexually exploited children. Retrieved from http://www.chhs.ca.gov/CWCDOC/CSEC%20Fact%20Sheet%20-%201.pdf

Cook, J. (2014, November 18). The New 'Grand Theft Auto' Lets You Have Realistic Sex With Prostitutes. Retrieved February 4, 2015, from http://www.businessinsider.com/grand-theft-auto-features-first-person-sex-with-prostitutes-2014-11 

Edge Online. (2013, September 16). Grand Theft Auto Review (Web log post). Retrieved from http://www.edge-online.com/reviews/grand-theft-auto-v-review/

Farley, M. & Butler, E. (2012). Prostitution and trafficking – Quick facts. Online. Retrieved from http://www.prostitutionresearch.com/Prostitution%20Quick%20Facts%2012-21-12.pdf

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2014). Operation cross country: rescuing victims of child sex trafficking. Retrieved from http://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2014/june/operation-cross-country/operation-cross-country

Feministborgia. (2013, October 19). Grand Theft Auto V –A feminist’s review (Web log post). Retrieved from https://feministborgia.wordpress.com/2013/10/19/grand-theft-auto-v-a-feminists-review/

Hooks. B. (2013). Feminism: A movement to end sexist oppression. In M. Adams, W. Blumenfield, C. R. Castaneda, H.W. Hackman, M. L. Peters, & X. Zuniga (Eds.), Readings for Diversity and Social Justice 3^rd (p. 337-339). New York: Routledge.

International Labour Office. (2014). Profits and poverty: the economics of forced labour. Geneva: Author.

Johnson, A.G. (2013). Patriarchy, the system: An it, not a he, a them, or an us. In M. Adams, W. Blumenfield, C. R. Castaneda, H.W. Hackman, M. L. Peters, & X. Zuniga (Eds.), Readings for Diversity and Social Justice 3^rd (p. 332-337). New York: Routledge.

Katz, J. (2013). Violence against women is a men’s issue. In M. Adams, W. Blumenfield, C. R. Castaneda, H.W. Hackman, M. L. Peters, & X. Zuniga (Eds.), Readings for Diversity and Social Justice 3^rd (p. 340-343). New York: Routledge.

Lloyd, R. (2011). Girls like us: Fighting for a world where girls are not for sale, an activist finds her calling and heals herself. New York: HarperCollins.

Look Different. (2015, January 30). This month is human trafficking awareness month. Retrieved February 4, 2015, from http://lookdifferentmtv.tumblr.com/post/109615431330/this-month-is-human-trafficking-awareness-month 

Metacritic. (2013). Grand Theft Auto V (Web review). Retrieved from http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-4/grand-theft-auto-v

Parfitt, B. (2013, September 16). Gamers petition for sacking of GameSpot writer who criticised GTAV for misogyny (Web log post). Retrieved from http://www.mcvuk.com/news/read/gamers-petition-for-sacking-of-gamespot-writer-who-criticised-gtav-for-misogyny/0121238

Petit, C. (2013, September 16). City of angels and demons (Web log post). Retrieved from http://www.gamespot.com/reviews/grand-theft-auto-v-review/1900-6414475/

Suellentrop, C. (2013, September 16). Grand Theft Auto V is a return to the comedy of violence. New York Times. Retrieved from www.nytimes.com

Walker, K, & California Child Welfare Council (2013). Ending the commercial sexual exploitation of children: A call for multi-system collaboration in California. Child Welfare Council. 100 p.

United States Department of State. (2014). Trafficking in persons report. Washington, DC: Author.