Police Force, Legal-Rational Authority, and State Violence

Okay, one more entry I've posted over at Sociology In Focus uses Max Weber's element of legal-rational authority to dissect the pepper spraying that happened at the University of California, Davis back in November 2011, as well as the London uprisings around the same time. Actually the entry is more focused on the legal-rational authority granted to police forces in these cases -- how their authority contributes to and excuses their perpetration of physical violence.

Link to the story: Social Movements and State Violence. Videos for analysis over there...



academics links

Contradictory Connections: U.S. Rhetoric and the Money Flow

So the Obama Administration is urging the leadership in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia to show restraint when responding to the civil rights movements that have been pushing on across Northern Africa, and specifically in Bahrain.

US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton has been Tunisia and Egypt, speaking to the uprisings in Bahrain specifically. From MSNBC:

Clinton called the situation "alarming" and said Bahrain and neighbors were on "the wrong track" by trying to quell unrest with troops instead of reform. Bahrain's majority Shia population has been chafing for years under the absolute rule of a Sunni monarchy and, emboldened by revolts in Tunisia and Egypt, has begun to more forcefully call for changes.

"We have deplored the use of force," Clinton told reporters in Cairo before flying to Tunis. "We have said not only to the Bahrainis but to our Gulf partners that we do not think security is the answer to what is going on."

Clinton's focus on Bahrain stems from their government's recent crackdown on the uprisings. This from Al Jazeera English:



Note from the video @0:45, "More than a thousand troops pouring in from Saudi Arabia." So we call for restraint on the part of these government forces, yet the U.S. has direct ties to Saudi Arabia's military.

Back in 2010, the U.S. announced plans to sell up to $60 billion worth of military aircraft to Saudi Arabia. The rationale for the sale:

Vershbow and Shapiro both stressed that bolstering Saudi Arabia's own defense capabilities would improve U.S. security in a vital part of the world where fears are growing over Iran's nuclear program.

"This is not solely about Iran," Shapiro said. "It's about helping the Saudis with their legitimate security needs ... they live in a dangerous neighborhood and we are helping them preserve and protect their security."

Vershbow said the sale would improve Saudi Arabia's ability to coordinate with the United States on shared security challenges "so it means we may have to station fewer forces on a continuing basis in the region."

Even if this sale was for militaristic aircrafts and not smaller arms used on the ground (like those seen recently in Bahrain), one can clearly see the connections between military contractors in the U.S. with Saudi Arabia's government. The contradictions are obvious enough. If we do not want Saudi Arabia to partake in the violent crackdown on citizens who are fighting for democratic rights, we should not be selling them the means to carry out violent crackdowns.


academics directory

Teaching Sociology: How American Media Uses Violence Against Women in Afghanistan to Veil the Public

One of the more difficult things I find when teaching popular culture is getting students to connect media trends to broader trends in society. It is not difficult for students to identify patterns of discrimination. But identifying discrimination alone misses critical context.

Since 2001, the media has been saturated with coverage of “The War on Terror” (or whatever the slogan of the day is). I recently read an extremely interesting journal article by Carol Stabile and Deepa Kumar (2005) in Media, Culture & Society, titled “Unveiling imperialism: media, gender and the war on Afghanistan.”

Stabile and Kumar’s article makes the following key points:

• Prior to 9/11, American politicians and American media were not concerned at all with women’s rights in Afghanistan or other Middle Eastern countries. Following 9/11, all of a sudden, the American military became Afghan women’s saviors across American televisions and in major print sources.


• American media constructs the military’s efforts to liberate Afghan women from their oppressive Afghan male counterparts as a first-time effort, thereby dismissing any and all efforts Afghan women have taken to liberate themselves.


• American media fails to acknowledge that when the United States armed and trained the mujahideen in the 1980s to push back the Soviet Union, the CIA was completely aware of the mujahideen’s extreme sexist tendencies. Thus, American efforts were far more invested in securing contracts to oil pipelines through Afghanistan and winning the Cold War than they were in humanitarian/women’s rights.


• American media never acknowledges that since the Soviet Union was ousted and the Taliban took over Afghanistan (due heavily to American support), Afghan women’s rights declined immensely.


• And since America’s military presence in Afghanistan, our media suggests Afghan women’s conditions have improved, when in reality they have hardly changed.

Some text from Stabile and Kumar’s article:

When we look at the condition of women today in Afghanistan, it becomes clear that the US never really had their liberation in mind. While some things have changed since the collapse of the Taliban for women, much remains the same. So, for instance, women may now venture out in certain regions without a male escort, but they still do not enjoy basic human rights. And while 1.5 million Afghan children now attend schools – one third of them girls – more than 3 million children do not go to schools because no infrastructure exists. Reports reveal that women are still punished according to Islamic laws. Kabul jail had no women prisoners shortly after the fall of the Taliban, but as of April 2002 women were being incarcerated for crimes such as leaving their husbands or having relationships with members of the opposite sex (Ahmed-Ullah, 2002). One year after the US attacked Afghanistan, the war-ravaged country had the second highest maternal mortality rate in the world (Sierra Leone was number one): 1700 out of every 100,000 women died during pregnancy or childbirth. In the US, the maternal mortality rate is 12 out of every 100,000 (Reuters, 2002). In December 2002, Human Rights Watch released a report documenting continued violence against Afghan women, particularly in the Western regions of Afghanistan (Human Rights Watch, 2001). (p. 775, 776).

The bottom line is that the American media does not present a realistic, accurate portrayal of Afghan women because Afghan women's so-called emancipation due to American efforts serves as a moralistic veil, influencing the American public to continue supporting the war. But what’s clear is American economic, political, and military efforts are not truly invested in Afghan girls’ and women’s rights; they are interested in oil.

How then, do we interpret TIME magazine’s recent issue and its cover portrait, showing Aisha – an 18-year-old Afghan woman whose nose and ears were cut off after she fled her abusive in-laws? Richard Stengel, Managing Editor for TIME, discusses the cover portrait in his article, “The Plight of Afghan Women: A Disturbing Picture”:

In the end, I felt that the image is a window into the reality of what is happening — and what can happen — in a war that affects and involves all of us. I would rather confront readers with the Taliban's treatment of women than ignore it. I would rather people know that reality as they make up their minds about what the U.S. and its allies should do in Afghanistan.

The much publicized release of classified documents by WikiLeaks has already ratcheted up the debate about the war. Our story and the haunting cover image by the distinguished South African photographer Jodi Bieber are meant to contribute to that debate. We do not run this story or show this image either in support of the U.S. war effort or in opposition to it. We do it to illuminate what is actually happening on the ground. As lawmakers and citizens begin to sort through the information about the war and make up their minds, our job is to provide context and perspective on one of the most difficult foreign policy issues of our time.

Explicitly, it appears TIME is taking an apolitical approach, simply reporting the news so to speak – reporting what is out there, in turn, allowing the public to make their own assessments. Implicitly, however, it is what is not reported (what is never reported) that makes this picture and the attendant discourse entirely political.

The messages implicitly conveyed: Afghan men and Afghan culture are horrible; American culture is great. We are, once again, the white knights coming in to save the tortured, helpless women of color from their demonic brown-skinned men. Orientalist discourse, truly at its best.

The messages never conveyed: American foreign policy helped set the stage for this hideous practice to transpire by knowingly supporting a regime rooted so deeply in sexism years ago. And now, America continues to invest more in its ubiquitous war machine than it does in say Afghan women’s and girls’ education (seriously, how many schools have been built and sustained by American efforts?) or in public health facilities. Oh, and dimensions of sexism (institutionalized and personal) persist in the United States.

At the risk of being opportunistic myself, the TIME magazine portrait and its attendant stories, coupled with Stabile and Kumar’s article make for an excellent teaching/learning opportunity. Simply viewing the TIME magazine cover and articles, one could easily point to horrifically sexist norms, and stop there. With Stabile and Kumar’s article, the questions and discussion become much richer.

Does the mainstream American media inadvertently (or deliberately) collude with American political, economic, and militaristic entities by using women’s rights as an opportunity to make our country look good, when really, we simply want resources? If efforts were truly being made to impede violence against women, why isn’t our military taking a stand in and around the Democratic Republic of the Congo (listen to this inspiring podcast)? What should America’s role really be in the Middle East if women's rights are a central concern?

Full Reference:

Stabile, C. A., & Kumar, D. (2005). Unveiling imperialism: media, gender and the war on Afghanistan. Media, Culture & Society, 27 (5), 765-782.


Academics Blogs

What Western Companies are Connected to Child Exploitation/Beatings in Bangladesh?

The Guardian has a story up about police in Bangladesh who reportedly beat workers in response to their demand for back pay and fair wages. As can be seen from the story's main picture, some of the reportedly abused workers are children.

Witnesses said at least 30 people, mainly workers producing garments for global brands, were injured. Pictures showed children apparently being beaten. Ten policemen were also hurt.

Although there has been violence for several weeks, today saw workers erecting barricades, pelting police with stones and attacking cars. Police described the fighting as the worst yet seen.

Children under the age of 14 are banned by law from working, but campaigners say many can still be found in the sprawling factories. Hundreds of teenagers took part in running battles with police today.

[...]

Many of the rioting workers are employed by plants which make ready-to-wear garments for sale in western high street stores.

"We worked for them," shouted one striking worker. "They are doing business and making money, but not paying us."

(Emphasis added).

As noted above, there is a direct link between the less than attractive (to put it mildly) working conditions and private clothing companies from the west -- but what companies??? Reading through the rest of the story, one ultimately gets the sense that this is an isolated domestic issue, impacted solely by Bangladeshi institutional conditions, not global business connections.

The garment industry accounts for more than 80% of impoverished Bangladesh's £10bn annual export earnings, according to commerce ministry data. The minimum wage, which is set by the government, was introduced in 1994 but remained unchanged despite soaring food prices until 2006.

[...]

The report cited a survey released last month by the Bangladesh Factory Inspection Department which showed that almost 15% of employers did not pay their workers on time between January and May. Many other factory owners did not pay overtime, while several continued to pay less than the government's minimum wage.

The garment industry accounts for about 40% of Bangladesh's total industrial workforce. Campaigners say wages have been cut by 20 to 30% recently in a country where almost half the population is already living below the poverty line.

Low levels of unionisation and organisation have meant protests that are chaotic but difficult for the police to predict or break up. Raids by protesters on well-known factories are frequent occurrences. Owners have hired their own gangs to protect their production lines.

In looking at the institutions mentioned in this story, they are all likely Bangladeshi: the "government" sets the minimum wage; the "Bangladesh Factory Inspection Department" ostensibly oversees working conditions in factories; the "factory owners" are likely middle managment contractors hired locally by the true corporate owners who are probably located back in high-income countries; "campaigners" would be grass-roots activists in Bangladesh that help with local "unionisation"; and finally, the "owners" (again, locally contracted middle management) hire local "gangs" to protect the factories.

It is as if the central corporate entities back in the west who truly drive the garment industry do not even exist, and therefore hold no responsibility in creating these oppressive, violent working conditions. Who are these companies? Why not name them? Are they not an important entity in this story and others like it around the world?

Here's the kicker line from the story: "Factory owners argue that the unrest risks frightening away western clients who need reliable deliveries." The irony in this statement is sickening. All that matters to the local factory owners is making sure Bangladeshi employees keep the peace (i.e., remain passive while being exploited) so that rich western clients don't take their business elsewhere. The western oppressors at the top of the food chain remain physically removed from the violence, exonerated from improving working conditions, revered by those in Bangladesh with the most power, and invisible in readers' eyes.


Best Blogs

Globalization, Corrupt Government, and Ubiquitous Violence: Papua New Guinea

Nothing terribly new here. However, if one is looking for an example of how governmental institutions and international big business contribute to civilian exploitation and increase the likelihood of violence across societal domains, take a look at Papua New Guinea.

Extensive ethnic conflict tore apart PNG throughout the 1990s due to mining companies' oppressive work conditions. Now, IRIN News reports how the law has been re-structured, such that indigenous persons cannot assert their land rights when the government colludes with private "developers.":

Papua New Guinea’s indigenous people have lost their right to challenge developers and the state over deals involving their land and resources.

[...]

The changes remove the rights that Papua New Guineans have had for years to protect their property from environmental harm and the right to sue for compensation for environmental damage and the customary rights to claim compensation for environmental harm.

Disputes concerning land and resource rights between indigenous groups, the government and corporate entities are not uncommon in PNG. While figures vary significantly, more than 5,000 people lost their lives on the island of Bougainville off the east coast of PNG between 1989 and 1999 following a bitter fight over compensation between Bougainville Copper Limited (BCL), an Australian-owned mining company, and the hundreds of indigenous landowners it displaced in Panguna.

The conflict escalated into a bloody civil war between members of the indigenous population and government troops.

The PNG state is further bolstered and protected by a violent police force, that according to the United Nations, utilizes torture to control prisoners:

The expert said the standards of hygiene at Mount Hagen Police Station were “beyond description,” and detainees were forced to urinate and defecate in bottles and plastic bags, which were then picked up by female detainees and piled up in the small common space.

Mr. Nowak was also concerned that “prisoners who escape are subjected to severe punishment, amounting to torture, including through brutal beatings with bush knives and gun butts, shooting detainees at close range and cutting their tendons with axes and bush knives after they are apprehended, with the intent of disabling them.

“The victims are usually kept in punishment cells, without any medical treatment, which sometimes even led to their death,” he added.

Considering that the state utilizes violence to extract the country's natural resources and control resistent members of the population, it is hardly surprising that family violence and violence against women is high in PNG.

The concept of "structural violence" suggests that those who are oppressed tend to utilize the same forms of oppression committed against them, upon others. This is because in experiencing their own oppression, they learn how to best acquire power from their oppressors, in this case through highly violent means. However, since they do not have the means to revolt against their oppressors, they use their oppressors' tactics on those less powerful, in this case women and children:



Of course since PNG is a small country in the Pacific, these cases of ubiquitous violence that stem from macro structural exploitation, generally stay off the international media radar.

Expulsion as an Option of Dominant-Minority Relations: Israel and the Occupied Territories

"Expulsion" is defined as "an effort to drive out a group that is seen as a social problem rather than attempting to resolve the problem cooperatively. This policy often arises after other methods, such as assimilation or extermination, have failed" (Parrillo, 2008, p. 137).

A good example of expulsion, in combination with extermination, occurring right now is the treatment of Palestinians in the occupied territory of the Gaza Strip by Israeli forces. In the aftermath of the 2009 Gazan War (in which the death tolls were substantially higher among Palestinians), Isreal's sanctions have become even more ugly. A fairly balanced, rationale perspective from The Independent, "Leading Article: A costly misjudgement by Israel":

Confused though the picture might be, however, what has so far emerged conforms to a pattern that has become all too familiar. Confronted with a situation it saw as threatening, Israel applied massive armed force – force that would appear, at least, to have been out of all proportion to the circumstances. Acting apparently without warning, Israeli forces closed in when the boats were still in international waters, 40 miles from the coast. At that point there was no immediate threat, as most people would see it, either to Israel's blockade, or to its national security – and these are not necessarily the same thing.

Yes, it can be argued that the aid flotilla was conceived by the Free Gaza Movement (FGM) as a deliberate provocation. The presence of elderly people and at least one baby on the boats does not detract from that. And yes, it can be argued that the plan to breach Israel's sea blockade of Gaza was foolhardy. Israel insists that its blockade is designed to thwart arms shipments destined for Hamas. It was never going to stand idly by as the ships came within reach of the coast, however peaceful FGM's leaders might have professed their intentions to be.

The catastrophe and the shame is that this is not the first time such an unequal confrontation has taken place. Time and again, Israel has found itself applying military force and swiftly prevailing, only to lose whatever moral high ground it had at the outset. No one – at least no one in an internationally recognised government with the possible exception of Iran – disputes Israel's right to defend itself if its security is threatened. But since Hamas seized control of Gaza three years ago, Israel has repeatedly shown itself at its worst. It is not only the vast imbalance between Israel's professional military might and the armed fighters of Hamas. Nor is it only the suffering caused to Gaza's residents and the apparent irrationality of many aspects of the blockade – including the ban on building materials needed to repair the war damage.

Above all, it is Israel's abject failure to devise ways of defending itself other than by overwhelming military force. Faced with mass demonstrations or aid shipments that are cast by their organisers as peaceful, Israel still has no answer beyond a call to arms. It cannot, therefore, be surprised when most of the rest of the world then judges the means to be excessive and disproportionate to the ends.

As clearly stated, it is Isreal's dominant power (i.e., "gunboat diplomacy") in the form of militarisitic might that is a central variable in this violent mix. Irrespective of who fired the first shots in this latest tragedy, the ongoing imbalance in death tolls (even on ships hoping to provide humanitarian aid) demonstrates how discimination can mainfest in its most extreme forms (explusion and extermination) when power disparities widen.

As the global community continues to watch, or simply condemn Israel, the social dynamics that enable these tragedies will persist.

"Climate Wars" and Ethnic Violence -- Kenya

The collective violence that occurred in the western Sudanese region of Darfur drew significant international attention. Unfortunately, a key contributing factor to the violence in Darfur that few people are aware of is climate change.

As different ethnic groups lost crops and the Sudanese government worked in tandem with militia groups (the Janjaweed) in attacking non-Arab tribes over a battle for scarcer resources, genocide ensued.

As this Los Angeles Times article explains, the same pattern could be on the horizon in Kenya, where the necessary elements are in place that frequently lead to horrific forms of inter-ethnic violence -- scarce natural resources, over-population, corrupt government, a lack of international intervention, poverty, and a proliferation of small arms.

From the story, "Kenyas draw weapons over shrinking resources":

Tribes that lived side by side for decades say they've been pushed to warfare by competition for disappearing water and pasture. The government is accused of exacerbating tensions by taking sides and arming combatants who once used spears and arrows.

The aim, all sides say, is no longer just to steal land or cattle, but to drive the enemy away forever.

It's a combustible mix of forces that the United Nations estimates has resulted in at least 400 deaths in northern Kenya this year. Moreover, experts worry that it's just the beginning of a new era of climate-driven conflict in Africa.

And as noted previously, prolonged, intensified inter-ethnic clashes over dwindling resources could be turning into a pattern across Africa, even though climate change is largely understood to be a problem driven by high-income countries. More from the article:

Africa is no stranger to conflict: The continent has been rocked by war, ethnic hatred, post-colonial border disputes and competition for resources, including oil and diamonds. But as the deserts encroach in Sudan, rainfall declines in the Horn of Africa -- a 15% decrease is predicted over the next few decades -- and fresh water evaporates in the south, climate change is transforming conflicts and kicking old tensions into overdrive.

"Climate change amplifies and escalates vulnerability," said Achim Steiner, director of the U.N. Environment Program. "It doesn't mean that conflict is inevitable, but it's much more likely."

And finally, easy access to small arms exacerbates the problem. Not surprisingly, the United States produces the highest number of weapons in the world, a good portion of which make it into the black market (see HERE).

But conflict is perhaps the most alarming symptom. Violence is becoming deadlier thanks to population growth and the proliferation of arms. Thirty years ago, a few dozen tribal warriors with spears might have clashed at a water hole. Today rural communities are armed with AK-47s and even national armies are jumping into the fray.

[...]

Most climate-related conflicts in Africa have been localized, but experts warn that "climate wars" between neighboring countries could be on the horizon.

"If there will be any wars, they will probably be over water," said Odingo of the climate change panel.

It's globalization at its worst. The whole article is an important and engaging read; check it out.



(Photos via the L.A. Times)

Illustrating the Multiple Layers of Male Hegemony

This YouTube piece up on Al Jazerra makes for an interesting example, illustrating how women's oppression cuts across multiple layers in society and manifests from one stage in a conflict to the next.



To begin with, the war between Hamas and Israel was led on both sides by men. Thus, most (though not all) of the war casualties were male. The over-representation of male victims in homicides and via war is nothing new; nor is it unique to any part of the world. And for some, this may suggest a lack of male privilege. However, the fact remains that it is men who are making the systemic decisions to engage in war.

With a disproportionate number of men killed in war via combat and civilian attack, a disproportionate number of women are left widows. In this example, we can see the after-effects of how women and their families are impacted since they have been steered away from formal education and other forms of occupational training. They are forced to venture into a male-dominated culture with a limited occupational skill set and minimal social network.

And this is to say nothing of women/girls who are victims of sexual violence when used as a weapon of war...

Group Sexual Assaults and Masculinity: Mainstream Media Keeps Missing It

The recent case of a 15-year-old girl who was allegedly gang raped by a group of boys in Richmond, CA has garnered quite a bit of recent press, understandably so. One of the attendant issues being discussed is that there were a number of bystanders who did not participate physically in the assault, but were complicit by cheering on or simply by observing but not intervening in any way to stop the group assault.

One of the things I've noticed among the expert discourse on National Public Radio is discussion of bystander apathy, noting the classic and tragic 1964 homicide of Kitty Genovese who was killed as bystanders diffused their personal responsibility to do anything, including calling the authorities. What has not been discussed is how a violent and misogynistic masculinity plays into these types of male-driven assaults.

In fact, it took a caller on this podcast (go to about 26 minutes into the podcast) to point this out. But even then, the expert panelist responds to the caller by swaying away from the gendered nature of this alleged crime, focusing instead on her personal interests of bystanders "freezing" while watching abusive behavior.

Within the literature on masculinity, a number of scholars have theorized group assaults of males on females and males on other males, specifically noting how these group assaults are a male-based bonding mechanism, enacted as a form of violent participatory theater for the perpetrators. Michael Messner and Jeff Benedict (see Public Heroes, Private Felons) have written a great deal on this issue as it relates to male athletes.

From Messner's Taking the Field: Women, Men and Sports:

...the dynamic underlying gang rapes is a statement of group-based male power, expressed through a dual process of misogynist denigration of women and erotic bonding among men, and this process has its roots in the erotic bonding of the misogynist joking culture of athletic teams. (p. 40).

However, this violent, misogynistic dynamic is not limited to the sporting world. In multiple arenas where heterosexual males form bachelor societies (e.g., fraternities, military units, prisons, sports teams), extreme forms of gendered violence are more likely to develop. Karen Franklin's excellent article titled "Enacting Masculinity: Antigay Violence and Group Rape
as Participatory Theater," published in Sexuality Research & Social Policy speaks to this phenomenon. Her article dissects the case of a 2003 Long Island, New York high school football team (graphic language):

According to a subsequent Grand Jury investigation report (Pingel, 2004), the assaults began on the first night of camp, when one of the young victims was taped to his bed. The boy was then forced to go to an adjoining cabin and put powder and gel in the hair of another underclassman. The next day, two assailants held down a boy while a third assailant sodomized him with a broomstick. This was done in front of other players, who laughed and joked about it. The broomstick assault was repeated the day after that. This time, the assailants applied duct tape to the victim’s pubic area, buttocks, legs, and eyebrows, inflicting severe pain by pulling off the hair on these parts of his body. Again, other players witnessed the assault. (p. 30).

To understand these public and gendered assaults inflicted upon females and males, Franklin offers the following explanation:

Participants in antigay assaults and group rapes usually recall feeling positive emotions at the time. During the assault, there is a drug-like high produced by the excitement and danger. Afterwards, there is a feeling of closeness and camaraderie, a sense of bonding produced by communal transgression. But there may also be an enormous, collective sigh of relief, in that they have survived this public test with their masculinity intact.

In other words, underneath the experienced veneer of camaraderie and warmth is a desperate struggle to achieve dominance, maintain status, or even to get through the ordeal with one’s masculinity intact. This competition for status or survival is not directly acknowledged. Rather, it is camouflaged by the ostensible goal of debasing a weaker, more feminine outsider.

There is more to Franklin's thesis than what is provided above (the entire article is worth a close read). However, in applying Messner's and Franklin's theoretical approach to the Richmond, CA case, if we can assume (1) all the alleged perpetrators were male and (2) all or most of the bystanders were male, then the collective assault was made possible by objectifying the victim so that she became an object used to help the boys/men bond.

In other words, the mainstream media is once again missing it. Although diffused responsibility is present in the Richmond, CA case and similar cases, that analysis alone is markedly incomplete. These examples of sexualized violence speak to the ongoing crisis in masculinity that permeates our world. As long as males build a sense of hegemonic masculinity through the debasement of women and other males, we will continue to have these types of sexual assaults perpetrated in the form of mass war crimes, small group and individualized assaults.

Additional NPR coverage:

• City Mobilizes In Response To Rape At School
• Number Of Arrests Growing In Calif. Gang Rape
  

Ethnocentrism in the Media

Examining the ways stories are framed in the media is a useful way of illustrating how ethnocentric we are as a global society. On the current front page of National Public Radio (NPR.org; 10.22.09) are international stories on Iran's failure to meet deadlines on nuclear proposals, the lack of key American politicians working with Afghanistan, and traumatic brain injury from gridiron football. It's obvious NPR has an international eye, but it appears the international stories typically covered are those that have a close connection to the United States.

On Al Jazeera's front page one can see immediately in its website structure, a broader international focus, with user-friendly links established so readers can quickly go to pages dedicated to Africa, the Americas, Asia-Pacific, Central/South Asia, Europe, and the Middle East. On "The America's" front page (10.22.09), the major stories promoted focus on the the U.S. envoy and the Afghan elections, an explosion in Puerto Rico, and the shifting government in Honduras. In Al Jazeera's conception of "The America's," the United States is not necessarily framed as the center.

While ethnocentrism (or some may say nationalism) embedded in major news sites may seem fairly obvious, what's less obvious is the way ethnocentrism shapes our international awareness and sensibilities. As an example, one recent and hideous story only making marginal news across U.S. websites, but which is being covered much more heavily on Al Jazeera, is the terrorizing of protesters in Guinea who were advocating for democracy and speaking out against Guinea's military government at the end of last month (September 2009).

The violence enacted against the protesters was grotesquely physical and sexual, said to be carried out openly by military forces backing Moussa Dadis Camara, Guinea's military leader who assumed leadership via a bloodless coup last year (not so bloodless anymore).





With Guinea perceived as less consequential for the United States at this moment, one has to search with far greater effort to find U.S. news sites that pay even moderate attention to this issue. Conversely, finding background stories on Guinea within Al Jazeera' site is rather easy. Because these stories are erased from or are never introduced to the West's public consciousness, we continue to look inward and ignore certain global crises, and in this case, the attendant forces that shape international terrorism.

Assigning Values to Manhood: An Example from Academia

Peter McAllister, an Australian anthropologist residing temporarily in Cambridge, studied fossilized footstep prints of Aboriginal hunters from about 20,000 years ago, documented in his book, Manthropology. He gauged the prints of an Aboriginal, dubbed "T8," and concluded that T8's running speed on soft ground translates to greater running speed than current 100 meter and 200 meter world record holder, Usain Bolt, on a rubber track. From the Reuters.com story:

An analysis of the footsteps of one of the men, dubbed T8, shows he reached speeds of 37 kph on a soft, muddy lake edge. Bolt, by comparison, reached a top speed of 42 kph during his then world 100 meters record of 9.69 seconds at last year's Beijing Olympics.

In an interview in the English university town of Cambridge where he was temporarily resident, McAllister said that, with modern training, spiked shoes and rubberized tracks, aboriginal hunters might have reached speeds of 45 kph.

"We can assume they are running close to their maximum if they are chasing an animal," he said.

"But if they can do that speed of 37 kph on very soft ground I suspect there is a strong chance they would have outdone Usain Bolt if they had all the advantages that he does."

McAllister also argues that women from eras ago were "superior," as exemplified through their ability to out-do Arnold Schwarzenegger in an arm wrestling contest. Isn't it interesting how he uses an example which pries at men's physical insecurities by having a woman from the past being able to out-muscle a male icon of physicality?

Any Neanderthal woman could have beaten former bodybuilder and current California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in an arm wrestle.

[...]

McAllister said a Neanderthal woman had 10 percent more muscle bulk than modern European man. Trained to capacity she would have reached 90 percent of Schwarzenegger's bulk at his peak in the 1970s.

Okay, so comparative anthropology shows that average Homo sapiens from back in the day were more athletic than today's elite athletes. Maybe, maybe not. According to McAllister, they were. But so what? What's the big deal? Who cares, and why?

Apparaently McAllister cares becuase this decline in athleticism is a so-called indicator of men's decline, or physical "softening" in society. Good lord, how long is this male identity crisis in physicality going to go on? Note how McAllister assigns value to masculine physicality. More from the Reuters.com article:

"If you're reading this then you -- or the male you have bought it for -- are the worst man in history. [emphasis added].

"No ifs, no buts -- the worst man, period...As a class we are in fact the sorriest cohort of masculine Homo sapiens to ever walk the planet." [emphasis added].

[...]

Manthropology abounds with other examples:

* Roman legions completed more than one-and-a-half marathons a day carrying more than half their body weight in equipment.

* Athens employed 30,000 rowers who could all exceed the achievements of modern oarsmen.

* Australian aboriginals threw a hardwood spear 110 meters or more (the current world javelin record is 98.48).

[...]

"We are so inactive these days and have been since the industrial revolution really kicked into gear," McAllister replied. "These people were much more robust than we were."

We already know how society at large privileges manhood in terms of physical strength and aggression. We see this pervasively in popular culture (e.g., movies, television, novels).



But now we see how even academia perpetuates the socially constructed understanding that "good" masculinity is rooted in physical strength, power, an speed. Whereas the "worst" man is someone who is unathletic and who has been "feminized" by a more sedentary corporate culture.

Gee, this is the premise of the movie, Fight Club. Knowing that even academicians perpetuate these gendered values, it's no wonder guys continue to engage in violence against people from all genders and sexualities across the globe.

(Photo courtesy of Reuters.com)

Masculine Insecurity and Targeting Women

Another public shooting by an unstable male, this time at the LA Fitness sporting club in Bridgeville, Pennsylvania. The 48-year-old male perpetrator, George Sodini, reportedly entered the gym, went into an aerobics room with female attendees, turned out the lights and opened fire on the complete strangers. Twelve women were shot, three fatally. Sodini then committed suicide by shooting himself.

Emerging reports about Sodini’s online blog are providing further insight into the motives behind his actions, specifically identifying insecurities he held about his sexual masculinity. From the New York Times:

Tortured by loneliness and his lack of success with women, George Sodini developed a plan to get even. On Tuesday night, he executed it, opening fire in a fitness center here and hitting 12 women, 3 fatally, before turning a gun on himself.

Mr. Sodini, 48, described his anger and frustration in painstaking detail in notes he carried with him and left at his home and in a chilling online diary, offering an extraordinarily stark portrait of a killer’s motives. Officials said Mr. Sodini, of Scott Township, a suburb about six miles southwest of Pittsburgh, prepared for the assault for at least nine months, buying ammunition and at least three guns and making practice runs to the fitness center.

[…]

In his online journal, which has since been taken off the Internet, Mr. Sodini, a programmer-analyst at a local law firm, said that he had not had a girlfriend since 1984 and that he had not had sex since July 1990, when he was 29.

"I actually look good," Mr. Sodini wrote in an entry dated Dec. 29, 2008. "I dress good, am clean-shaven, bathe, touch of cologne — yet 30 million women rejected me — over an 18- or 25-year period. That is how I see it. Thirty million is my rough guesstimate of how many desirable single women there are.

"A man needs a woman for confidence. He gets a boost on the job, career, with other men, and everywhere else when he knows inside he has someone to spend the night with and who is also a friend."

Note his isolation (i.e., anomie). But more importantly, I recently read an absolutely outstanding journal article by Angela Harris titled "Gender, Violence, Race, and Criminal Justice," published in the Stanford Law Review. Among making a number of excellent points in the article, Harris theorizes masculinity, its relationships to gendered insecurity and violence:

Manliness is one of those ideas that is often made real with violence. Violent acts often carry idiosyncratic moral or emotional meanings to the perpetrator. But violent acts are also, sometimes, the result of the character of masculinity itself as a cultural ideal. In these cases, men use violence or the threat of violence as an affirmative way of proving individual or collective masculinity, or in desperation when they perceive their masculine selfidentity to be under attack. (p. 781).

Later, Harris discusses work by Jackson Katz and James Gilligan in her footnotes, offering further perspective into the Pennsylvania tragedy, specifically describing issues of male sexual anxiety, additional patriarchal gender-role expectations, and the potential for violence:

"Humiliation always embodies an awareness of impotence," remarks Katz. Conversely, impotence-literal or figurative-always brings with it the threat of humiliation. Katz's analysis connects humiliation to male gender identity since women cannot be impotent.

Gilligan, based on interviews with violent criminals, argues that the main motives for violence are "the fear of shame and ridicule, and the overbearing need to prevent others from laughing at oneself by making them weep instead." GILLIGAN, supra note 14, at 77 (1996). Gilligan also connects this emotional dynamic explicitly with gender:

The male gender role generates violence by exposing men to shame if they are not violent, and rewarding them with honor when they are. The female gender role also stimulates male violence at the same time that it inhibits female violence. It does this by restricting women to the role of highly unfree sex objects, and honoring them to the degree that they submit to those roles or shaming them when they rebel. This encourages men to treat women as sex objects, and encourages women to conform to that sex role; but it also encourages women (and men) to treat men as violence objects. It also encourages a man to become violent if the woman to whom he is related or married "dishonors" him by acting in ways that transgress her prescribed sexual role. (p. 789, 790).

Harris’s article is a highly recommended read, as she also delves into the public's romance with gender violence and the hyper-masculine composition of predominantly male groups (namely police departments, street gangs, and the state). Our fascination with gender violence coupled with violent male institutions results in the public believing that "a certain amount of gender violence is necessary for law and order" (p. 802).

More from Harris on the social construction of gender:

Most of what is important about masculinity and femininity is not innate, but rather is generated by social institutions and conventions. If masculine gender performances repeatedly take certain destructive forms, this is not because men are inherently bad but because social conventions take on a life of their own. The question is not how to alter men's nature, then, but what can be done to alter the connections between masculinity and violence. (p. 802).

Thus, in order to prevent and reduce shootings like that carried out by Sodini, Harris theorizes that institutions need to be de-gendered. The specific examples she uses are police departments. Theoretically, however, her analysis would also call to revamp the media and other institutions that influence men like Sodini to feel inadequate and to feel that adequacy can be achieved by dominating women through various forms of abuse (sexual, economic, emotional, physical...in this case death). To say the least, extensive gendered reform is needed.

Full citation for the Harris article:
Harris, Angela P. (2000). Gender, violence, race, and criminal justice. Stanford Law Review, 52 (4), 777-807.

More multimedia on the tragedy from a Reuters post.

For Anyone Who Thinks Patriarchy Doesn't Exist...

Today the BBC World Service aired one of the most disturbing pieces I've ever heard. The piece stems from the brutal gang rape and murder of South African football star, Eudy Simelane, which took place in April 2008. The Guardian covered this tragedy and the attendant phenomenon termed "corrective rape" (recall the movie Boys Don't Cry), which generally goes unaddressed by the South African criminal justice system:

The partially clothed body of Eudy Simelane, former star of South Africa's acclaimed Banyana Banyana national female football squad, was found in a creek in a park in Kwa Thema, on the outskirts of Johannesburg. Simelane had been gang-raped and brutally beaten before being stabbed 25 times in the face, chest and legs. As well as being one of South Africa's best-known female footballers, Simelane was a voracious equality rights campaigner and one of the first women to live openly as a lesbian in Kwa Thema.

Her brutal murder took place last April, and since then a tide of violence against lesbians in South Africa has continued to rise. Human rights campaigners say it is characterised by what they call "corrective rape" committed by men behind the guise of trying to "cure" lesbians of their sexual orientation.

Now, a report by the international NGO ActionAid, backed by the South African Human Rights Commission, condemns the culture of impunity around these crimes, which it says are going unrecognised by the state and unpunished by the legal system.

The report calls for South Africa's criminal justice system to recognise hate crimes, including corrective rape, as a separate crime category. It argues this will force police to take action over the rising violence and ensure the resources and support is provided to those trying to bring perpetrators to justice.

The ferocity and brutality of Simelane's murder sent shockwaves through Kwa Thema, where she was much known and loved for bringing sports fame to the sprawling township.

[...]

The Guardian talked to lesbians in townships in Johannesburg and Cape Town who said they were being deliberately targeted for rape and that the threat of violence had become an everyday ordeal.

"Every day I am told that they are going to kill me, that they are going to rape me and after they rape me I'll become a girl," said Zakhe Sowello from Soweto, Johannesburg. "When you are raped you have a lot of evidence on your body. But when we try and report these crimes nothing happens, and then you see the boys who raped you walking free on the street."

According to the BBC World Service piece, black lesbians in particular are targeted. Both the BBC World Service and Guardian pieces have candid interviews with South African men who casually/humorously discuss raping women, how they justify their actions, the violent socialization of masculinity that leads to this patriarchal phenomenon, and the lack of response by South African authorities -- lack of response by bystanders/general public, police, and up through the courts (i.e., radical criminology). See also here.

Sexual Violence as Male Bonding

SocProf addressed this over on The Global Sociology Blog already but I thought I’d add in my two cents. A recent study conducted by the South African Medical Research Council found that 27.6% of the men they sampled (N = 1,738) admitted to having raped a woman or girl in their lifetime.

The study included men from different race and age backgrounds, who lived in rural and urban areas, and noted the tendency of men to gang rape as a form of male bonding. The sample was relatively young. IRIN reported some other alarming statistics from the study.

Of the 27.6 percent of men who had committed rape, "23.2 percent of men said they had raped two to three women, 8.4 percent had raped four to five women, 7.1 percent said they had raped six to 10, and 7.7 percent said they had raped more than 10 women or girls," the report said.

"Asked about their age at the first time they had forced a woman or girl into sex, 9.8 percent said they were under 10 years old, 16.4 percent were 10-14 years old, 46.5 percent were 15-19 years old, 18.6 percent were 20-24 years old, 6.9 percent were 25-29 years old, and 1.9 percent were 30 or older."

Note that first sentence from the second paragraph, about 10% of those who admitted committing rape did so the first time before age 10. Of course conducting research for the sake of research can just be flat out depressing. The study revealed some interesting correlation’s that may help to push for solutions to this violent public health concern.

"Men who disclosed having raped were significantly more likely to have engaged in a range of other risky sexual behaviours. They were more likely to have had more than 20 sexual partners, transactional sex, sex with a prostitute, heavy alcohol consumption, to have been physically violent towards a partner, raped a man, and not to have used a condom consistently in the past year."

Significant factors in the high incidence of rape were parent absenteeism, childhood trauma, bullying, teasing and "deeply embedded ideas about South African manhood ... which can be predominantly addressed through strategies of apprehension and prosecution of perpetrators" the report said.

South Africa’s History of Apartheid

The issue of parent absenteeism merits additional commentary. A 2007 documentary carried out by the BBC World Service titled “Sexual Violence in South Africa” quotes researcher Rachael Jewkes, a leading scholar in the area of women’s sexual victimization and who helped conduct the first study cited above.

(Starting at 4:50 of the podcast):

One feature of South Africa is that we have quite a large proportion of the population who have been massively traumatized through the history of the country and through growing up in apartheid. And one of the things that apartheid did was it systematically destroy family life … the past law system meant that you couldn’t reside in an urban area unless you had a job. And often that meant that a man would be able to get a pass and come work in an urban area but he wouldn’t be able to bring his family with him. And so this lead to the destruction of family life.

And very often they would end up breaking ties with that family because of the untenable situation … And one of the things we know from South Africa, as well as internationally, is that men who have been traumatized in childhood, whether experiencing severe physical violence or sexual abuse, but also emotional abuse and neglect, and physical neglect are much more likely to perpetrate rape when they get older.

Another interviewee from the podcast who is male spoke to the legacy of apartheid in South Africa on men.

(Starting from 10:00 of the podcast):

Apartheid created a thinking and a feeling that men, in particular black men, that you were nothing. You’re subhuman beings. And in most cases, black men would be left with pain, would be left with anger. And more often than not, not anger, but pain is translated into violent behavior or violent tendencies.

Thus, as the mass exploitation of people occurs, the violence trickles down with women and girls of color feeling the added exploitation at the hands of men from their own and other ethnic groups. Clearly, apartheid had its ill effects in adding to an already severely patriarchal culture by disrupting stable family life. As stress increased, ideas about how to achieve appropriate masculinity became more corrosive, furthering women’s abuse.

Male Bonding through Sexual Violence in North America…

Of course this does not only happen in Africa or those “other foreign, non-western” areas. Philippe Bourgois’s classic ethnography, In Search of Respect: Selling Crack in El Barrio clearly illustrates the way colonized men of color in America’s urban ghettoes also exploit women, using gang rape as a way to bond with each other and assert a violent masculinity.

And it’s not just poor men of color who engage in this sexually violent means of bonding. In all-male or predominantly-male groups, men frequently exploit women (or girls) as a means of becoming a more cohesive group. This happens far too frequently in athletics, increasingly from high school up to the professional ranks.

Jeff Benedict’s book, Public Heroes, Private Felons documents the different ways American college and professional athletes have utilized the criminal justice system and public opinion to get away with both physical and sexual abuse of women. The same thing happens in Canada with hockey stars (see Laura Robinson’s Crossing the Line: Violence and Sexual Assault in Canada’s National Sport), and in Australia among rugby footballers.

…And in Australia

A recent documentary carried out by the Australian Broadcasting Company vividly demonstrates how the culture of rugby influences too many players to objectify women and then use them to build cohesion among their male peer group.

Sarah Ferguson’s excellent report, “Code of Silence” still has two interviews up that point to the problematic nature of male athletes' socialization and how it perpetuates women’s victimization. From an interview with Charmyne Palavi, who was raped by an Australian rugby player:

(Starting at 3:26 of the video):

Interviewer: Do you see that this, or hear about it, this issue of there being three players, four players, or a couple watching or what’s going on there?

Palavi: I don’t know of many girls that knowingly go with a player, thinking that all the other players are gonna come in. They’ll go with a player thinking that it’s gonna be just them and the player. And they get back to the hotel room, or when they get back to that player’s house, cause they never really know where they’re going to, [the other players] either come into the room while it’s happening. And you know, what’s a girl supposed to do? … To think that they need these guys around them. Where’s the whole one on one sexual activity? [They have] Power in numbers.

Also interviewed for the piece was Steve Burraston, CEO of the Newcastle Knights, who chimes in on why such a high proportion of athletes (or in this case rugby players) engage in violent and/or drug-related behaviors.

(Starting at 12:10 of the video):

We have to recognize that we attract young, aggressive, risk-taking males. That’s what we want. When we run ‘em on the field, we want them to be aggressive. They’ve gotta make tackles. They’ve gotta be fearless. Then we went ‘em to do things that other people don’t do….they’ve gotta take certain risks on the field. So we attract an aggressive, young, risk-taking male.

We give him a shower, put a suit on him and then say now we want you to be a submissive male. Here we want you to go out there and not have any problems. It’s very difficult to do that, so you have to keep educating people. You have to keep talking to them. You have to keep putting them through programs. You’ve gotta make sure you have a stringent structure, that you’ve got the right policies and procedures. And certainly, that you take the right action and you give the right messages.

As these different cases from across the globe show, although men and boys are socialized in very different contexts, their socialization can have similar patriarchal tendencies and result in the systematic sexual victimization of women and girls. In South Africa, where collective violence was the most extensive for the entire society, the degree that men from various demographics rape is accordingly the highest across society.

However, even in high-income countries like Canada, the United States, and Australia, there are certain contexts, such as sports (namely in hyper-masculine sports), where male bonding occurs at a disproportionately high level through gang rape. And among the men in these groups who do not sexually exploit women, there is almost always a code of silence (or humor) that protects the male perpetrators.

Not to mention, sports media constantly bombards fans with images of women as sexual objects. Being a fickle fan of mixed martial arts, it is impossible not to notice the incessant ring girls and contests that try and find the next “beauty queen” who will sell magazines, ultimately negating any intellectual and athletic talents she may possess with images that highlight sex appeal over substance.

Is There an Answer?

So what can be done? Jackson Katz argues prevention needs to begin with the re-socialization of boys. He offers Ten Things Men Can Do To Prevent Gender Violence. Listed below is #10, but reading the entire list is recommended.

Mentor and teach young boys about how to be men in ways that don't involve degrading or abusing girls and women. Volunteer to work with gender violence prevention programs, including anti-sexist men's programs. Lead by example.

(Photo courtesy of IRIN)

Picking and Choosing Criminal Types

Much has been written about James van Brunn, the eighty-eight year old white supremacist who allegedly entered the Holocaust Memorial Museum last week and fatally shot Stephen Tyrone Jones, an African American security guard. This past Friday on NPR’s “Tell Me More,” host Michel Martin interviewed Randy Blazak, PhD, Associate Professor of sociology from Portland State University.

Dr. Blazak made some important comments regarding violence in American society, both the gendered nature of gun violence, and the way ethnic stereotyping plays out in mainstream media descriptions of crime and violence. First, Dr. Blazak briefly noted that those who engage in these mass shootings are always men. Additionally, I would note that in school shootings, the perpetrators have been boys. Point being, with very few exceptions, mass shooters are consistently male.

Secondly, when talking about white supremacist ideology, Dr. Blazak made the following insightful comments, highlighting that although racist white supremacy is not always blatantly visible, it still exists covertly and often times supports the more glaring extremist actions in private:

It wasn’t that long ago that white supremacy was the law of the land, and there are still people who would never dawn a Klan robe or put on a swastika arm band, who are sympathetic to many of the ideas that these groups hold. So I think it’s problematic to call these folks a few fringe crazies because there are many people who secretly who share some of the same beliefs about Jews or about immigration or about minorities.

From there, Dr. Blazak makes the very important point that in our national discourse on race, religion, and extremist behaviors, the Muslim religion is constantly spotlighted. Christianity, however, never enters discussion, even when it is tied quite closely as an ideological motivator for extreme violence.

…I was watching the coverage on Wednesday from Lou Dobbs on CNN, who was talking about acts by Muslims and plots by Muslims, and then he talked about the murder of George Tiller and failed to mention the religion of the man who shot George Tiller, which was Christian. And I thought that is another example of the normalization of the type of bigotry that ends up at the extreme with people who are willing to do violence to defend their beliefs.

This was an excellent point that merited further discussion. When the mainstream media picks and chooses which races and/or religions to target and associate with extreme violence, those that are exonerated from these associations are further extended their social privilege in society at large.

Thus, instead of analyzing how religious fundamentalism can lead to violence across the board, we only look to those “dangerous” people the media typically associates with terrorism and other types of crime.

Youth Violence in Chicago: Over-emphasis on Enforcement

NPR ran a story yesterday on the high levels of youth violence, specifically gun/gang violence, in Chicago ("Youth Killings Reach Crisis Level in Chicago"). From the story:

So far this school year, at least 36 Chicago Public School students have been killed, most of them victims of gunshots. Scores of other Chicago children and teenagers have been wounded in shootings, and there are concerns that the gun violence could escalate when school is out for the summer in a few weeks.

While urban gun violence in Chicago and other cities is nothing new, there is a growing sense among community leaders that it's now at a crisis level.

The story speaks to a few key issues prevalent in the criminology field. Take, for example, this youth’s quote.

Jordan says having his high school years marred by the constant danger of gun violence is leading him to attend college as far "away from the city as possible; that's why I'm going to [go] all the way to the East Coast. I refuse to live my life in fear. "

Jordan plans to attend the Citadel in South Carolina next fall.

"My family is telling me, when I leave, don't come back," he says.

W.J. Wilson’s classic 1997 text, When Work Disappears: The World of the New Urban Poor, discusses how in Chicago’s most impoverished neighborhoods, those families who could afford to leave, did. As crime escalated, educated African American professionals, who once lived in those communities, bolted for the burbs. Thus, Chicago ghettos were left without those role models for the youth and young adults left behind.

In turn, the unemployed and those working in the informal economy became all the more visible for young people. This phenomenon is seen through Jordan’s plans, as another intelligent, motivated, college-bound youth is encouraged to never return to his Chicago community.

The other structural problem presented in this story is the proliferation of guns, which I addressed before, though in a global context. Those interviewed in the NPR story talk about the responses that have been implemented to address this. They do discuss conflict resolution programs being put into practice, which there is nothing wrong with. However, this is still a relatively small-scale response to a macro problem, and therefore, will not likely result in major improvements.

They address other responses (i.e., reactions) being utilized, such as greater police presence.

The Chicago Police Department is targeting those entrenched gangs throughout the city in several ways. One is by what he calls "hardening the terrain," or having officers saturate certain areas such as parks, street corners and alleys that are known for gang activity.

A few concerns manifest from this approach. First, again, it is a reaction-based intervention, and thus, will not fix root issues. A positive that can develop from increased police presence is that some communities with high crime rates do not feel that they can move forward with crime prevention programming until criminal elements have been removed from their neighborhoods.

Unfortunately, what tends to happen more frequently with increased police presence is greater tension between the police and neighborhood residents. In addition, more arrests in these communities contribute further to the already disproportionately high number of poor, young men of color in the criminal and juvenile justice systems, largely for non-violent crimes.

As California has learned, prison over-crowding is also a major factor that contributes to state debt and a cutback in social services (e.g., education, health care), making the unintended rippling effects of amplified police enforcement quite harmful.

The one structural area that the story does address in the form of prevention is gun control (the audio file does not cover this part).

Complex problems require complex solutions," says Simeon senior Ronnie Mosley. "I think, you know, we have to kind of be radical in our approaches."

Mosley, who will attend Morehouse College in Atlanta in the fall, has led rallies and marches against gun violence with his classmates. He and other students have traveled to the Illinois State Capitol to push for an assault weapons ban, a state limit of one handgun purchase a month, and other "common-sense gun laws" — none of which has passed.

Since President Obama has pushed for increased gun control, there has been increased public sentiment for the individual right to bear arms. Recent research, however, has shown that the easier it is to obtain a gun in one’s community, the more likely homicide rates increase, and that the ease with which people can obtain guns is greater in minority communities (Shenassa, Daskalakis, & Buka, 2006).

Other research has shown that “Licensed dealers who kept no records or falsified records were the preferred source of supply for street gun merchants” (Wachtel, 1998, p. 232) and that while the number of licensed gun dealers who are corrupt is low, corrupt dealers still account for a huge portion of guns illegally trafficked and used in crimes. An example described from this study:

In a notable diversion involving 1,200 guns, a savvy vendor bypassed retail sources by using a forged Federal firearms license to buy guns directly from an unwitting distributor. After obliterating most of the serial numbers, the trafficker resold the guns to three other unlicensed peddlers in bulk quantities (p. 232).

Dealer corruption emerged as a surprisingly significant source of supply. Gun tracing disposed that some retailers had not only failed to account for incoming guns but also ignored State registration requirements. Malfeasance licensees was particularly evident in the casework, as 71 percent (13,667) of the diverted guns passed through 15 licensed dealers who made unrecorded or misrecorded sales to individuals and unlicensed vendors (p. 234).

In addition, the study notes that citizens without criminal records can easily purchase guns from vendors and then re-sell them or give them to others – what they refer to as a straw purchase. Also significant was theft from gun distributors. In these cases, the gun venders are not at fault, but the ease with which guns can be obtained (either through surrogate purchasing or theft) is obvious.

Increasing gun control through intensified background checks, not having gun retailers located in commercial sectors, and maintaining better oversight of retailers would not necessarily stop conflict between youth, but it would certainly mitigate the lethality.

The other key issue not addressed in the piece was gender. How many of the assailants and victims were males? Over 90%? Concerns over violent masculinity must be addressed as it relates to homicide and other violent crimes.

Citation:
Wachtel, J. (1998). Sources of crime guns in Los Angeles, California. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies and Management, 21 (2), 220-239.

See also:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/outposts/2009/05/gun-ammunation-sales-remain-robust-across-the-us.html

http://chrisuggen.blogspot.com/2009/05/8-million-firearm-background-checks-in.html