CULTURE CHANGE

[Click Here for Series Announcements]

For our final Module, we will look at culture change. Primarily, we are interested in your thoughts, ideas, and impressions about how to instigate real societal change. Each teaching fellow has written a short essay about what they deem most important as a focus for culture change; we would like each of you to do the same.

Not Just A Woman's Issue -- Tashia Peterson

Culture Change -- Claire Prestel

Cultural Change: One Baby Step At A Time -- Jessica Dubin

Culture Change -- Taryn Fielder

"A Wasteland of One's Own" -- Rebecca Hulse

Culture Change -- Jamie Kohen

What Are Your Thoughts About Culture Change?


NOT JUST A WOMAN'S ISSUE

by Tashia Peterson

Too often the distinction between sex and gender is not appreciated. While women and men are undoubtedly physically different, gender refers to the socially determined roles and relationships men and women are "supposed" to adopt. In the first module we looked at the language of violence and how this contrasts with the more personal language that women are "trained" to speak. Must women learn to use this language of violence to even things out and get ahead or can both sexes learn instead to speak another language, one of mutual respect, dignity and equality? This issue of violence against women is not merely a woman's issue. For too long we have heard only women talk about the inequality and subordination. Where do the men stand on this issue? There are two parties to this problem and as long as only one fights the battle, there can be no real victory.

Women, who have made much progress outside the home still return to find they must perform the "second shift", where they are breadwinner by day and homemaker after working hours. To truly alter this balance, both men and women are going to have to rock the boat and reevaluate these attitudes that we have towards the issue of gender. It is time that discussions on the issue of violence against women take on a new approach. An approach that calls on both men and women to engage in meaningful discussion of how these attitudes and preconceptions can be changed. Questions of law and enforcement are meaningless if at the crux of it, men still believe themselves superior to women and issues that concern women are still placed last on the agenda.

One development that I find very positive and would like to see grow into a movement is the emergence of men's groups that study the issue of violence against women and the need to reinvent what it means to be a man. These groups in essence, challenge all men to question what it really means to get involved and fight this issue of violence against women. These groups are an important part of the ongoing process of breaking a belief system that for too long has indirectly supported a tolerance towards the issue of violence against women.

The following are links to a few organizations established by men who want to do something about this culture of violence:


Culture Change

by Claire Prestel

 

My ideas about this class don't revolve around a cohesive theme. I believe - perhaps this just happens to be what I'm interested in - that violence against women has a lot to do with our perception of female sexuality. That violence against women so often takes the form of rape cannot be a coincidence - we treat female sexuality as a commodity, as up for grabs, as something women do not control or possess themselves. Instead of thinking of it as belonging to women, society as a whole takes on some sort of strange responsbility for women's sex, as if it's a public good alienated from women themselves. And once separated from women themselves, sex is left free to associate with other cultural commodities, themes and products - like violence. Violence is sexualized and sex becomes violence. Rape.

Of course in the home, violence comes as both sex and standard physical abuse. One can only assume that for an abusive partner who perhaps already feels entitled to sex or feels he can get sex, the violence cannot be contained within rape alone but must expand to fill all of the relationship. And can it also be that once a woman has given away sex by being married, has presumably given it away to her husband - has taken it out of the public domain and into the private, she has simply become less valuable to society and to her individual partner? Once she has given away the one commodity she had to offer, society doesn't care about her and her husband or boyfriend is left free to do what he wants. And somehow, to him, her giving him sex means she can be beaten because everyone knows the one thing she had to give is gone.

These are vague and not particularly inventive theories. I don't have much personal experience to go on or with which to test them. I've never been raped or assaulted. My experience of violence against women is as an ever-present threat. I think of it when I don't walk home alone or when I check beneath my car before I get in. I am fortunate in that I don't have to deal with the effects of violence every day in any sort of real, physical way. Instead I am able to simply think about it. And because no actual violence is forcing itself to prominence in my mind, I am able to think of violence as just one part of the larger problem of sexism.

The following are three recent anecdotes that have to do with sexism and somehow with violence against women. I'm not sure how or if they fit together but would appreciate suggestions or reactions to any and all.

ONE.

A few days ago at a small dinner party, a friend was explaining why she didn't play any sports at her college. She started by explaining that the sports teams are single-sex. Then she smiled, said she was about to say something "politically incorrect," and (to a group of 3 boys and 4 girls) finished by explaining that she "doesn't really like girls anyway." Everyone started to laugh a bit but not uncomfortably. Then the speaker said something about having girls as friends, knowing girls she likes personally, but just not liking girls in general; sports teams of only girls dissolve into cattiness, she said.

I have heard other women say this before. In fact, one of the most stylish girls I went to school with wrote a whole article in a weekly campus newspaper about not liking like girls.

Mostly these statements make me sad. Why is it that we would never hear a boy or man saying this about other boys or men? [And, of course, if we heard a girl saying "Oh, I just don't really like boys" we would assume either that the speaker was to be pitied (maybe she'd had some sort of bad experience with a boy and had become embittered) or that she was gay].

More importantly, why is a statement like this conversationally rewarded - why do people react as if the speaker has just said something great and exciting? Why is it seen as somehow subversive? Why do people smile and laugh; why don't they feel uncomfortable like they would if someone made such a statement about people of a certain race or religion? And why is it women who feel so comfortable saying these things about other women? Where did they learn not to like girls? And why is it okay to say something like this when there are other women or girls around?- Women you consider your friends. From where does such self-hatred come?

I don't know what this has to do with violence against women. But I think it does have something to do with taking women (and girls) seriously. If no one likes them, who's going to listen to them? And if women don't even like girls, who will defend them and stand up for them? And is it any wonder that if it is considered "subersive" and exciting to say such a thing in a group of super-liberal, super-educated young people, that we live in a society that devalues women and girls so systematically?

TWO.

Today in my criminal law class, our professor was making an important theoretical point when he chose to cite another law professor who has done important and related work: Catharine MacKinnon. As soon as he said her name, students in the class actually groaned aloud. I'd never heard anything like it in our class, or any class (at least not since my freshman undergrad government course when the teaching fellow presented MacKinnon in under 5 minutes, actually dismissed her as "crazy" and cut off any and all discussion).

My criminal law professor is liberal, and I know many people in our class disagree with him almost daily. But why was it only this statement that elicited groans? What is it about this that makes everyone react so strongly? And why is it that the conservatives in our class are suddenly groaning, vocalizing their disrespect for MacKinnon and their commitment to . . . what? pornography? Class conservatives suddenly became vocal 1st Amendment defenders? MacKinnon must be powerful, no?

THREE.

When I started to work on this class I had a conversation with my boyfriend about it. We talked specifically about rape and about feminist notions of consent. It became clear that he believes feminism poses a real threat to romance; that somehow his interactions with women - say at bars or parties or even when dating - have been somehow changed and interfered with, that he operates under some sort of cloud of fear. This idea isn't new or uncommon - lots of people believe sexual harassment law has destroyed the workplace and that if feminists had their way no one would have sex without signing a consent form. I know there are all types of stories that circulate about workplace discomfort and crazy campuses where feminists have taken control. And I can't prove that these stories are apocryphal, but it's just so hard for me to believe them and so hard for me to take seriously the concerns expressed by even my boyfriend. Maybe I'm alone, but I just haven't noticed the collapse of either workplace or sexual relations.

No one is really talking about consent forms. And what wonderful romantic and always comfortable world used to exist anyway? In that world, women weren't even in the workplace and raping your wife wasn't a crime. Where did this idea come from that feminists want to kill romance? Or that women will always cry rape in these oft-described ambiguous situations where consent isn't clear and where innocent young men are being dragged off to jail as rapists? None of the men and boys I've ever talked to who seem to have accepted this rhetoric can point to a single incident in their lives of such ambiguous consent. They all claim to be afraid of being called rapists but they can't think of a single difficulty they've ever had. And if feminists have imposed anything on them, it is only that at some point they ask a woman if she actually wants to have sex.

Is that what everyone is afraid of? That one sentence, one question. The one minute it takes someone to ask if you actually want to have sex? I've never had sex with someone who didn't ask first, at least in some way, or to whom I didn't somehow clearly express consent. In fact, I often find that moment when the question is asked to be the most romantic. It means that my boyfriend really wants to have sex with me, and it makes me feel good. Am I alone?


Cultural Change: One Baby Step at a Time

By Jessica Dubin

I have a difficult time imagining broad culture change.  Perhaps I am a pessimist, but talk of altering gender socialization and improving education about violence against women strikes me as very far from our grasp.  When our Supreme Court won't recognize that a state has a duty to protect people from violence and appears ready to strike down a law that would give people a civil right to be free from gender-motivated violence, how can we expect citizens to believe that violence against women is inherently wrong?  I wonder if it is possible to change our culture before the highest court of our country is ready to acknowledge that violence against women and children is unacceptable.  Can we produce a cultural change that would in turn make the Court reconsider its position, or must the Court first declare a change and then Americans will respond?  I don't know the answers to these questions, and they leave me feeling frustrated and stupid. 

So, instead of debating the possibilities of large-scale social change in my Ivory Tower, I try to do small things that may make a difference in a few people's lives.  I volunteer at a rape crisis center, where I have the opportunity to make police and prosecutors question their biases about rape victims and to help women survive their ordeals.  I participate in a peer education group about teen dating violence and date rape, which gives me the chance to share my views on these issues with many high school and college students.  I work at a Legal Services Center, where I help assist poor women in getting divorces from their abusive husbands.  I intern at a District Attorney's office, where I work on domestic violence and child sexual abuse cases.  And perhaps most importantly, I try never to miss an opportunity to engage a friend, acquaintance, professor or boss in a discussion about violence against women.  If I can open the eyes of at least one person a month to the enormous problem of gender violence, I feel as if I have done something worthwhile.  The other day, a woman came to my door seeking donations for an environmental charity.  I explained to her that although I care about the environment, given my finite amount of resources, I only give money to rape crisis centers and domestic violence shelters.  We spent about fifteen minutes talking about the urgency of each of our causes - I learned a lot more about the environment, and I hope she would say the same about violence against women.

So, I see myself as perhaps changing culture one baby step at a time.  I look forward to hearing your ideas about how it's possible to take bigger steps. 


          

Culture Change

By Taryn Dayne Fielder

Due to my connection with the International Issues Module and my education in International Law and Human Rights, I approach this module from a more international perspective than perhaps some of the other Teaching Fellows will.

Culture change in the international realm is characterized by a number of exciting initiatives and movements.  International law, human rights, and increased inter-state cooperation have all led to greater recognition and action.  Increased communication is one of the exciting advances that has created new opportunities and forums within the context of women's rights.  As we have become increasingly connected to and with other states, cultures, and peoples, the free flow of information has benefited the human rights movement generally and the women's rights movement particularly.

The media has played an unquestionably important role in shedding light on some of the most egregious and outrageous abuses of human rights, especially rights of women to be free from violence.  But the media also forces our attention away from some of the most pressing issues of entrenched violence by sensationalizing other issues and areas of the world.  Not to suggest that problems such as female genital mutilation, trafficking of girl children, and female infanticide are not issues that deserve sensational media attention, but focusing to intently on these problems pulls our attention from everyday issues that occur across the globe and perpetuate these outlandish expressions of violence against women.

We can begin to deal effectively with outrageous problems until we have come to some sort of universal understanding of what violence against women truly is.  Because cultural identity and moral relativism play such a heated role in the debates surrounding many women's issues, we often lose sight of the main goal- to develop women's sense of self-worth; to bring respect and honor to the roles of mother, daughter, and wife; and to insure that women have adequate opportunities for choice and that decisions are not forced upon them.  Although these ideals may seem just as far from universal acceptance as some traditionally upheld cultural practices, these ideals help form a more acceptable basis from where women's rights movements can begin to take shape and mold perceptions.

It is important to start with perceptions because so much of what we attribute to violence against women happens as a result of deeply-seeded cultural and social biases that are inscribed upon people from the day that they are born.  Sexual violence happens as a result of misconceptions about men's relationships to women, and the societal perpetuation of those misconceptions lends itself to a vicious cycle that can only be broken down through concentrated efforts to change social perceptions.  Obviously the key to achieving this goal is education.  Efforts at educating children and the general public must be observed, analyzed, criticized, and ultimately changed with the goal of establishing equality among the sexes firmly impressing upon the process.

This is a process that we can witness happening all around us on a daily basis and realize the fruits of nearly as often.  With the explosion of the internet, access to information has been exceptionally benefited.  As technology spreads across the planet, it results in increased need for, ironically enough, man-power that can no longer be produced by men alone, but requires the help of capable and intelligent women.  As education becomes more widespread and illiteracy rates continue to fall, people begin to realize the importance of treating all human beings with respect and dignity.

The process will not happen overnight.  Although it begins with education, it then must translate into equal representation of women in political structures, economic valuation of the work of women, and social recognition of women's contributions to society.  These sorts of changes will have the most positive effects on ending worldwide violence against women because they will represent an important change in the atmosphere of the gender issue- it will represent the time that women have come into their own and realized true equality, not only in law, but in reality.


 

"A Wasteland of One's Own"

By Rebecca Hulse

In a recent New York Times article, "A Wasteland of One's Own," [Francine Prose, New York Times Magazine, p. 66, February 13, 2000] Francine Prose laments the modern media's abominable failure to give voice or forum to serious women's issues. The only voices chiming from women's corners on TV, in movies or on the Internet, Prose protests, are lipstick application how-to's and features on whether or not you and your mate are a match made in heaven. The growing market catered to women in media, especially the new media of the Internet, has the potential to be a feminist's dream: finally women more money and the power to impact the direction of the media through their wallets. Women are finally able to shape the market. "Why shouldn't we be gladdened," Prose asks, "by this evidence of what some feminists have long suspected: that our voices would be heard when we had enough money to guarantee that someone would listen?"

Why shouldn't we be glad? "Because so much of what's flashing across our television, movie and computer screens," Prose argues, "suggests that what women are being offered is not just separate but sequestered, not challenging or provocative but intellect-numbing and reactionary - an expensive, seductive, glossy mass invitation to disappear into Cyberpurdah…." (emphasis added).

According to Prose, "no one is asking, or prompting women to ask, the unresolved questions that the more levelheaded feminists having been posing for decades, queries that might actually affect women's lives. How can you get him to help change the baby's diapers? Why aren't you making as much as the guys in the office - the guys who do exactly what you do? What do you do if you're pregnant and poor and have to drive 500 miles to the nearest abortion clinic? Why does everyone assume you are incapable of thinking about anything more profound than nail polish and preschool jitters?" With so much new media out there by women and for women, why is no one addressing serious questions? Prose continues:

"There's plenty of advice on how to change ourselves - woman by woman, pound by pound, wrinkle by wrinkle - but not a shred of guidance on how to change our situation. Nor is there any suggestion that we might want, or need, to rethink basic issues of power, equity and economics, or that our interest and passions should expand to acknowledge the world beyond the narrow confines of the kitchen, the nursery, the beauty salon and the office.

"Quite the contrary, really…. The new Web sites advertise themselves as solace and escape, consolation at the end of our impossible stressful days of full-time work and full-time child care: the pause that refreshes, that revivifying - and pacifying - break that enables us to get up the next morning and endure another impossible day. Geraldine Laybourne's credo for Oxygen [a TV network devoted to women] - that women are 'pushed and pressured in such amazing ways that they deserve a place where they can take a deep breath' - falls far short of suggesting that we examine the source of that pressure, or that we begin to push back, or that we face the problems that no amount of shopping can solve.

"And finally, there's the ultimate deception: the marketing-research-driven con, the appalling bait-and-switch practiced on the woman who is being promised relationship, being sold on community, and who is in fact buying into a progressively deeper isolation and seclusion. For what is this new culture offering us, exactly, except the chance to work (at least) two jobs, eight hours in the workplace, another eight in the home, followed by the marvelous reward, the invitation to watch "reality" on television or to read a barely literate online magazine, along in Cyberpurdah, satisfied and at peace, with nothing to disturb our blessed, hard-won tranquility, except the brief, spiky thrill of a purchase and the gentle click of the mouse?"

What do you think? Does your experience in this Series provide evidence otherwise or suggest that there are ways new media can focus our attention on women's issues that matter? How can we get the message to the mainstream? How do you respond to Prose's critique?


Culture Change

By Jamie Kohen

When we speak of changing our culture, we are asking for a change in the norms and values that dictate the ways in which women are treated. We are asking for a modification of the current second class status and the lack of respect and equality that women face on a daily basis. Contrary to the idea some of the email comments have espoused that it is just men who need to change their attitudes, I believe that we all need to change some of our views. Granted, women may more quickly adopt notions of gender equality and female autonomy. But if we consider the imbedded notions of male entitlement that our society has accepted and fostered, we quickly realize that women's perceptions are likely to be skewed toward male dominance as well. Because many women have accepted the status quo and adapted to it (even if unconsciously), we need a radical change in norms in order to achieve the equality we deserve.

The battle for culture change needs to be fought on many different fronts simultaneously. Change in the laws (or change in the enforcement of existing laws) is one method of affectuating changes in norms. But often the law is merely a shadow that secondarily reflects already existing changes in societal beliefs. This means we need to look to extra-legal avenues to express our dissatisfaction with the current state of tragedy. Other domains of social norms may be more easily altered, and may impact women's daily lives to a greater extent. It is the accumulation of all the subtle influences on our behavior and thoughts that have created today's world in which many men use violence against women. They use it to dominate, to control, to get sexual pleasure, to disrespect, to hate and to scorn. In the world of tomorrow, the norms which we live by will demand greater respect and equality for women's bodily autonomy, and with that, the freedom from violence will come.

Sexual Norms.

Our society needs to rethink our basic notions and the messages sent regarding intimate sexuality for males and females. By sexuality I do not mean the provocative bodily images that objectify women and are meant to represent men's passion or sexual desire. I am referring instead to the deepest, most intimate conceptions of a woman's sexual functions and wishes. In our culture, these inner female sexual desires are ignored, suppressed or closeted (or they are perversely characterized by a male dominated audience, as desiring for the female body to be ravished, taken and used. On the other hand, men's sexuality is flaunted and considered inevitable. Think of the way that ED and Viagra are considered and discussed compared how (or if) vaginal orgasims or female condoms are talked about.

Women have to become more comfortable with their sexuality, their bodies and their desires. I believe that the biological divide between men's desire for sexual gratification and women's desires has been over-exaggerated. While men might experience a greater hormonal urge for sexual gratification, I don't believe this differential can explain the pervasive sexual abuse that men inflict on women. There are many learned behavioral responses regarding sex that are so imbedded in a history of accommodation to men's sexuality, that they have come to be accepted as pure biological truths. A change in these norms would result in powerful alterations in our understanding of the sex drive.

Women should be encouraged to feel more comfortable about their sexuality to decrease the stigma and taboo of discussing anything related to female sexuality. Recall how the pure and private ideals of female sexuality have been used in the past to justify laws that only considered virgins as eligible rape victims. In the modern rape law context, this notion of a female's passive and unwanting sexual appetite has added to scrutinizing of a woman's actions in determining consent. If a woman acted in a way that was at all considered sexually aggressive, she is assumed to have consented to whatever the man later inflicted. Women should be able to express sexual desire for men without offering carte blanche for the man to satisfy his hormonal urges.

Such changes may require a new language between men and women to allow us to communicate as equal partners who collaborate in the decision to engage in sexual acts. Ideas of men wooing women and knocking down their resolve only to have the women fall madly in love with them should be Hollywood fantasies of the past. They should not roar their heads in a courtroom or a jury deliberation room. But the solutions will not be simple. As we have learned, clear cut notions of "no means no" don't offer panacea for the complex and subtle interactions that occur in sexual contexts. Creating a new dialogue will take time and practice, because in many ways there are completely new players acting in the game of love and life. The women today are not operating along the same social mores that rigidly defined older female generations appropriate behaviors and desires. We are creating new roles as we learn to express our autonomy. As welearn that we can be bold and active, in all situations including a sexual context, we need to simultaneously understand that we do not need to cower to a man's unwanted advances nor to wait for a wanted advance.

Greater acceptance of same-sex sexuality will also help defeat the notions of male sexuality dictating female's sexuality that lurk abound in our society's laws and norms. As same-sex relations become increasingly acknowledged and accepted, the view of women's role as subordinate to men is likely to fade. For in providing examples of a sexual relationship without the presence of a man, society is served an example of a sexual relationship devoid of the influence of gendered male domination. And empowering women requires changes that enable women and men to experience sexuality less connected to gender.

Modes of Change.

The media and entertainment idustries can play a leading role in changing the view of male-female relations that we hold. The federal government has the ability to influence television advertising and programming by requiring public service messages. Already, the government has implemented programs to induce stations to include anti-violence and anti-drus messages in television shows. The same method could be used to send messages regarding violence against women. Support for women's and family television which excludes physical violence (thereby not providing male "role models" who disrespect women) can help too. By providing alternative forms of entertainment which have universal appeal, but do not include derogatory speech or violence against women, the entertainment industry can affectuate change. The Internet is another arena with vast untapped potential for changing norms, as female participants enter dialogues together and connect across the country, and across racial and age and gender lines, they can begin to work together. Sharing experiences and offering feedback on a global network would create unprecedented lines of communciation and mechanisms for change.

Education can play a strong intitial role and be a powerful first offense in teaching children how to relate to members of the opposite sex. As we teach about human sexuality and puberty, we should at the same time acknowledge the existence of the societal problems associated with such topics. This would include rape, unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases, as well as the historical and pervasive treatment of women as inferiors. Physical education classes could include self defense training so that girls learn at a young age to have the strength and willpower to deter and defend against male violence. Similarly, when we teach about the historical underpinnings of today's legal environment of anti-discrimination, we should include studies of the violence against women and how that has affected children's daily threats and development.

Parents can play a significant role in influencing young minds to consider men and women equals and to inculcate a system of beliefs which denounces violence. In the same way that norms regarding racial discrimination have changed, norms regarding women's inferiority to men can be changed through parents speaking to their children about violence against women. In addition to teaching that it is not okay for a white man to use vigilante justice against a black man (as was once accepted), parents ought to teach that it is not okay for a man to use violence to get what he wants against a woman. Of couse, the problem of violence against women is linked to a larger problem of how to reduce violence in our society in all realms. In the past year we have witnessed tragic instances of violence perpetrated by youngsters and befalling innocent victims. As children are increasingly taught that violence is not an appropriate mechanism for obtaining their goals, they should be reminded that violence against women is more, if not equally abhorrent.

Self defense courses can be an empowering experience for women, and can help prevent violence against women in many ways. Increasing a woman's psychological and physical repertoir of defenses will make her less likely to appear vulnerable, and therefore less to be attacked. And if she is attacked, or more subtley pressured or coerced, she can use these defenses to aid in her escape from the situation. Learning the psychological mechanism, physiological responses, and physical vulnerabilities that come into play when one is violated are important. But self defense classes also have a more intimate and deeper influence on women's mental health, both as they participate in the course, and upon later reflection. Women become more in touch with their bodies and their strengths through these classes. This can be an extremely opening and rewarding sensation. Armed with a new self awareness and self confidence, women will reenter the world anew. They will be encouraged to value their phsycial and emotional space, and will remember that any unwelcome intrusions on such are not to be tolerated.

Employment Context.

Other required modes of change include increasing financial stability and mobility by incresing access to jobs, day care and education; and achieving greater balancing between dual caregivers for the responsibility of children and the maintenance of household chores and domestic affairs. In particular, the workplace is an arena in which legal controls have helped enable women to be respected and treated as equals.

Our sexual harassment law originated from instances of men acting sexual toward women in the workplace. While today the defintion of harassment has been broadened to include any injustices 'based on sex' that produce discrmination in the workplace. For some feminists, sexual workplace harassment provides a clear example of male dominance which is focused around sexuality. For instance, Susan Estrich (Sex at Work, 43 Stan. L. Rev. 813 (1991)) writes:

What makes sexual harassment more offensive, more debilitating, and more dehumanizing to its victims than other forms of discrimination is precisely the fact that it is sexual. Not only are men exercising power over women, but they are operating in a realm which is still judged according to a gender double standard, itself a reflection of the extent to which sexuality is used to penalize women. In my view, [harassment] cases are such a disaster in doctrinal terms precisely because, as with rape, they involve sex and sexuality.

Others have argued that the emphasis on the "sexual" nature of the men's advances obscures the real feminist goal of acheiving gender equality in the workplace. Instead of focusing on sexual-advance type instances, women should work to reduce any forms of gender-based harassment that interferes with their ability to thrive in the workplace. This relates to the notion of how closeting female sexuality can cage women into unequal gender norms (such as past laws requiring virginity for marriage, or present day norms describing men as "studs" and women as "sluts" when they are sexually active). By preserving the distinction between different forms of harassment (sexual adavance or other), we are again encouraging such norms. Read this excerpt from Vicki Schultz, "Reconceptualizing Sexual Harassment," 107 Yale L.J. 1683 (1998).

Conclusion.

Violence against women is not inevitable. It is not wholly, or even primarily, the product of biology or other, unnamed immutable characteristics. Biology matters in innumerable contexts, and gender differences are to be celebrated and accomodated in some instances. But in many contexts, the divisions are unreal and unwise, and they are used by men to manipulate and control women. Violence against women is a product of resultant culture. And this culture we can, should - indeed must - change.

Although changing our culture is a big feat that will take much time, we at least have a clear idea where to begin. We must combine legal efforts with challenges along other fronts in order to change society's norms. Popular images of sex and violence, often intertwined, have undoubtedly fueled the current crisis. We must balance free expression with responsible entertainment. Some might say that we would be fooling ourselves to see popular images of gender-equal relationships devoid of any violence. But people's ideals beget norms and norms in turn affect ideas and ideals. The two are intertwined. Change can only occur by understanding each, and how each affects the other.


Culture Change Forum

Please use this forum for discussing the ideas presented by the teaching fellows in their essays above. Also, we encourage you to express your thoughts, ideas, and impressions about how to instigate real societal change.


Series Announcements

A transcript of the March 21 Interview with Catharine MacKinnon is now available online. Please note that this transcript has been edited for readability. The unedited version is also available. In addition, some student questions that Professor MacKinnon could not answer during the interview, she has answered via email, and these answers are available online. Thanks to all who participated!

Series evaluation forms are now available online. I would like to personally urge you to take a few minutes to fill one out -- this information will be very useful for future series conducted by the faculty and staff at the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard Law School.

 

Melissa J. Baily; Head Teaching Fellow, HLS 2001