T. M. Lindsey's blog

Jackson Katz: Violence Against Women Is a Men's Issue

2008-06-03T08:00:00-04:00

Jackson Katz, an internationally recognized educator on gender violence prevention among men and boys, argues society must first transform how it thinks about violence against women if it wants to prevent these acts from reoccurring. "As a culture, Americans first must take the step in acknowledging that violence against women is not a women's issue, but a men's issue," Katz said.Jackson Katz, Men Against Violence

"This is the foundation strategy for engaging young men and boys in gender violence prevention," Katz told an audience of school counselors, social workers, teachers, University of Iowa psychology students, social workers, and community members at a forum in Iowa in April. "The first problem I have with labeling gender issues as women's issues is that it gives men an excuse to not pay attention. This is also the problem with calling them gender issues, because the majority of the people in the status quo see gender issues as women's issues."

Katz is an educator, author and filmmaker and has been long recognized as one of America's leading anti-sexist male activists, in particular in the sports and military cultures. In 1993 he conceived and co-founded the Mentors in Violence Prevention (MVP) Program at Northeastern University's Center for the Study of Sport in Society. The multiracial, mixed-gender MVP program was the first large-scale attempt to enlist high school, collegiate and professional athletes in the fight against all forms of men's violence against women. Today MVP is the most widely utilized gender violence prevention program in college and professional athletics.

Drawing upon his most recent book, "The Macho Paradox: Why Some Men Hurt Women and How All Can Help," Katz shared some strategies with the audience, providing them with what he hoped was a foundation they could build upon in their professional and private lives. "My goal here today is to give you some concrete strategies on how to approach issues regarding violence against women and prevent gender-violence issues among men and young boys."

Katz spent a significant portion of the session driving home his first strategy and why a paradigm shift in thinking is imperative to the prevention of gender violence. At the root of the problem is language and how, historically, language has helped cement and legitimize how people view gender violence.

Katz used race and gender to illustrate how, over time, language has helped perpetuate and maintain the dominant culture's dominance. "In the United States, when we hear the word `race,' people generally think of African Americans," Katz said. "When people hear `sexual orientation,' they tend to think that means homosexual, gay, or lesbian. When people hear `gender,' they think of women."

"In each, the dominate culture is left out of the equation. This is one way that dominant systems maintain themselves in that they are rarely challenged to think about their own dominance," Katz said. "This is one of the key characteristics of power and privilege and why the dominant culture has ability to go unexamined and remain invisible."

Katz admits this is one of the key challenges he faces when working with men, the dominant group in our society. Katz reminds the audience that his focus is on men. "I hope nobody in this room is under the delusion that this is sexist," Katz said. "I know women have made great historical strides in recent history, but when we talk about the dominant group in our society, we are talking about men. I'm also aware that members of dominant groups have been strong supporters of subordinate groups, but let's not be naïve, for there have been members of dominant groups who have resisted reform and responsibility."

Another reason why Katz has a problem with people using women's issues to describe violence against women is the issue of perpetration and who is responsible for perpetrating these acts. "Take rape for example," said Katz. "Over 99 percent of rape is perpetrated by men, but it's a women's issue?"

Kats said one underlying problem is that college campuses tend to focus on the prevention of rape and sexual violence. "But the term prevention in not really prevention; rather, it's risk reduction," Katz said. "These programs focus on how women can reduce their chances of being sexually assaulted. I agree that women benefit from these education programs, but let us not mistake this for prevention."

"If a woman has done everything in her power to reduce her risk, then a man who has the proclivity for abuse or need for power will just move on to another woman or target," Katz added. "It's about the guy and his need to assert his power. And it's not just individual men, it's a cultural problem. Our culture is producing violent men, and violence against women has become institutionalized. We need to take a step back and examine the institutionalized polices drafted by men that perpetuate the problem."

The third problem Katz has with using the term women's issues has to do with how deeply personal these issues are in men's lives. "It is estimated that 18 million women, children, and men have been sexually abused in the U.S.," Katz said. "Think about all the men who love these people and have been personally and profoundly affected by knowing that their loved ones have been a victim of sexual violence. So don't tell me these are not men's issues."

Katz's second strategy for addressing gender violence demands that we hold male leaders accountable, since they have the transformative power within the institution to make change happen. "I come from a social justice perspective that if you are a member of the dominant group and you don't speak up in the face of others in your group when they are abusive, your silence is a form of consent and complicity."

Katz says the mainstream media should also be held accountable for its silence in the realm of reporting on gender violence. "On the one-year anniversary of the Virginia Tech massacre, the coverage of the event was pathetic, not to mention the commentary was ridiculously superficial," Katz said. "There was not one mention of men, masculinity, or violence in their coverage, yet all of these school shootings have been perpetrated by young men. The first thing we should be talking about is the gender of the perpetrators, not gun control, school security, and the school's responsibility."

Moreover, Katz used Michael Moore's documentary film, "Bowling for Columbine," to help support his point about the de-gendering of violence perpetrated by men. "Moore's documentary about the Columbine shootings won several awards, including an Oscar for Best Documentary," Katz said. "He makes a two-hour film about gun violence; however, he doesn't once mention the single most important factor leading to the shooting: gender."

Katz points out a pattern that has evolved regarding how the media uses passive voice and sentences when reporting gender violence. Using a board in the front of the room, Katz helped make his point by providing the audience with a concrete exercise to illustrate the power of passive voice (see below).

John beat Mary. (active)

Mary was beaten by John. (passive)

Mary was beaten. (passive)

Mary was battered. (passive)

Mary is a battered woman. (active)

"John has left the conversation long ago, while Mary evolves into the active victim," Katz said. "This evolution of victim-blaming is very pervasive in our society, because this is how our whole power structure is set up. We start asking why Mary put herself into a position to be beaten by John."

"If we really want to work on prevention, we need to start asking questions about John, not Mary," Katz said. "We won't get anything done until we start treating these issues as men's issues and shift the paradigm at the cultural level."

Sexualizing Tweens for Profit: A Q&A with Gigi Durham

2008-05-14T08:00:00-04:00

With the recent fall of pop sex symbol Britney Spears and the emergence of the newly sexualized teen idol Miley Cyrus, aka Hannah Montana, University of Iowa journalism professor Gigi Durham couldn't have timed the publication of her new book any better.

Durham's book, "The Lolita Effect," examines the motives behind the media's sexualization of tween girls and how they are exploiting young girls for profit. For example, at Abercrombie & Fitch, little girls were sold thong underwear tagged with the phrases "eye candy" and "wink wink." In Britain, preschoolers could learn to strip with their very own Peekaboo Pole-Dancing Kits -- complete with kiddie garter belts and play money.

Durham advocates healthy and progressive concepts of girls' sexuality, but criticizes the media for its sexual representations. Studies by the Kaiser Family Foundation and other research organizations show that sexual content aimed at children has increased steadily since the 1990s, Durham said. Times were prosperous, Britney Spears emerged as the sexy schoolgirl on MTV, and tweens had plenty of disposable income -- a perfect alignment for marketers trying to expand into a new demographic. By 2007, 8- to 12-year-olds' consumer spending was $170 billion worldwide, according to the market research firm Euromonitor.

Interview with Gigi Durham, author of "The Lolita Effect":

Iowa Independent: I assume the book's title is alluding to Nabokov's "Lolita." Given the predatory relationship that evolves between the protagonist and the nymphet, Lolita, in the book, why did you title your book, "The Lolita Effect"?

Durham: Yes, the book is an allusion to Nabokov's "Lolita," which is written from the predator's point of view, and he sees Lolita as the one who is bringing it on. All predators do that, so all of the abusiveness in the novel and the empathy for Lolita is lost in the way we now talk about girls. In that sense, Lolita is a tragic figure. That's why I'm using that title, because we all think we know what it means. To me Lolita represents an effect of our culture and our media that positions girls in that way. Of course girls are transitioning into adulthood and are interested in sex, but what 12-year-old girl would initiate or knowingly enter into those kind of relationships? You can't pin it on the kid.

Iowa Independent: So does your book look at the other end of the sexualization and marketing of tween girls and examine the role of men?

Durham: It looks at all aspects regarding the marketing of this type of sexuality and the narrow, restrictive form of sexuality that's commercially driven to young girls. But it also looks at the impacts, such as the rise in child-sex trafficking and child pornography and how this is being legitimated by the mainstream media and the impact on girls who are not learning about sex in healthy, progressive natural, normal ways. They are not being given this safe transition into adulthood, where they have good information about sexuality and they can make good choices themselves.

They are not getting good information from the media, and they are not getting this information from anywhere else either, because we are so skittish about dealing with these issues. As a result, we have really high rates of teen pregnancy in the industrialized world, twice that of the U.K. and eight times that of Japan. Moreover, one in four girls in this country has had a sexually transmitted disease (STD). We are not doing it right; we are not giving these girls what they need.

Iowa Independent: On the flip side, do you think marketers are targeting adult males and their desires or fantasies about the Lolita persona?

Durham: I totally do think so. Because not only are they marketing to children, but at the same time there is this other effect where adults are exposed to these same kinds of images, in particular adult men, subsequently giving these men the implicit idea that these young girls are sexual objects -- which I think is really problematic. The effect is an implicit or tacit support of those ideas.

Iowa Independent: Putting this in a recent context, what are your thoughts about the explicit photographs of 15-year-old Miley Cyrus in the latest issue of "Vanity Fair"?

Durham: For me, the very fact that this generated so much public controversy shows that this is a really important issue. In a way I was glad. This points to how we tend to polarize girls' sexuality in our society. There's no middle ground, we either repress girls' sexuality or we exploit it for profit. The big outrage that this girl is a pure, innocent and chaste girl is a bit ridiculous. At the same time she is very young, so I don't think it is OK that her body is on display for this voyeuristic gaze for commercial profit. The issue is more complex than the way it has been presented; it's not an either-or issue.

Iowa Independent: Do you think marketers are consciously branding female innocence and purity with the intent of eventually using this branding to exploit the sexualization aspect of their marketing strategy?

Durham: It almost does seem that way, doesn't it? Britney Spears took this same route. She started out a Mouseketeer on the "New Mickey Mouse Club" and then she became a sex symbol. They start out innocent, then overnight they become sex symbols and there is no transition, which is not good for girls, who need an extended time to understand and cope with their own sexuality as it develops. In a way, it's a social trauma.

Iowa Independent: What role do these girls' parents play in this process, especially those who allow their daughters to be exploited by the media, especially when it turns out they have no control over how they are exploited, whether it be a parent, producer or media conglomerate?

Durham: I thought it was really clear in the Miley Cyrus case that there was a group of adults that were using her body for their own purposes. There were adults there including her father, Billy Ray Cyrus, photographer Annie Leibovitz and her handlers, who were making her decision for her. It came out later that Miley was ashamed and embarrassed about it, and if this is true, then it indicates that she didn't perceive she had any control in the situation. We want girls to make intentional, good decisions about themselves and their sexual development.

So I do think parents are important, and this is one of the reasons I wrote the book. I want parents to have a tool for coping with this, for their kids are being assaulted by media images from such an early age. The book provides some good strategies for kids and parents on how to talk about sexuality without it feeling like such a difficult thing to talk about.

Iowa Independent: We can keep criticizing the media for helping perpetuate this problem through mass marketing and consumerism, but how do we get them to change their behaviors? How can we address the demand-side --the boy's/men's role in -- of the equation?

Durham: Boys are getting the same messages from the media, especially what defines masculinity and femininity, so we need to have more co-ed discussions that involve teachers, parents and counselors helping facilitate a healthy discussion about sexuality.

A lot of boys are very thoughtful and see girls as more than eye candy, so it's important to bring them into the discussion as well.

And then there is the push back against the marketers. Parents need to continue to put pressure on marketers and hold them responsible for what they are selling. There have been a number of products that have been removed from the shelves because of these efforts.

Iowa Independent: What about recent video games like "Grand Theft Auto" that are not only violent but that treat women as sex objects while simultaneously degrading them, or as is the case in "Grand Theft Auto," you can kill them after having sex with them?

Durham: Not only are these games incredibly violent, but all the women in these games are sex workers. They are all strippers or prostitutes. The games are rated "M" and are intended for adult audiences but of course that never matters, because 13- and 14-year-old boys are the ones that tend to play these kinds of games. Again, I think boys need more media literacy and education and need to hear adults they respect being critical of these issues, then they will begin to understand why our value system doesn't appreciate those representations.