"Real rapes" and "real victims": The shared reliance on common cultural definitions of rape

Feminist Legal Studies

Volumn 4, Issue 2, 1996, Pages 159-177

  Stewart, Mary White ^a   Dobbin, Shirley ^a   Gatowskt, Sophia I ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0006984037     PISSN: 09663622     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/bf02167608     Document Type: Article

References (78)

1. S. Brownmilier, Against Our Will: Men, Women and Rape (New York: Bantum, 1975);
2. M. Bun, "Cultural Myths and Supports for Rape", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 38 (1980), 217-230;
3. S. Estrich, Real Rape (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1987).
4. Estrich, supra n.1;
5. L Holmstrom and A. Burgess, The Victim of Rape (New Jersey: Transaction Publishers, 1991);
6. C. Smith and L.D. Nelson, "Predictors of Rape and Victimization Reportage." Paper presented at the American Sociological Association Annual Meeting, New York: August, 1976.
7. H. Garfinkel, Studies in Ethnomcthodology (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1967).
8. P. Berger and T. Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality (New York: Doublcday, 1967);
9. C.W. Mills, "Situated Actions and Vocabularies of Motive", American Sociological Review 5 (1940), 904-913;
10. R. Quinney, Crime and Justice in Society (Boston: Little Brown, 1969).
11. See for example: K. Bumiller, "Fallen Angels: The Representation of Violence Against Women in Legal Culture", International Journal of the Sociology of Law 18 (1990), 125-142;
12. Burt, supra n.l; S.A. Dobbin, S.I. Gatowski and M.W. Stewart, "Gender Bias in the Processing of Rape Cases: Implications for Social Representation Theory", Paper presented at the IV European Congress of Psychology, Athens, Greece, July 1995;
13. D. Giacopassi and T. Dull, "Gender and Racial Differences in the Acceptance of Rape Myths Within a College Population", Sex Roles 15/1-2 (1986), 63-75;
14. J. Schwendinger and H. Schwendinger, "Rape Myths in Legal, Theoretical, and Everyday Practice", Crime and Social Justice 1 (1984), 18-26;
15. D. Scully, Understanding Sexual Violence: A Study of Convicted Rapists; Perspectives on Gender, Vol. 3 (Boston: Unwin Hyman, 1990).
16. Bumiller, supra n.5; Scully, supra n.5.
17. Bumiller, supra n.5.
18. J. Lipman-Blumen, Gender Roles and Power (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1984).
19. M.W. Stewart and S. Storman, A Study of the Nevada Justice System's Response to Sexual Assault: A Report Submitted to the Supreme Court of Nevada i Gender Bias Task Force (1991). This study was supported by a grant from the Supreme Court of Nevada's Gender Bias Task Force.
20. Metro police in Las Vegas told us that black women rarely report rape in their office. No black or Hispanic women volunteered to take part in this study. This raises a question regarding the interaction between racial and gender bias which makes justice doubly difficult for minority women in Nevada.
21. Estrich, supra n.l; Holmstrom and Burgess, supra n.2; LH. Schafran, "Rape is Still Underreported", New York Times, August 26th (1995), 15.
22. S.I. Gatowski, M.W. Stewart and SA Dobbin, "Gender Expectations and Stereotypes as they Affect the Judicial Process", Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Western Psychological Association, Phoenix, AZ, April 1993.
23. Estrich, supra n.1; H. Feild, "Attitudes Toward Rape: A Comparative Analysis of Police, Rapists, Crisis Counsellors, and Citizens", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 36/2 (1978), 156-179;
24. Holmstrom and Burgess, supra n.2.
25. Estrich, supra n.1;
26. Federal Bureau of Investigation, Crime in the United States, 1994 (Washington, D.C.: US Department of Justice, 1994); Holmstrom and Burgess, supra n.2; Schafran, supra n.11.
27. Ann Arbor News, "Rape Vastly Underreported", April 26, in Edwin Pfuhl and Stuart Henry, The Deviance Process (New York: Aldine de Gruyter, 1993).
28. Holmstrom and Burgess, supra n.2.
29. Estrich, supra n.1; S. Feldman-Summers and G. Palmer, "Rape: A View from Judges, Prosecutors, and Police Officers", Criminal Justice and Behaviourism), 19-40.
30. Feldman-Summers and Palmer, supra n.17; Feild, supra n.13; Holmstrom and Burgess, supra n.2.
31. Smith and Nelson, supra n.2.
32. P. Enis, Field Survey 2: Criminal Victimization in the U.S., Report of a National Survey (Washington, D.C.: US Government, 1967).
33. Holmstrom and Burgess, supra n.2.
34. Holmstrom and Burgess, supra n.2.
35. Holmstrom and Burgess, supra n.2;
36. P. Wood, "The Victim of a Forcible Rape Case: A Feminist View", American Criminal Law Review 11 (1973), 335-354.
37. G. LaFree, "Official Reactions to Social Problems: Police Decisions in Sexual Assault Cases", Social Problems 28/5 (1981), 582-594.
38. Gatowski, Stcwart and Dobbin, supra n.12.
39. E. Stanko, "The Impact of Victim Assessments on Prosecutor Screening Decisions", Law and Society Review I (1981), 239.
40. Stanko, supra n.26, at 239.
41. H.S. Becker, Outsiders, Studies in the Sociology of Deviance (New York: Free Press, 1963);
42. E. Goffman, Presentation of Self in Everyday Life (New York: Doublcday Anchor, 1959);
43. E. Lemert, Social Pathology: A Systematic Approach to the Theory ofSociopathic Behaviour (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1951).
44. LaFree, supra n.24.
45. Bumiller, supra n.5; Stanko, supra n.26.
46. Stanko, supra n.26; see also Smith and Nelson, supra n.2.
47. Stanko, supra n.26; Bumiller, supra, n.5.
48. L. Clark and D. Lewis, The Price of Coercive Sexuality (Toronto: Women's Press, 1977);
49. LaFree, supra n.24; T. McCahill, L Meyer and A. Fischman, The Aftermath of Rape (Lexington DC: Health and Company, 1978).
50. Bumiller, supra n.5; Feldman-Summers and Palmer, supra n.17; LaFree, supra n.24; McCahill, Meyer and Fischman, supra n.33.
51. Bumiller, supra n. 5; Estrich, supra n.2.
52. See for example: V.P. Hans and N. Vidmar, Judging the Jury (New York and London: Plenum Press, 1986);
53. W.A. Harrell and J. Sagen, "Sex Differences in the Perception of Rape and the Sentencing of Rapists", Paper presented at the American Sociological Association Annual Meeting, Montreal, August 1974.
54. M.B. Scott and S.M. Lyman, "Accounts", American Sociological Review 33 (1968), 46-62.
55. E. Goffinan, Relations in Public (New York: Basic Books, 1971).
56. G. Sykes and D. Matza, "Techniques of Neutralization: A Theory of Delinquency", American Sociological Review II (1957), 335-354.
57. D. Scully and J. Marolla, "Rape and Vocabularies of Motive: Alternative Perspectives", in A. Burgess, Rape and Sexual Assault (New York: Garland, 1985).
58. Supra n.39.
59. Supra n.40.
60. Quinney, supra n.4.
61. R. Weninger, "Factors Affecting the Prosecution of Rape: A Case Study of Travis, Texas", Virginia Law Review 64/3 (1978), 335-354.
62. Fifth Judicial District Court, Nye County, Nevada, USA, cited in Reno Gazette Journal, Jan.11, 1994.
63. N.S. Ehrenreich, "Pluralist Myths and Powerless Men: The Ideology of Reasonableness in Sexual Harassment Law", Yale Law Journal 99 (1990), 1177-1234;
64. M.A. Meads, "Applying the Reasonable Woman Standard in Evaluating Sexual Harassment Claims: Is It Justified?", Law and Psychology Review 17 (1993), 208-223.
65. Wall Street Journal, May 28, 1991; see also Andrews v. City of Philadelphia, 895 F.2d 1469 (3d Cir. 1990);
66. Austin v. State of Hawaii, 759 F. Supp 612 (D. Haw. 1991);
67. Burns v. MC Gregor Electronic Industries, Inc., 989 F.2d (8th. Cir. 1993);
68. Robinson v. Jacksonville Shipyards, Inc., 760 F. Supp 1486 (M.D. Fla 1991);
69. and Yates v. Avco Corp, 819 F2.d 630 (6th Cir. 1987)
70. Meads, supra n.46.
71. See Vaughn v. Menlove, 132 Eng. Rep. 490 (1837) at 210, indicating that the reasonable person standard has always been based upon a male perspective of reality.
72. Meads, supra n.46, at 219.
73. Meads, supra n.46, and N.R. Cahn, "The Looseness of Legal Language: The Reasonable Woman Standard in Theory and Practice", Cornell Law Review77 (1992), 1398-1446.
74. See Harris v International Paper Co. 765 F. Supp. 1509 (D. Maine. 1991) for an example of a case utilizing a "black person standard" to determine whether a civil rights violation occurred.
75. Meads, supra n.46.
76. Meads, supra n.46.
77. Ellison v. Brady 924 F.2d 872 (9th Cir. 1991), at 878, a case involving a hostile work environment claim, was the first of such cases to articulate the reasonable woman standard. See Meads, supra n.46, for a discussion of this case.
78. See Meads, supra, n.46, for a discussion of dris issue.