In Monday’s class we grounded our discussion in a review of the core ideas related to the role of sexuality in the city. Following this we jumped into my question in which I referenced Brown-Saracino’s work. Dialogue focused primarily on the concept of ambient community, which is defined as feelings of belonging or connection that arise from informal, voluntary, and affective ties. We grappled with whether or not Bowdoin can serve as an ambient community or whether students forge community in diverse ways.
The other readings and expert questions for this day inspired conversation about if we can consider cities as safe spaces for women or not. While there were comments in favor of each argument, after hearing various points of view, I believe that certain cities may be equally as dangerous as certain suburbs. The massive quantities of people living and traveling through cities are definitely daunting, and this sense of anonymity can make people feel uneasy about those around them. However, as someone mentioned, this constant flow of individuals potentially provides more active bystanders in problematic situations. Additionally, a classmate reminded us that sexual violence, which is a major safety concern for a lot of women, occurs most frequently from people with whom someone already has close personal ties with rather than from strangers. While we often structure the sexual violence conversation around women, it is important to keep in mind that these issues also affect men.
We touched on the numerous consequences of framing sexual violence as a “woman’s problem.” Of these results, I believe the most toxic to be the culture we have allowed to support and perpetuate it. This brings up another one of the readings that covers the 11,000 untested rape kits in the Detroit Police Department. In class we considered some of the potential reasons why these kits, that potentially contain scientific evidence, were not tested. The author emphasizes a lack of resources as the main underlying factor, but I think it is crucial to reflect on how greater cultural factors might have influenced this decision. Why is it that we often hear about sexual violence cases going unresolved? Would we ever see scientific evidence related to a homicide ignored and discounted in this same way? What is so different about sexual violence that creates this double standard? Is this due to the tricky nature of the “he-said, she-said” aspect that is often present in rape and sexual assault cases? Is physical scientific data not enough to accurately take action in these cases? Would the unimpressive judicial outcomes that we typically see in these types of trials not justify the resources spent to test these kits and analyze all of the information made available? Our class discussion raised important questions about our cultural norms.
If we want to change the way these issues are talked about and dealt with in society, I think we will need to be able to identify the foundation of the problem in order to modify it. To do so we will need to address whether issues of sexual violence are related to a gender, race, or socioeconomic status. Most likely these issues are interwoven between many if not all of these facets of identity, which complicates the prospect of finding a simple resolution.
It is always interesting to investigate and examine the ways in which certain sociological phenomenon is prevalent or observable at the urban level, and, further, how it unfolds in a smaller environment such as Bowdoin. For example, as we discussed in class, ambient communities are formed here on campus and manifest themselves in different ways. Whether it is the main quad, Smith Union, or the dining halls, spaces are often used to foster community in a manner of the participants choosing.
In terms of whether or not cities are safe spaces for women, I think Caroline made some good points, which highlights the themes from class. Cities and urban spaces offer the increased risk due to the high density of people in a region, however, in many cases, this high frequency of people allows for an aspect of protection. It is disheartening to call urbanites potential witnesses, but for women who feel uneasy and anxious about navigating a city, the population can act as a source of comfort. In accordance with Caroline, I also think it is important to realize that although sexual violence is often talked about from the female perspective, the problem involves a more universal audience. The average person who is unfamiliar with the speed and knowledge of navigating a city will feel nervous about moving through that kind of space, regardless of gender. It is true that most sexual violence occurs from people who are familiar or have close, personal ties to the ones who are affected, but this does not invalidate the fear of sexual violence for a city goer or someone uncomfortable in that environment.
The last point that I thought was provocative from Caroline’s post is why sexual violence involving women is treated differently than other cases and crimes. There are many opinions to this point, but the untested rape kits from the Detroit Police Department offer a blatant example of this larger, prevalent issue. There should be no reason that rape or sexually violent cases are treated differently than a homicide and considered less important, yet they are. It is highly doubtful all these occurrences are coincidental, so the question is what the unique characteristic is for these types of injustices. Upon further examination, there is no logic behind so many unresolved cases and a lack of adherence to procedure based on the type of case. The current system and/or thought process behind dealing with sexually violent incidents needs to be altered, but, first, there needs to be a firm understanding of why these incidents are handled the way the are before they can be fixed. As Caroline stated, the first step in resolving something like this is to untangle all of the factors and have a clear understanding of what is what. After this, headway can be made into solving an issue that demands better results.
After the discussions we had in class, it was very interesting to hear the points of many on whether or not they believed that cities can be safe spaces for women. While a common belief is that sexual violence and danger is more prevalent in cities, because of the degree of anonymity, the overall consensus of the class is that many women actually had experiences that they felt safer in cities than they might have felt in suburbs. Although their are more people in cities, the examples given in class valued cities as safer places because of the amount of people surrounding. If someone was to be following you or providing sketchy behavior, having more people in the actual area made them feel safer than if they were in a suburb alone.
We also discussed in class how suburbs were created around femininity and bringing the housewife to light, but not created around feminists. The suburbs emphasized the important role that women played in maintaining a successful household always having cooked meals and a spotless house to come home to. This type of lifestyle was not supportive of women having jobs and supporting their families like the husband did, but rather taking care of the feminine domestic roles. I think cities offered women a place to disown the domesticity of the suburb and take back their right to work and participate in an equal society. While I think that cities are a more gender equal place, there is still significant gender inequality, especially in corporate jobs, that prevent women from still achieving what their male counterparts achieve. Unfortunately these problems stem from the rise of the suburbs, and while cities provide some freedom, women still face the dangers of sexual violence anywhere they go. Overall, women may have experiences in which they feel safer in cities, it is still a systemic problem that women have to always be thinking of ways to protect herself and evaluate her surroundings to best ensure she does not fall prey to the violence.