Showing posts with label violence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label violence. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 6, 2009

Study Shows High Rates of Violent Crime Against People With Disabilities

http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2009/10/05/study-shows-high-rates-of-violent-crime-against-people-with-disabilities/

The first national study on crime against people with disabilities has been released by the Justice Department, and it shows that people with disabilities (PWD) are the victims of violent crimes at approximately 1.5 times the rate of temporarily able-bodied people. NPR reports:

The results, just released by the Justice Department, are disturbing. But they come as no surprise to those who work with people with disabilities. For a long time, they’ve known about this particular crime problem, at least anecdotally.

But what people in the field had long known, and what the Justice Department report confirms, is that crime is a daily fact of life for many people with disabilities and most of it never gets public attention.

The study, by Michael Rand and Erika Harrell of the Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics, found that, in 2007, people with disabilities were victims of 716,000 violent crimes and 2.3 million property crimes.

Disabled women were the most at risk: They were victims at rates almost twice that for other females. And unlike other women, those with disabilities were far more likely to be victimized by people they weren’t close to. The report found that 16 percent of violent crimes against females with a disability were committed by a current or former spouse, boyfriend or girlfriend. Among women without disabilities, it was 27 percent.

The study also shows that assailants are most likely to victimize people with cognitive disabilities, and people with multiple disabilities (a person with more than one disability was the victim in more than half of all violent crimes committed against PWD).

On the subject of violence against women specifically, while attacks by intimate partners make up a smaller percentage of violent crimes against women with disabilities than those against able-bodied women, previous studies also show that caretakers are the most common perpetrators of sexual violence in cases where women with disabilities are victims, followed by male family members. Thus, unless things have changed dramatically in recent years, the statement that “those with disabilities were far more likely to be victimized by people they weren’t close to” is likely not true, but rather it’s more commonly different relationships that are being violated.

The fact that these crimes so rarely make the news — and that when they do, they are presented as some sort of abnormality rather than a systematic problem — has to be noted a sizable part of the reason for their prevalence. Silence helps abuse to continue, and abusers are most like to choose victims who a) they believe will stay silent or b) they believe will be silenced if/when the abuse is reported. Able-bodied society has erected many barriers to PWD speaking out about abuse, which are heavily connected to wider forms of ableist oppression, and Lauredhel discusses some of the most common ones here. Violent criminals quite logically utilize the abusive systems we already have in place to their greatest advantage. And this we should already know.

Our society rarely likes to acknowledge and address issues of systematic prejudice and violence — indeed, such systems are created because those privileged in them have something to gain — and so these cases, the perpetrators, and the victims are frequently overlooked. That this is being billed as the first ever national study of crime against PWD alone tells us that. Acknowledging the violence surrounding us might force more people to realize that these high rates of violence exist for a reason, and that just like with any other marginalized group that is routinely victimized by others, it has nothing to do with PWD being inherently easy or vulnerable targets. Rather, it has everything to do with how a society structured around the needs and perspectives of able-bodied people marginalize and isolate people with disabilities and otherwise treat them as lesser human beings, unworthy of rights, safety and protection. Such a society only aides and encourages perpetrators of violence.


Thursday, September 24, 2009

Is supporting women and girls just another fad?

http://jezebel.com/5366937/is-supporting-women-and-girls-just-another-fad?skyline=true&s=x

Is Supporting Women And Girls Just Another Fad?

Yesterday the Clinton Global Initiative hosted a panel on "Investing in Women and Children," and panelists spoke movingly about the need for more funding for female empowerment. But for big business, are women and girls another passing fad?

Edna Adan, founder of a hospital in Somalia, laid out the inequalities women face in her country. She said Somalian women were dying in childbirth "because nobody cares... [People think] she's dying because she was meant to die. She was not meant to die. She could be safe." She added, "the decision of whether she has treatment must be left to the woman. Often it's a husband or a brother or a father who decides whether she will be taken to the hospital or not." Zainab Salbi of the nonprofit Women for Women International told listeners that oppression of women isn't just a third-world problem, and that one in four American women suffers from domestic violence. "It is really a global issue," she said. She also argued that "we can't actually get into environmental issues or climate change or ending poverty or wars if we don't invest seriously in women."

It's a common statement these days. Nicholas Kristof and Sheryl WuDunn are giving issues affecting women and girls lots of exposure, and arguing that resolving these issues will actually reduce poverty and violence. And panelist (and Goldman Sachs CEO) Lloyd Blankfein's statement that "investing in women is investing in families" is no longer controversial. But does that mean the corporate world really cares about women and girls?

Panelist Rex Tillerson, chairman and CEO of ExxonMobil, said,

Philosophically, we are committed because it's critical to our own sustainability in the countries in which we operate. A large part of our activities today and in the future are in less-developed parts of the world. So our longer term success is built around the ability to have a productive work force, have communities that are stable. And it's not just financial commitment, but human-resource commitment. [...] funding is not the issue. Not necessarily.

But according to Zainab Salbi, funding is the issue, because women still get only one cent of every development dollar spent around the world. And even those who agree that money is necessary may not care so much about helping women and girls as an end in itself. Jos at Feministing writes, "for the businessmen on the panel 'empowering' women seemed to be more about using them as the person that funds go through." And Blankfein called investing in women "a recruiting tool and a retention tool" for Goldman Sachs.

Helping women and girls seems to be the method du jour both for reducing global poverty and for looking like a socially responsible business. Insofar as this actually leads to the improvement of female lives around the world — and there's evidence that microfinance efforts, at least, do — this is a good thing. And if helping women also results in helping families and societies, that's good too. But Tillerson's lip-service to women's issues and Blankfein's use of them as a recruiting tool are troubling because they suggest that big business leaders think supporting women and girls is the hip thing to do right now. This hipness could lead to real change, but it could also lead to high-profile, low-impact efforts that don't do much good. Environmentalism is in a similar state right now — it's cool to be photographed wearing "green" clothing, but we need a lot more than Cameron Diaz in an organic shirt to stop climate change. And we need more than an oil exec talking about "human-resource commitments" to stop women dying in childbirth. Let's hope we get it.

Global Power Gals [The Daily Beast]
Clinton Global Initiative: Investing In Girls And Women [Feministing]