General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsLady Freedom Returns
(14,120 posts)TheVisitor
(173 posts)I do have to say, however, that I disagree with the focus... The PSA puts a lot of focus on the victim and directs little attention to the accountability of the criminal/culprit. I think in order to really combat domestic violence and sexual assault, we need to focus on truly punishing those who are committing the crimes, as opposed to focusing on the bits and pieces of the problem caused by their crimes. Of course, victims need and deserve the utmost support, just to clarify. However, this PSA needs to say something more along the lines of:
No more excuses for abusers, no more excuses for rapists, no more bullying, no more sexual assault, no more reduced sentencing or letting criminals off the hook for their crimes.
I think the whole PSA would be more effective if it simultaneously psychologically criminalized and shamed the culprits while holding the improper responses of the criminal justice system accountable to higher standards.
chervilant
(8,267 posts)This PSA says all that you've suggested, and more.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)our courts, our judges, our cops, our congress and so man other more, are still using this language. at the deteriment of our girls.
i think create something that is this clear.... woud be a great PSA
[link:http://|
SunSeeker
(51,574 posts)Jackpine Radical
(45,274 posts)really symptom suppression. There is nothing wrong with symptom suppression, and it is often necessary, but it doesn't fix the underlying pathology that generates the symptoms.
Incidentally, most of the rapists and abusers I have met are already drenched in rage and shame. (MOST--not all; some are just plain assholes), and most are themselves products of highly abusive backgrounds. Sure, we need to punish, but let's do something more productive than shaming them and making their lives as miserable as possible--that's just a formula for recidivism.
Criminologists describe incarceration as having four major functions: Incapacitation (locking the person up to prevent their reoffending); retribution (meting out "just desserts" ; deterrence (providing an example to others so that they will not similarly offend); and rehabilitation. I don't argue against the first 3 functions, but I really want to make the point that we do very little about the 4th, rehabilitation, and that is where the major payoffs would lie. However, it is expensive, it smacks of "coddling criminals," and for the most part it is not done.
But to take it one step further, the real solution lies in primary prevention. A culture that exalts violence and brutality will produce violence and brutality. Western culture needs a massive overhaul of its entire value system, beginning with the junking of patriarchy.
Bragi
(7,650 posts)Right wing law and order zealots constantly make the claim that jails solve social problems.
They don't.
Jails may satisfy our need for retribution and vengeance, but they don't solve social problems.
Never have, never will.
I think you kind of carried that point way past reason...
For example, I do not believe that if we allowed bank robbers to walk free without any repercussions, it would discourage them from doing it again. I do not believe, that if someone described a bank robbery suspect from a bank being robbed, would ever be questioned as to whether or not the event occurred or if it was their 'fault' for it happening. Were they making a large deposit? Were they flaunting their expensive shoes? Well, they were asking for that bank to be robbed, right? That's the mentality that unpunished criminals breeds.
In fact, I think this can apply to pretty much any crime. People do need to be punished for committing crimes. The problem with our prison system is not that it is being overwhelmed by violent offenders, but that people are being put in jail too frequently, for far too long for non-violent offenses. People have gotten 25+ years in prison for simply having a stash of their own drugs on them at the wrong time. Do I think they are as bad as a rapist? Absolutely not, yet rapists get off the hook more often and their crimes are unreported because of a societal disease that involves victim blaming.
In addition, however, there needs to be a change of role models for young people. Right now, young kids growing up are seeing that rapists, murderers, and thieves are allowed to walk free - as long as they are in the right position / have enough money. A perfect example of this would be police/justice system, bankers, and politicians... So the message to the young generation, and even my generation was that these things are OK, because they were tolerated. When you allow a crime to go unpunished, you are enabling that activity and telling anyone who witnesses the lack of a fair judicial process that you condone and agree with the behaviors and don't see them as crimes at all.
Good role models would encourage people across all genders, ethnicities, and cultural backgrounds to consciously make the decision to be better human beings and to love themselves as well as others. Good role models are not what we see on television or in media for the most part, but that is unfortunately the majority of role models seen by our society.
Anyway, I don't see the validity in your partisan argument. I don't think this has anything to do with partisan issues. The for-profit prison system is exploited by both sides of the mainstream political spectrum. This is a human issue, end of story.
Bragi
(7,650 posts)I thank you for your civil and thoughtful response.
On the matter of role models, I agree entirely.
On the matter of jails, you wrote that "People do need to be punished" for committing crimes.
My view differs somewhat. I think society in general should mostly be concerned that anyone who commits an act deemed to be criminal in nature be treated, first and foremost, in a manner that has is proportionate to the offense, and offers the best chance of protecting society by preventing them from re-offending. That's what matters most.
This being the case, we know that the current jail system is very unlikely to produce a good result for anyone wishing to prevent future crime. The system is a failed and broken one. It does harm to people who are incarcerated, to their families and to society. I therefore don't support dropping more people into a broken system for longer times for a wider range of offenses so as "punish" them. I prefer other options that we know work at preventing future crime.
That is my general belief. It is not limited to any specific crime. I understand that some crimes are more abhorrent than others, and that we need to take special care to ensure that people who commit particularly abhorrent crimes are dealt with in the manner that protects society, and produces the best outcome. Seldom does this mean incarcerating more people for longer times.
I don't expect everyone to agree with me on this, but that is how I feel about crime and punishment in general.
(Note: You describing my view as "partisan" in your response. It may or may not be relevant, but I don't understand what you meant by that term.)
- B
SickOfTheOnePct
(7,290 posts)hunter
(38,317 posts).
sheshe2
(83,792 posts)No more.
WillowTree
(5,325 posts)leftstreet
(36,109 posts)The history of NO MORE
The NO MORE symbol has been in the making since 2009. It was developed because despite the significant progress that has been made in the visibility of domestic violence and sexual assault, these problems affecting millions remain hidden and on the margins of public concern. Hundreds of representatives from the domestic violence and sexual assault prevention field came together and agreed that a new, overarching symbol, uniting all people working to end these problems, could have a dramatic impact on the publics awareness.
The signature blue vanishing point originated from the concept of a zero as in zero incidences of domestic violence and sexual assault. It was inspired by Christine Mau, a survivor of domestic violence and sexual abuse who is now the Director of European Design at Kimberly-Clark. The symbol was designed by Sterling Brands, and focus group tested with diverse audiences across the country who agreed that the symbol was memorable, needed and important.
NO MORE calls on all of us together to end the silence and speak out against the violence experienced by people of all genders, races and ethnicities, and age groups.
http://nomore.org/about/
Texasgal
(17,045 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)Those Law and Order actors from SVU are perfect for it.
DAMANgoldberg
(1,278 posts)Olivia Benson on SVU, this is her pet project. Joyful Heart Foundation.
oldandhappy
(6,719 posts)And now we need one "No More" on the male side -- no more I was just joking, no more I thot she was joking, no more I could not stop myself, no more she defied me, no more she is a tease, no more how could I stop in the middle, no more I thot she did not mean it when she said no, no more but i am the man, no more violence -- period.
chervilant
(8,267 posts)Together we can end relationship violence and sexual assault, for damned sure.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)for me to see.
WheelWalker
(8,955 posts)very moving... very empowering
lovemydog
(11,833 posts)Tuesday Afternoon
(56,912 posts)seabeyond
(110,159 posts)i play... lol
Tuesday Afternoon
(56,912 posts)seabeyond
(110,159 posts)remind me
something like. ikr....
oh, oh oh
ikr
right? lol
that really works for me. more than Ns, S. but that one is fun
Tuesday Afternoon
(56,912 posts)There are tons of 'em ... Kind of like solving the crossword puzzle for me.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)K&R!
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)lovely fall. things to do. leaves falling. pumpkins to buy. lol.
you?