Sociology 2259 Chapter Notes - Chapter online: Scapegoating, Dcf Interframe Space, Psychopathology
30 Apr 2018
School
Department
Course
Professor
Vocabulary of a Rapist:
• Research based small samples men, frequently clinicians’ own patient pop
• Medical model predom- rape viewed individualistic, idiosyncratic symptom of disordered
personality= rape assumed psychopathologic prob and individ rapists assumed be sick-
unable isolate typical/ even predictable pattern symptoms causally linked to rape and
fewer than 5% rapists psychotic time their rape
• View rape learned socially through interaction w others, convicted rapists learned att and
actions consistent w sexual lang against W- acquisition cult derived vocabs motive, can
be used diminish resp and negotiate non-deviant identa
• Vocabulary of motive- wrong-doers attempt reinterp actions through use linguistic device
by which norm-breaking conduct socially interpreted- anticipating neg consequence
behav, wrong-doers attempt present act in terms both cult approp and acceptable
• Scott and Lyman (1968)- excuses and justifications= linguistic accounts that explain and
remove culpability for untoward act after been committed
• Excuses- admit act bad/ inapprop but deny full resp, often through appeals to accident/
bio drive/ scapegoating
• Justifications- accept resp for act but deny wrong- show in this sit act approp
• Accounts- socially approved vocabs neutralize act/ consequences and always
manifestation of underlying negotiation of ident
• Stokes and Hewitt= aligning actions- tactics and techniques used by actors when some
feature of sit is problematic- actor’s attempt, through various means, to bring conduct
into alignment w cult
• Cult conceptualized set cog constraints-objects- people must relate as form lines conduct
and includes physical constraints, expectations and defs of others and personal biography
• Carrying out aligning actions implies awareness elements norm cult that are applicable to
deviant act and in addition actual effort bring action into line w awareness- deviant behav
legitimized
• 83% convicted rapists interviewed view selves as non-rapists (use concept accounts
explain selves and actions)
• Typology emerges consists admitters and deniers- admitters acknowledged forced sexual
acts on victims and def behav as rape (used excuses) and deniers eschewed sexual
contact/ all association w victim/ admitted sexual acts but didn’t define behav as rape
(used justifications)
• Both relied same themes, stereotypes and images: some admitters, like most deniers,
claimed W enjoyed being raped and some deniers excused behav by ref alch/ drug use
(did so quite dif than admitters)
Methods and validity:
• Rapists vol research disprop white, somewhat better edu and younger avg inmate= all Ps
volunteers- sample not random so may not be representative all rapists
• Rapists vol more about feelings and emotions to F author and her interviews longer
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
• Once rapport est, men wanted to talk, even though sometimes meant, for example,
missing a meal (reluctant end interview)
• Reputation prison inmates have for ‘conning’, validity special concern in research-
purpose research obt men’s own perceptions acts, also nec est extent perception deviated
from other descriptions of their crimes
• Est validity, used same technique others used prison research: comp factual info,
including details crime, obt in interview w pre-sentence reports on file at prisons
• Allowed clarify amount change occurred rapists’ accounts pre-sentencing to time
interviewed and amount discrepancy b/w rapists accounts, as told to us, and victims’
and/or police versions of crime, cont in pre-sentence reports
• Despite time lapse 1-20 years (avg 3 years) b/w pre-sentence reports and interviews= no
sig changes in way rapists explained crimes, w exception 18 men denied crimes trials but
admitted to interviewers (no cases admitted trial but denied during interviews)
• Major difs b/w accounts heard crimes from rapists and police’s and victim versions:
o Admitters (including deniers turned admitters) told ess same story as police and
victim versions but subtly understated force used and though used words like
violent describe acts, also omitted ref more brutal aspects crime
o Deniers differed sig victim and police versions- constructed accounts which, by
implicating victim, made own conduct appear been more approp- never used
words like violent, choosing instead emph sexual component their behav
• Investigated poss deniers claimed behav not crim b/c, in contrast to admitters, their
crimes resembled research found public def controversial rape, that is, victim an
acquaintance, no injury/weapon, victim picked up hitchhiking/ in bar- but crime
committed deniers only slightly more likely involve these elements
• Asked explain behav, sample (except deniers turned admitters) responded w accounts
changed surprisingly little since trials and interview accounts basically same others’
versions their crimes, deniers systematically put more blame on victims (content validity)
Justifying rape:
• Deniers attempted justify behav by presenting victim in light made her appear culpable,
regardless their own actions
Women as seductresses:
• Men who rape need not search far cult lang supports premise W provoke/ resp for rape
• Addition common cult stereotypes, fields psychiatry and crim (victimology) trad
provided justifications for rape, often portraying raped W being victims own seduction
• W supposed be coy about sexual availability, refusal comply w man’s sexual demands
lacks meaning and rape appears normal
• Deniers tried dem victims willing and some cases, enthusiastic Ps- rape became more
dependent upon victim’s behav than upon their own actions
• Not only was she willing, she was the aggressor, seductress lured them, unsuspecting into
sexual action
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
