Why Gender Neutral Restrooms Are A Controversy - 1387 Words

Why Gender Neutral Restrooms Are A Controversy Some people may be confused as to why gender neutral bathrooms are a controversy. This controversy stems from the trans* rights movement’s desire for safety and acceptance. Trans*, short for transgender, is an umbrella term that is used to describe people who identify as a gender they were not assigned at birth, this includes female to male, male to female, agender, and non-binary individuals while cisgender, cis for short, is used to describe someone who identifies with the gender they were assigned at birth. Some trans* individuals many pass as their identified gender and face harassment in the restroom if they are outed as trans*, likewise some trans* individuals do not pass or have not†¦show more content†¦Many arguments against gender neutral restrooms are backed in ignorance and fear of transgender issues and what trans* means. These people believe that transwomen are men in dresses and transmen are tomboys, that ge nder is binary and rigid. A way to help people accept gender neutral bathrooms is to educate people on trans* issues and what trans* is. To teach people that transwomen are women - not men in dresses, that transmen are men, that gender is not binary, that gender is fluid, that gender identity and gender expression are two different things, that being trans* is not a mental illness. Many people are simply not aware or understand what it means to be transgender. In the Autumn of 2015 a Missouri town was divided when transgirl Lila Perry started using the girl’s restroom and locker room, even after the school offered a single stall restroom. Students gossiped and eventually parents raised concern at a school board meeting, they asked the school to stop giving privileges to â€Å"confused teenagers who want to be something they are not sexually. The parents did not get the response they wanted so they and some students organized a student walk out;before this even happened Lila dropped gym class because she feared for her safety. Sydney Dye, a high school senior who helped organize the walk out says â€Å"This protest wasn t out to bully Lila or call her out on anything or try to make her

The Life and Times of American POWs in Korea Free Essays

string(63) " camp as a POW tom says in the book that about 1,500 men died\." The world war two as well as the cold war was understood in a different concept from the Korean War. In them the Americans fought for both survival and virtue not Realpolitik, there was little chance in the imaginative minds for negotiation even though the general public had a very simple understanding of the Korean conflict. The U. We will write a custom essay sample on The Life and Times of American POWs in Korea or any similar topic only for you Order Now S government planners tempered them own impressions with such strategy and belief of thrust and parry. The U.S interest in the Korean peninsula is often said to have been limited in that planners were ready to cut their losses in the even that the conflict challenged to undermine the global prepondence of power. Thus, there were various effects whose magnitudes were immeasurable. For instance, the shootings within the peninsula may have been limited, but the magnitude of fear among the fighting soldiers was not.[1] The fighting was so intense and fierce as well as unpredictable that even Seoul, changed hands about 4 times.   Initially the Americans seemed to have won the war when General Douglas until the people’s republic of china got involved in the war. The Chinese army and other communist forces surrounded the Americans to hand them their worst defeat ever. The often called â€Å"great bug out† was a cruel shock and a rude awakening to a nation that had invented the atomic bomb, beat the Axis of â€Å"evil† attained prosperity while rebuilding Europe and with the belief that their Asian counterparts were backward and incapable of mounting any major challenge. The Chinese propaganda machine put a lot of emphasis on allied atrocities as well as conversion of POWs to Marxism. [2]At the early stages of the wrangles ever peace terms Republic of China started relentless changes of germ warfare. A majority of the reports published were supported by confessions relieved from POWs who were under () with often supervision from international inspectors with varying credibility. A large number and probably all the germ warfare confessions were falsified. At the end of the armistice talks, most of what was left was dedicated to the prisoners with the talks lasting for about half the time of the war. More recently the thesis that the Korean prisoners of war certainly prone to collaborate have been judged as a tenacious one, even though it had been meticulously debunked as early as 1963 by the pentagon. The situation in Korea was that of captivity being different rather than the captive. The U.S prisoners were coerced to give confessions in Marxist jargon. Instead of having just a quite session to inform fellows, as had been the case in earlier conflicts. The Korean was encompassed periods of incarceration as cruel as any American encounter, with about a third perishing resulting in a highly coercive atmosphere. If by any chance there was collaboration in Korea, then the situation can best be explained by the demands of the captors as well as the conditions the captive were subjected to instead of just a decline in character of youth. Although the POWs, may not have a permanent or profound revolution in their thought patterns still they were subject to vigorous and routinely indoctrination processes. This kind of methodology was responsible for a large number of collaboration that superficially appeared as a personality transformation. Within the camps, separating officers and â€Å"natural† leaders from the rest of POWs did the segregation. Such tactics like the encouraging race, class as well as political affiliation so as to abrade personal lies and group places among the POWs. Albeit the Chinese forces proclaimed the policy of â€Å"leniency† it was often on the theoretical basis as most the camps were inherently coercive.   In this often-coercive environment the Chinese forces added a forum from where the prisoners could often be minutely scrutinized for compliance. A brief summery of personal accounts from some of the soldiers who took part in the Korean War would probably provide a better insight to the flight of the prisoners of war. After graduating from high school (1950) Tom Gaylets was recruited in the U.S army, fort Knox, Kentucky for a period of six weeks. He later joined his brother and other soldiers who were in Korea. His unit has changed with the duties of blowing up bridges making roads while at same time removing and locating enemies. This particular unit according to tom moved up and down Korea encountering 21 battles in extreme wealthier condition. (summer 100 degrees) to less than 40 degree in winter) the experience according to him was like â€Å"a hell hole because we fought the war 24 hours a day seven days a week†.[3] There was no such a thing as taking a break. The soldiers were always at the frontline. The following year (may 17 1951) tom was called up by his commanding officer with the excitement at the prospect of arriving home was short lived the following morning when Chinese soldiers attacked their division. After a while the Chinese soldiers captured them, they were taken to a holding area until later at night in order to move them. After that the torture exercise began the Chinese made them carry sickness, hunger, and fatigue! They were not offered anything to eat by the Chinese soldiers, and ate anything that they could find on their way.[4] The food that was served to soldiers was terrible though there was a gradual change after some time. For instance there was one point where tom says that they were served rice and noticed some piece of meat in the rice. Thinking that things had changed for better the soldiers were upbeat only to realize the following day that a rat had accidentally gotten in to their food but the Chinese soldiers intentionally ignored and instead went a head to serve it to them. They were not served meat in their meals until some time in 1953. In the course of his stay at the camp as a POW tom says in the book that about 1,500 men died. You read "The Life and Times of American POWs in Korea" in category "Essay examples" During the winter seasons the dead soldiers were wrapped and chopped on the hillside without any decent depict an act of dehumanization. Tom himself almost succumbed to death due to various factors like starvation, bouts of dysentery and apparently about 100 pounds.[5] The Chinese soldiers were constantly looking for excuses in order to punish the POWs. A friend was routinely (every morning) put in a four –by- four foot-hole and left for the rest of the day with a hat on his head. After that he would be taken out of every night only to be returned the next morning where he would fill out information with his hat on and then taken back to the hole. When Tom left to go and see some of his friends in the other company the Chinese solders would move him into a hut their start a fire there and leave him closed up for days. Another account by a soldier named David is a description of the deplorable conditions that they were subject to. After eluding the enemy soldiers for a couple of days, David and his compatriot were captured they were then taken through then initial positions and in fields and then hidden under cliff during the day. (Out-doors) they were not offered any sanitation or medical care. The food that was served to them was a brown powder and which was very little in quantity. This state of affairs was routinely carried out until June of 1951 when they were moved to a mining camp. At this stage a large number of prisoners began to die from starvation, while others died as a result of no medical care for the wounds and injuries sustained and others died from torture. Within his camp everyone according to David was plagued with dysentery that resulted in large number of soldiers dying in this camp. After about three months at the camp the soldiers then started moving them out to new camps. The transfer involved a matching process with no food while at the same time some of them were bombed by the U.S B24 which resulted to even more deaths. During the winter seasons some prisoners were given a pair of cotton pajamas but this all they had for the remaining seasons in spite of the fluctuating weather conditions which could go as well as below zero by about 40-50 degrees in the cold season be as lot as this in the included: body lice, dysentery, pneumonia, skin disorders, intestinal disorders, night blindness, beriberi, frostbites and the more insensitive one was the threat to be executed which often accompanied all Out of the approximately 7,190 prisoners of war, who were captured largely in the first months of the war, about 3,000 of them are estimated to have died in captivity about 43% of the mortality were as a result of starvation in a period that last about for six months (Nov 1950-Apr 1951. often the Chinese soldiers communist apologist normally argue that the U.S bombed most of the areas, thereby preventing the delivery of food.[6] However, some soldiers also claim that even though a large apart of the North Korean supply were heavily bombed most of the camps where the POWs were situated were right on the border of china, which had been exempted from bombing. Although the purposeful starvation of the American POWS had ceased in the early summer of 1951, a new phase of treatment greeted the POWs. This phase easy characterized by very disturbing experiences even to the American public than the initial murder by starvation method; the mass indoctrination in propaganda that were anti-American in philosophy often referred as brainwashing as well as the recruitment of the prisoners of war to regurgitate/repeat the learned propaganda in signed statements and even public broadcasts took hold. Even though the â€Å"brainwashing† term eventually fell out of favor, due to the belief by psychologists that the communist indoctrination had no permanent effect on a majority of POWS as soon as they returned, it however was both a mental and physical torture process. In the history of the war they were some points (1950-1951) that are considered significant. For instance, the purposeful starvation of POWs by the Korean and Chinese soldiers often broke the spirit of the prisoners. The resulting effect was that they ceased to help one another. Attempts by most officers to take command, coercing them to cooperate in their common interest, were often thwarted by the communist guards, unless the officers were willing to be collaborators. Some officers took up this choice, for example a Lt. Col Paul Liles and Harry Fleming chose this method by creating communist propaganda, and in return cutting down on the number of deaths in their camps.   Even though these officers were later court martialed, many still believe they played a crucial role in saving many lives that would otherwise have been lost if they had not taken this stance. Elsewhere, many prisoners were too apathetic to defend their comrades and even themselves from the predators and other thugs like James Gallagher and PFC Roth well Floyd. In one particular instance, that has stood out happened in 17 Feb 1951 when Sgt. Gallagher tossed two POWs that had been severely weakened by dysentery from inside the barrack to the cold where they froze to death. The reason given by him was that the body stench and the general stink of the unclean dysentery patients was a revolting one.   Although this may be accurate, when soldiers act as a team and care for one another, the survival rates is gotten very high. There were some prisoners too who were never reported. The U.S authorities had documented about 66 American personnel that had been held back by the communist forces against their will after the war ended. A majority of them had been captured outside of Korea, and as such were not considered under the armistice terms. So far nothing ever came of them over after concerted efforts by diplomatic missions to secure their release. There were about three general phases to the encounters of the POWs per most of the soldiers especially the ones who hired to tell their tale. For instance the soldiers who gave their personal accounts had the experience of marching which can be referred to as the â€Å"marching phase† in this phase the communist soldiers and particularly the Chinese subject the POWs to often walking barefoot while poorly clothed in bitterly cold weather. They were then marched from their points of capture to camps that were situated deep inside North Korea. The second phase which took place until sometime in October 1951 when a majority of the camps were left to the Chinese control, In this phase where a great deal of deaths about 40 percent as a result of starvation, malnutrition as well as denial of Medicare by the unsympathetic north Korean PA guards. Other than malnutrition, starvation and lack of medical care the experience of the soldiers also included such acts like night blindness. Most of the men interviewed have discussed night blindness among prisoners as well as guards, vegetable competing lacking from their diet or in small quantities that do not make up a balanced diet. These are enough conditions about torture lice cold together with dysentery. There are instance where a guard is told who was ready to offer his bag of lunch plus 2 hours head start to any prisoners of war was willing to escape from the prison camps. This is a testimony of the deplorable state of the prisons and the treatment offered to the soldiers. Most of the times there was no medication and if it was provided then it was inadequate with no records at all. Some prisoners were indoctrinated on a daily basis with the sessions lasing from morning to night with just a short break for the Chinese soldiers to have their lunch. In the mean time the prisoners were not offered any food and it is during such times when the brains rushing process began. The perception that was instilled in them was that of repeating communist ideals and philosophy that they had learned in the process.   At night the soldiers would come into the huts and make the soldiers sit while facing eth wall, and warmed with flash lights that shone on the prisoners’ faces, the soldiers made them repeat the communist philosophy References: Harry Spiller, 1998. American POWs in Korea, sixteen personal accounts. McFarland Company Raymond B. Lech, 2000, Broken soldiers, University of Illinois Press, Urbana and Chicago IL, 330pp [1] Raymond B. Lech, 2000, Broken soldiers, University of Illinois Press, Urbana and Chicago IL, 330pp [2] Raymond B. Lech, 2000, Broken soldiers, University of Illinois Press, Urbana and Chicago IL, 330pp [3] (Harry Spiller, 1998). [4] (Harry Spiller, 1998). [5] Harry Spiller, 1998. American POWs in Korea, sixteen personal accounts. McFarland Company [6] (Harry Spiller, 1998)    How to cite The Life and Times of American POWs in Korea, Essay examples

Criminological Theory free essay sample

Criminological theories have rarely been concerned with the analysis of female criminality. Typically criminologists have either been content to subsume discussion of women offenders under ‘general’ theories, that is to say they have implicitly assumed the female is dealt with in discussing the male, or they have dealt with them exceptionally briefly in the way that other ‘marginal’ or ‘special’ categories are treated. The reason offered for this overwhelming lack of interest is that within the population of known offenders, female offenders constitute a statistically much smaller proportion than male offenders. With the exception of offences like shoplifting and soliciting, the number of female offenders nowhere exceed the numbers of male offenders known to the police. But this statistical ‘insignificance’ alone cannot fully explain why so little work has been attempted in this area. Rather the relative absence of work on crimes by women may be considered as symbolic of the nature of the discipline of criminology. Traditional criminology in both the UK and the USA has always had close links with social and penal policymaking bodies with the result that research has tended to be directed towards areas officially designated as social problems. Female criminality has not generally been treated as a particularly important or pressing social problem, not only because of its comparative rarity, but also because of the nature of the offences committed by women. Official statistics, which are themselves a problematic source of information in criminology (Hindess, 1973; Wiles,1970), indicate that women engage mostly in petty offences and, with the exception of prostitutes, most appearances by women in court are for first offences. Women do not seem to pose a serious recidivist problem therefore; nor a threat to society, and so fail to constitute a real problem to the agencies of social control. Failing to become a pressing social problem has meant that studies of female criminality have not received much official support or finance with the result that traditional ‘control oriented’ criminology has also shown a lack of interest in this area. The lack of attention devoted to the question of crimes committed by women and their treatment has given rise to the present unsatisfactory understanding of female offenders and the offences they commit. There has been virtually no development of our knowledge in this area with the result that ostensibly scientific works predicated upon unexplicated ideologies have been allowed to stand uncriticized. Recognition of the under-development of criminology and sociology in this area is explicit in Ward’s statement to the U. S. National Commission on Crimes of Violence that: Our knowledge of the character and causes of female criminality is at the same stage of development that characterised our knowledge of male criminality some thirty or more years ago. (Ward, 1968) As a consequence of this lack of development the ideology and methodological limitation inherent in some of the classical works on female criminality still inform contemporary studies and, furthermore, are reflected in the treatment of female offenders. This paper is therefore concerned to reveal the ideological foundations of the major theories of female criminality, in particular the culturally relative, commonsense conceptions of women on which they are based. I shallconcentrate on the works of Lombroso (1895) and Pollak (1950), whose theories are still influential, as well as the work of Cowie, Cowie and Slater (1968) whose analysis of female delinquents reveals the influence of the early theorists. The second part of this paper will focus on the possible implications of the ideologies inherent in these studies of female criminality. The ideology of theories of female criminality. The most significant ideology which informs both classical and contemporary accounts of female criminality is a sexist ideology. It is sexist not because it differentiates between the sexes but because it attributes to one sex socially undesirable characteristics which are assumed to be intrinsic or ‘natural’ characteristics of that sex. Such an ideology arises because the socially structured and culturally given nature of the assumptions informing these theories are not treated as subjects for analysis; rather common-sense understandings are taken for granted as a suitable platform from which to commence theorizing. Working within the natural attitude, adopting culturally given understandings of the nature of sexual differences and in particular the characteristics attributed to women, the theorists concerned provide merely a scientific gloss for common-sense understandings. Myths about the ‘inherent’ evil in women or their lack of intelligence and ability and their ‘natural’ passivity therefore abound in these studies and they are used uncritically to supply ‘evidence’ for either the greater or lesser involvement of women in crime. GENDER AND CRIME An equally persuasive theme implicit in most accounts of female criminality, which also stems from the uncritical attitudes of the pioneers in this field, is that of biological determinism. Biological determinist accounts may take two forms, although they are rarely mutually exclusive. Firstly women who have committed offences are perceived to have been motivated by fundamental biological bodily processes. For example, menstruation or the menopause, by affecting the hormonal balance in the body, are taken to be precipitating factors leading some women to commit criminal acts. In such cases action is seen to be directly related to, or even directly produced by, hormonal or biological imbalance. Secondly, and more significantly, the female biology is perceived to determine the temperament, intelligence, ability and aggression of women. In this case it is usually argued that women are ‘naturally’ averse to crime and hence any involvement in criminal activities is treated as symptomatic of a fundamental physical (or more recently mental) pathology. As a consequence of biological factors assuming such a key status in studies of female criminality it has followed that female offenders have been treated as a homogeneous group. Such factors as class, status, power, age, culture and so on are not considered as pertinent to an understanding of female criminality even though these variables are now accepted as relevant to the study of male criminality. As a result, therefore, of both the creation of a narrow stereotypical perception of women which relies upon culturally constituted understandings of the nature of female sexuality and the belief in biological determination, those women who do commit offences are judged to be either criminal by nature (Pollak, 1950) or pathological because they deviate from the ‘true’ biologically determined nature of woman which is to be law abiding (Cowie et al. , 1968; Lombroso, 1895). The latter perspective which treats female offenders as pathological is prevalent in both classical and contemporary criminological theories, one consequence of this being the continuing implementation of policy decisions predicated upon an understanding that criminal activity by women is a product of pathology located within the individual rather than an exemplification of meaningful action. Indeed it has become a ‘popular’ belief that women who commit criminal offences are ‘sick’ and in need of psychiatric treatment; it is to a much lesser extent that this ‘sick’ analogy has been adopted in the treatment of men as men are generally ssumed to be rationally responsible for their actions while women are not. This theme of the biological basis of female criminality which has become so entrenched in official and academic explanations was first fully formulated by Lombroso in his work entitled The Female Offender published in 1895. It is of course t rue that Lombroso employed biological factors to account for male criminality but with few exceptions this school of thought has been repudiated. As Shoham maintains, Today . . . . . the Lombrosian myth in criminology, and the few contemporary adherents to the biophysiological approach to the genesis of crime, are considered a sad episode which retarded the development of the field by almost half a century. (Shoham, 1974: 167). This is undoubtedly the case with most of Lombroso’s theories and yet the ideological content of his work on female criminality persists in contemporary explanations. In particular his assertion that most women, with the exception of the rare ‘born’ criminal, are ‘congenitally . . . ess inclined to crime’ and his belief that women’s ‘natural’ passivity and conservatism robs them the initiative to break the law have become a predominant part of the ideology in contemporary criminological and sociological the ories. The work of Cowie, Cowie and Slater (1968) is perhaps the best exemplar of a modified form of the ideology inherent in Lombroso’s work. In analysing the differences between male and female delinquency they state, Differences between the sexes in hereditary predisposition (to crime) could be explained by sex-linked genes. Furthermore the female mode of personality, more timid, more lacking in enterprise, may guard her against delinquency. (Cowie et al. , 1968: 167). Clearly,Cowie, Cowie and Slater and other theorists who adopt similar positions, have taken no cognizance of cross-cultural studies nor of historical data which reveal that, rather than there being only one ‘female mode of personality’ there are a multitude of culturally and historically based sets of attitudes and expectations that influence the consciousness or personalities of women, thus producing gender related behaviour. To suggest, for example, that women are ‘more lacking in enterprise’, or in the case of Lombroso, lead more sedentary lives because of their genetic structure, is to ignore the social situation facing many women which gives no opportunity or outlet for active or creative behaviour. Interestingly, Lombroso maintains that one sure sign of criminality in women is the lack of a maternal instinct. This deficiency was perceived to mean hat ‘psychologically and anthropologically’ the delinquent woman belongs more to the male than the female sex. But this belief, which is echoed in Cowie’s work, is based on not only biological determinism but also on a confusion between sex and gender. As Ann Oakley (1972) has pointed out sex is a biological term and gender a social, cultural and psychological term such that for a woman to act in a socially defined ‘masculine’ way does not mean that she is sexually or biologically abnormal. However, where gender appropriate behaviour is seen as biologically determined women who adopt ‘masculine’ forms of behaviour become labelled ‘masculine’ themselves and this has connotations of ‘maleness’ which are seen to be linked to hormonal or genetic abnormalities. Cowie et al. in fact failed to distinguish between sex and gender at all, they state, Is there any evidence that masculinity or femininity of bodily constitution plays any part in predisposing to delinquency and in determining the form it takes? (Emphasis added. In response to this question they maintain, Delinquents of both sexes tend to be larger than controls, and overgrown by population standards . . . Markedly masculine traits in girl delinquents have been commented on by psychoanalytic observers. . . . we can be sure that they have had some physical basis. (Emphasis added. ) (Cowie et al. , 1968: 171–2) The point is that female delinquents are not perceived to be mer ely adopting behaviour more usually associated with males, they are portrayed as being chromosomally or genetically abnormal. This means that the ‘treatment’ of such offenders becomes justifiable, the aims, intentionality and rationality of the deviant act are overlooked and the social and cultural conditions under which the act took place can be relegated to the vague status of ‘environmental’ factors whose only role is to occasionally ‘trigger’ the inherent pathology of the deviant. Crime and delinquency can thereby be treated as an individual, not social, phenomenon. Inherent in this ‘individual pathology’ model is a control oriented ideology which serves to locate the causes of ‘problems’ in specific individuals and which supplies the relevant knowledge and understanding to develop the appropriate technologies and social policies for controlling deviant members. Criminological theorizing thereby becomes a means of providing new technologies for control or, failing that, a means of legitimating current policies which become justified as forms of treatment rather than punishment. Moreover, while such theorizing is not concerned to provide the subjects of its study with the means to change their social situation and status it does provide a damaging anti-intellectual diet for its consumers which in fact serves to mystify the social phenomenon under research. For example, the way in which Cowie, Cowie and Slater present their evidence is worth noting for they attempt to appeal to the reader’s ‘senses’ rather than intellect or critical faculties. They have a tendency to invoke ‘commonsense’ and concepts of the ‘natural’ to support their claims rather than relying on credible, scientific evidence. Rather than reducing the influence of their work however, their anti-theoretical and anti-intellectual approach may be conducive to acceptance by policy-makers who perceive themselves to be concerned with ‘practical’ issues and not theoretical ones. THE REJECTION OF GENDER DEAL According to Carlen, women generally are deterred from committing crime because they are brought up to see themselves as the guardian of domestic morality. They also have less opportunity to commit crime. Because they are closely supervised than males first by parents and later by husband. Patriachal idealogy promises women happiness and fulfilment from family life. Carlen’s study was based upon a small sample of mainly working class women involved in fairly serious crimes it is therefore dangerous to generalise from her findings. Nevertheless her study does provide strong support for the view that criminal behaviour becomes likely when societies mechanism of social control break down. Other sociologists have examined social control mechanism to explain while women seem so much more likely to conform than men. The implications of the ideological content of theories of female criminality. The implications of theorizing have frequently been overlooked by those sociologists or criminologists who perceive themselves merely to be observers or recorders of everyday life. Yet social theories do have indirect social implications either by confirming common-sense and culturally located beliefs or by altering the consciousness of people in their everyday lives through a criticism and demystification of accepted values and beliefs. Allen recognizes this when he argues that, Theories enter into the ideological process and emerge in an abbreviated, often vulgarized, sloganized form embedded in language and thought processes alike. They form the basis of common-sense attitudes. They are transmitted through the family, enter into folklore, get expression through the mass media. In a variety of subtle ways conventional theoretical explanations enter the conscious of individuals and provide them with instant explanations. CONCLUSION Compassionate judges and juries who viewed females as continent, docile and virtuous, and who understood the social stigmas that criminal proceedings cast upon women defendants. The quotations in this article revealed the subservience, dependence and chastity that were part of the Victorian cult of femininity. State and local laws encouraged a submissive and domestic role for women. Court officials, when faced with a direct contradiction to the popular female stereotype, such as a murderous woman, often could not accept the inconsistency and continued to treat the defendant as if she were inherently less violent than men.