Deserving Victims?: Sexual Status and the Social Construction of Violence

Abstract

Theoretical understanding of the meaning of the term violence is underdeveloped. This paper examines the question of how violence to the person is socially defined, and in particular how understandings of violence are both gendered and sexualised. It highlights how victim characteristics, as well as the social and interactional contexts in which violence occurs, influence interpretative frameworks, with specific reference to the binary distinction between the public and private and to notions of culpability and victimisation. This entails a consideration of the social meanings which constitute notions of a 'person' with a 'right to life' and occupation of 'public space.' The importance of the victim/perpetrator dichotomy in theorising violence is also considered. These themes and issues are examined in relation to a relatively new area of study; the case example of public violence towards lesbians and gay men.

The Unknown Victims: Hegemonic Masculinity, Masculinities, and Male Sexual Victimisation

“…This suggests that power flows through state and voluntary organisations, meaning that they may unconsciously label male rape victims as 'undeserving' or as not 'real' victims, not worthy of protection and adequate treatment. Though men are more likely to be victims of interpersonal violence (Richardson and May 1999), the notion of 'undeserving' or not 'real' rape victims prevails because male rape victims (unconsciously) undermine and disrupt the power and authority of the gender order. This notion of 'undeserving' or not 'real' rape victims is echoed in the following quotes:…”

Exception to Excess: Tactical Use of the Law by Outgroups in Bias Crime Legislation

“…In turn, Webster's spatial challenge to power relations rendered violence a legitimate response that confirmed his discursive death. Given the enduring “ideological and normative power” of the public‐private binary in Western society (Cooper 1993, quoted in Richardson and May 1999, 321), the act of nudity in public space—a condition reserved for the private domain—registered Webster's performance as transgressive. Coupled with the naturalization of heterosexuality in public space, the appearance of a transgressive sexual identity was therefore inappropriate and provocative (Bell 1995; Valentine 1996).…”

Heterosexist Ambivalence and Heterocentric Norms: Drinking in Intergroup Discomfort

“…Several other researchers have also noted that the attributes of heterosexuals are also often prescribed for all (cf. Bricknell, 2000;Phelan, 2001;Richardson & May, 1999;Valentine, 1993;Warner, 1999). Such prescriptions create double binds between the adoption of heterosexual attributes and the full enactment of identity for lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons.…”

“…Sociologists Richardson and May (1999) refer to 'the naturalization of heterosexual norms in public' to describe dynamics such as these in which general categories such as 'society' or 'the public' are conflated with the particulars of heterosexual experience. Businesses that cater to lesbian and gay clientele (e.g.…”