Abstract:This article uses the empirical fact of woman-to-woman rape as a lens to critique Sharon Marcus's ''Fighting Bodies, Fighting Words: A Theory and Politics of Rape Prevention.'' To the extent that any theory forecloses this fact, we can assume it is erroneous. While Marcus's work is promising in its intention to deconstruct binary views of gender, it largely reiterates the very dualism it seeks to destabilize. I explore two different deconstructive arguments that can be drawn from the piece, each of which has b… Show more
“…If one thing is clear, it is that there exists no easy answer to the question of how best to frame the problem of sexual violence. I have elsewhere suggested integrating the ways both gender normativity and gender transgression occur in sexual violence by drawing on Butler’s theory of performativity (Butler, 1999; Malinen, 2012). While seeing the strategic and practical value of each perspective elaborated above, I continue to view the performative approach as an ideal framework for understanding the social problem of sexual assault.…”
Although still less recognized than man-to-woman sexual assault, awareness of woman-to-woman sexual assault has grown sufficiently over the past three decades that we should no longer speak of its discursive emergence as the breaking of hitherto uninterrupted silence. This article begins the project of exploring and comparing discourses used to frame this phenomenon. Based on a situational analysis of interviews with service providers who had experience supporting survivors of woman-to-woman sexual assault, this text presents three discourses used to think about this form of violence: all violence is men's violence, violence is a choice, and nonviolence is learned. Each discourse is characterized by a specific relationship between sexual violence, free will/determinism, and gender and by attendant rules for what can and cannot be said. As such, each communicates ideological commitments, which reflect and sustain specific approaches to antisexual violence work. Each seeks to negotiate a sociopolitical context of gender-based oppression and sexuality-based oppression that includes the risks and realities of silencing and recuperation of survivor speech. The objective of this article is to enable service provider reflection about the implications of diverse discourses used to frame woman-to-woman sexual assault and to discourage naturalization of any given approach.
“…If one thing is clear, it is that there exists no easy answer to the question of how best to frame the problem of sexual violence. I have elsewhere suggested integrating the ways both gender normativity and gender transgression occur in sexual violence by drawing on Butler’s theory of performativity (Butler, 1999; Malinen, 2012). While seeing the strategic and practical value of each perspective elaborated above, I continue to view the performative approach as an ideal framework for understanding the social problem of sexual assault.…”
Although still less recognized than man-to-woman sexual assault, awareness of woman-to-woman sexual assault has grown sufficiently over the past three decades that we should no longer speak of its discursive emergence as the breaking of hitherto uninterrupted silence. This article begins the project of exploring and comparing discourses used to frame this phenomenon. Based on a situational analysis of interviews with service providers who had experience supporting survivors of woman-to-woman sexual assault, this text presents three discourses used to think about this form of violence: all violence is men's violence, violence is a choice, and nonviolence is learned. Each discourse is characterized by a specific relationship between sexual violence, free will/determinism, and gender and by attendant rules for what can and cannot be said. As such, each communicates ideological commitments, which reflect and sustain specific approaches to antisexual violence work. Each seeks to negotiate a sociopolitical context of gender-based oppression and sexuality-based oppression that includes the risks and realities of silencing and recuperation of survivor speech. The objective of this article is to enable service provider reflection about the implications of diverse discourses used to frame woman-to-woman sexual assault and to discourage naturalization of any given approach.
“…Below is her narrative about her experience of sexual coercion by her girlfriend, which might challenge the heteronormative foundation of this binary. As previous studies have noted (Kramer 2015;Malinen 2013), same-sex sexual violence has disrupted the heteronormative assumptions behind the binary of men as desiring and women as non-sexual. Same-sex sexual violence is difficult to comprehend through this binary (Braun et al 2009;Gilroy and Carroll 2009), such as the confusion among police officers regarding whom to arrest when they arrived at a scene after receiving a report of same-sex domestic violence (Knauer 1999).…”
Section: 'Why It Has To Be Her Who Forced Me?:' Women and Same-sex Sexual Violencementioning
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
“…These are powerful examples of how gendered discourses structuring the conventions and availability of resources exclude women's victims. While this is the most obvious form of denial structuring the male aggressor/female victim paradigm (Malinen , ), exclusion of woman aggressors from treatment programs is just as necessary to its maintenance. Social worker Sandra describes one way female juvenile sex offenders are simultaneously excluded from VAWS discourse and the group therapy she notes is the “most effective methodology” for their treatment: …”
Section: Isolation From the Violence Against Women Subworldmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, sexual assault may be defined to include violence committed by persons of any gender against persons of any gender, but explained as enabled by and perpetuating the domination of women. In this way, gender‐transgressive sexual assault is made to appear illogical and indeed impossible (Malinen ). Further, staff of VAWS organizations frequently display differing levels of openness to gender‐transgressive survivors.…”
Section: Support From the Anti‐violence Project Subworldmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Despite discursive commonalities, the VAWS and the AVPS are distinguished by how gender and interpersonal violence interact in their discourses and hence their practices. The VAWS presumes a male aggressor and female victim, and so is equipped to address incidents that conform to that vision, which I refer to as “gender paradigmatic” (Malinen , ). While my research focuses on woman‐to‐woman sexual assault, many insights here apply just as well to survivors of other non‐paradigmatic, or “gender transgressive” (ibid.…”
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
