å Sunday, April 23rd, 2017

Most abusive individuals make the wrong choices. By verbally and or physically attacking an individual. Some individuals believe any aggressive actions toward their spouse is a family matter. They assume husband wife; girlfriend boyfriend and personal relationships are private problems. Any individual with such an attitude about forcefully harming another person has committed a crime. Their aggressive behavior is no longer a private incident. The domestic occurrence quickly becomes an awkward situation whereas an individual finds himself entangled with the courts. Any assault incident in no longer in the private sphere its governed by the judicial system therefore it’s a public matter. The judicial institution has clear laws about violence against women. The discipline imposed upon individuals can produce an individual who follows the normal acceptable positive behavior. Or the punitive actions against a batterer can be a hindrance whereas the individual shifts further into deviant behavior patterns.
Most men who are drawn into the judicial system because their ideas about striking women are linked to an assumed belief of entitlement. Some men associate marriage, culture and masculinity with a special liberty to handle their relationship troubles by whatever manner they chose. In addition, some men ancient traditional customs influenced their negative attitude towards women. For instance, abusive acts towards a woman was acceptable in some households. In other words, men complained about a women promiscuity so he hit her.
Multiple men entangled with the judicial system believed they were emasculated, humiliated and left powerless. They were confronted with the truth about their conduct and their explanation fell on death ears within the judicial system. Some individuals were removed from their household, family, society. To put an end to domestic violence many perpetrators were transported to jail. The judicial institution reinforced their intolerance for domestic violence. Perpetrators were forced to take anger management classes, although they resisted. Perpetrators were educated. They were given an opportunity to change. Most refused anger management courses. The judicial institution had the power to transform individuals. Both women and men conformed. Men were alienated from their family therefore they were left feeling feminized. The women were more independent depending on how much support they received from social programs. A victim’s autonomy was created from a tragic situation. The women were temporarily removed from their previous dependency on men. They were either self-governed or closely surveilled by social services. Women advocates and counselors conversed with multiple women about their rights. The man and the women appeared to have reversed roles. The women became head of the house, empowerment. Under close supervision from the courts the women coerced into testifying. She must conform to the judicial rules, she must give her testimony in the courts. Some victims oppose the legal demands yet they go along with the required governed procedure.
Individuals identity has shifted in multiple ways. The judicial institution has made either a positive law abiding citizen. Or a deviant individual who commits the same sort of crime again. All race, class and Both man and women from all different racial background and class has been affected by the constraints of judicial institution. The perpetrators and victims are different subjects. Their past identity has been extensively shattered. For instant, some women would have never imagined being the mother and the father to their child after the father was removed from the household. Some men could have never fathomed his wife would have testified against him. The making of a new identity.

Sally Engle Merry describes the subjective “self” as constantly changing and evolving. We hold multiple different identities at any given moment, and sometimes those identities conflict. Human life is a process of trying on and keeping or shedding different subjectivities. The ability for a woman to take action against an abusive spouse, and to even consider taking on a new legal subjectivity, as an individual with rights, shows that there has been a shift in the way we look at the public and private spheres, and masculinity. However, the way the attempts at this rights-based subjectivity plays out makes evident how far we still have to go in terms of equality. Taking on a legal subjectivity, where the source of her identity is the state, is a big shift for a woman. It will likely be in conflict with powerful subjectivities that are supported by her family and community, for example mother.

Merry describes the way the legal system produces subjectivities as being similar to the way Judith Butler describes gender – it’s the performance that creates it. The interaction with the law creates new modes of power, which produces new subjectivities. I’m frankly having trouble finding the words to explain what Merry was saying here, but I think I understand it. The law produces the the subject, but then it is through the interaction with the law that that subjectivity is confirmed, is I believe what she is getting at.

Merry brings up gender because gender plays so strongly into a person’s legal subjectivity. Gender effects the way a person is treated when calling on law enforcement for help, and as Merry has proven through her study, interactions from that moment forward shape a woman’s subjectivity legal identity as a rights-bearing person. The way law enforcement speaks to her, how seriously her claim is taken, punishment for the offender, whether or not the offender is arrested, all of these things impact the woman’s ability to accept the new subjectivity. Unfortunately gender plays an even stronger role, a woman is not truly a victim in the eyes of the law unless she is practically a perfect person. She can never have done drugs, fought back, or endangered her children in any way. The taking on of the new legal subjectivity also generates a lot of pushback typically, not just from law enforcement but from people in her personal life, especially the man who’s power is challenged.

In the article “Rights Talk and the Experience of Law” Sally Merry argues that rights are adopted by their identity mostly gender identity. “Gender is an identity which is performatively constituted by expressions” (351). Each gender rights can also be identified by encounters with the police, courts, judges and etc. she talks heavily about battered women and how they should speak up about their violent relationships to receive help. The human rights movement depends on the government to comply with the victims to advocate for the right to help these batter women. The battered women movement relies on criminal justice that encourage women to see their violations as a form of a crime and seek help from the legal system. But some battered women are slow to take action because they are scared of what might happen with their husbands. They are afraid that their husbands may kill them if they take them to court. So women are so afraid that they may back down and drop all charges or they may not want to testify against their husbands. They also fear the shift in subjectivity in the law. They may be called or seen differently by the law. By taking in these rights requires an identity change between both partners. The women will been seen as self protected by the state and the man will be seen as a criminal and controlled by the state.

All of the interactions with law can take on a new identity and sometimes favor the gender. A male police officer may fail to arrest a man for abuse because he may not think batter is something serious. This may discourage women of feeling like they have any rights. So the women must assert themselves so they can have some rights and not just be seen as battered women. There was an increase in cases of men beating on their wives which lead to an increase in seeking help from the law. Women that have been batter came together to help one another and develop a shelter to supper battered women.

Women taking actions by going to the law is being looked at as an exploration. Trying the system and hoping it won’t fail them. By going to the law these women must know the risks; a hostile and angry partner, and it Amy challenge the mans masculinity. When a women calls the police or press’s charges it opposes the power of his masculinity. These women are conflicted by using their rights to come forward about their violations or keeping their mouth shut and being a good wife. Unfortunately they can’t do both.

Some the the women Merry interviewed reported fears and anxieties about going to the courts. Some experienced hesitation for a long time before they went to court. After some women went to court they found the legal system supportive. When these women went to court they slowly stated to their dignity back and feel proud.

The men also was interviewed and they expressed that they felt angry and humiliated. Some felt that it was only one sided and everyone in the court was in the women side. Some wanted to know after so long of abuse their wives wanted to speak up now and that their behavior was not serious at all. Others found it to be life changing and very helpful they started to support their wives.

I think Merry means that identity can be produced through the legal system. For men they can been seen as being humiliated and a criminal. And for women they can been seen as a source of the humiliation and a battered women.

In “Rights Talk and the Experience of Law: Implementing Women’s Human Rights to Protection from Violence”, Sally Engle Merry examines how one begins to see their problems within the framework of human rights. Focusing on gender-based violence in romantic and familial relationships, Merry and her assistants interview a number of women and men on their experiences with law enforcement, the judicial system, and advocacy groups to illustrate how these interactions bring awareness, or does not, to their consciousness of human rights and their understanding of how rights are applicable to the violence they have experienced (or perpetrated).

The interviews take place in Hilo Hawai’i in the early 1990s, across a broad range of ethnicities but mostly within a lower rung of economic class. They find that the interactions with law enforcement and the judicial system greatly affect the victims’ ability to look at their selves and their situations through the lens of human rights. For example, in many cases, the police officers responding to domestic violence cases were either chummy with the attacker or dismissed the women’s complaints. The result was the woman believing that they were not entitled to protection. On the other hand, many of the judges in the examples given were supportive of the women, resulting in the women developing a sense of self which acknowledged that they were due protection under the umbrella of human rights.

While the above may seem like common sense – it seems evident to me that one’s interactions with law enforcement and the judicial system will affect how one views themselves in relation to the law and rights – Merry’s research and essay is quite interesting, as it is yet another example of the public versus private sphere and how the division affects the rights of women. Merry speaks to the women developing a new sense of self, one that is not necessarily defined by their relationships with their partners or families, rather one that is defined as a subject of the state, one that is owed protection. This transition moves the conversation around gender-based violence in the home from the private domain into the public domain, allowing not only visibility but protection.

Merry does touch on the economics of both the victims and the attackers throughout her paper and spends a small paragraph on how those with the resources have different experiences. It would be interesting to investigate this further. On the one hand, one may think that having additional resources would allow victims easier access to lawyers and assistance. On the other, Merry makes a point of recognizing that many of these cases remain private due to the financial resources on both sides. Given that the consciousness of rights is tied to the private/public sphere division, it would be rather interesting to further investigate the impact of keeping these cases private has on the women’s ability to view their situation through the lens of human rights.

Toni Mitchell

Assign 9

The history of rights shows that the struggle for the recognition of women’s rights was difficult enough and the recognition of the right of women to a life without gender violence has been even more difficult. With a perspective based in a socio-legal and critical approach, Sally Engle Merry defends the recognition of the right of women to a life free of gender violence must be seen as a conquest of the feminist movement and women’s organizations.  It was the struggle of the feminist movement which provided the catalyst for the recognition of women’s rights and the specific right of women to a ‘healthy’ life free of gender violence and to protection against such violence. The right of women to a life free from gender-based violence cannot be fully realized without the implementation of this right at the international and the local level. The implementation of rights and the existence of social movements involved with the right to a life free from gender violence is decisive to transforms the demands for protection from violence and its eradication to be see not as a question of mercy, but as a question of justice; and putting the individual experiences of gender violence victims within a wider framework from which the abuse can be considered as a social problem.

Throughout the article,“Rights Talk and the experience of Law: Implementing Women’s Human Rights to Protection from Violence” , Merry interviews a number women known to society as a victim of domestic violence. She uses the issues concerning the bettering of women to model the way law acts to change social behavior. she examines examines various forms of intervention which have been developed in the US and globally for diminishing violence against women. She further discusses how they have globalized, focusing in particular on the role of the international human rights movement in defining gender-based violence as a human rights abuse.

From my point of view, those wishing to make a human rights claim on a violation of  reproductive rights, must use the terminology of other mainstream rights to do so. although this may appear as something difficult for a woman to do, Merry argues that “Human rights are difficult for individuals to adopt as a self-definition in the absence of institutions that will take these rights seriously.” Another thing that caught my attention is the usage of  the term victim. Why is it that when authorities are involved, women

Sally Engle Merry’s essay, “Rights Talk and the Experience of Law: Implementing Women’s Human Rights to Protection from Violence,” attempts to examine the ways in which people who did not necessarily previously see themselves as entitled to rights (civil, human, or any other) come to see themselves as such. To make the argument, Merry employs her research with battered women (and abusers) in Hilo, Hawai’i in the 90s and concludes that this transition occurs within and is based upon an individual’s interaction with the legal system – or, some might say, the state.

Merry’s interviews seem to show that a battered woman’s experiences, from the time she calls for legal intervention to put a stop to the abuse to her interactions with court officials and then long-term services to prevent further abuse, are what begin to shape her (usually) new notion that she should have autonomy (bodily and otherwise) and is entitled to a set of rights to protect and preserve that autonomy. Many of the women interviewed experienced police officers displaying more sympathy towards the abusers than towards them. Some of them even described the police as “cold” and entirely unsympathetic to their horrible ordeals. This experience can lead to what she discusses in the introduction of her essay – many women dropping their initial complaints and refusing to cooperate with law enforcement.

Centrally, what she seems to be putting forward, however, is that positive interactions with the court system can help women to develop a strong sense of their rights. The ideal conditions, one imagines, begin with sympathetic police officers who recognize the dangers that women in abusive relationships face and immediately implement ways to protect the woman and keep her separated from her abuser. Then, a sympathetic Judge who understands the power dynamic and the influence that he or she can play within it to get the abuser to stop his behavior (in at least one of the interviews, a woman described being quite satisfied with a Judge’s lecture to her abuser, but less impressed by the police’s actions or his experience in the jail system). Finally, and what seems to be a crucial component, is the long-term follow up preventative measures of ATV classes that both partners attend.

So, when all the components seem to come into place, a battered woman’s identity can shift from seeing themselves as someone who must tolerate abuse to someone who has rights AND can implement those rights. But, evidence based on Merry’s interviews shows that these experiences can vary quite a bit and, thus, if a woman’s rights are not taken seriously by the state (i.e. the legal system), then there is no guarantee, really, of a woman understanding her identity as entitled to rights.