Teaching Criminology at the Intersection

A how-to guide for teaching about gender, race, class and sexuality

Rebecca Hayes, Kate Luther, Susan Caringella, Rebecca M. Hayes, Kate Luther, Susan Caringella

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2014
• ISBN:
  9781135005702
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Ciencias sociales
• Subtopic: Sociología

Teaching about gender, race, social class and sexuality in criminal justice and criminology classrooms can be challenging. Professors may face resistance when they ask students to examine how gender impacts victimization, how race affects interactions with the police, how socioeconomic status shapes experiences in court or how sexuality influences treatment in the criminal justice system. Teaching Criminology at the Intersection is an instructional guide to support faculty as they navigate teaching these topics.

Bringing together the experience and knowledge of expert scholars, this book provides time-strapped academics with an accessible how-to guide for the classroom, where the dynamics and discrimination of gender, race, class and sexuality demographics intersect and permeate criminal justice concerns. In the book, the authors of each chapter discuss how they teach a particular contemporary criminal justice issue and provide their suggestions for best practice, while grounding their ideas in pedagogical theory. Chapters end with a toolkit of recommended activities, assignments, films, readings or websites.

As a teaching handbook, Teaching Criminology at the Intersection is appropriate reading for graduate level criminology, criminal justice and women's and gender studies teaching instruction courses and as background reading and reference for instructors in these disciplines.

1

THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF A MONSTER

A lesson from a lecture on race

Paul Hernandez and Toby A. Ten Eyck

Discussing the social construction of race and differences in college classrooms has proven to be difficult (Obach, 1999; Townsley, 2007; Khanna and Harris, 2009). Race is especially challenging to teach in classrooms that have little diversity and/or where the instructor is a member of a socially privileged group (Bohmer and Briggs, 1991; Pence and Fields, 1999; Haddad and Lieberman, 2002; Harlow, 2009). When discussing racial inequality and racism and linking these topics to broader society, professors and students are often resistant or uncomfortable, making it difficult to know if the presented material is being processed in a critical manner. Overall, introducing students to material that challenge their preconceived ideas within society is difficult. This is especially true when teaching students to critically examine our socially constructed understanding of criminals. For example, students may have the idea that crime in society is a product of inherently dangerous African American and Latino men, or that poor minority communities are filled with “bad” people who are criminals. Students are inundated by media imagery which shape their perceptions of inequality within the justice system and race-based sentencing (Alexander, 2010), immigration (Zatz, 2012), women, drugs and prison (Bush-Baskette, 2010) or racial profiling (Gabbidon, et al., 2012). A common thread among many of the common topics illuminated by the media is race. Race seems to be a central topic among the majority, if not all topics engaged by the criminal system in the United States. Thus, when examining the many issues presented in criminal justice courses, it is critical to confront racial bias or discomfort or any “untouchable” topics surrounding race and difference. Many students are convinced that they can determine people’s race based on visual observation and phenotype or that along with race are undeniable predetermined qualities based on stereotypes. Students come to our classrooms with their socialization from parents, peers, media and society. With a lifetime of believing that the majority of their ideas are social facts, combined with entering a course that challenges these ideas, the stage is set for resistance from students when teaching about the social construction of criminals.

Privilege also plays a role in the development of many of the ideas that students bring to class. Students’ privileges can work as something that makes them exempt to negative stereotypes which they often accuse other groups of possessing. If the instructor responds with frustration to seemingly off-target questions or student apathy, she or he can potentially shut down the students’ willingness to participate; thus creating an environment where students are unlikely to be open to sociological perspectives on race.

This chapter offers an interactive lecture on the social construction of race influenced by Dr. Ten Eyck but created and implemented by Dr. Hernandez. I have used this material, titled “The Social Construction of a Monster,” in introductory to sociology, race and inequality, contemporary social problems, and social inequality courses in both a major university and community college. The class sizes at both institutions were similar with approximately 35–40 students. The majority of students were non-sociology majors fulfilling core academic requirements and were European American from small rural communities that likely had little, if any, racial diversity.

The underlying motivation for this work is similar to that of Bohmer and Briggs (1991), in that my attempts in the classroom to explore complex racial topics with students from privileged class and race backgrounds have often been met with antagonistic, confused or indifferent reactions. I have found that it is often difficult for students to understand race relations beyond their own individual, anecdotal explanations and experiences (or lack thereof), and are likely to draw on the myths and stereotypes of race presented by the media and treat these as part of their known realities. For example, many of my students typically believe that issues surrounding race are historical and today those who claim racism are simply “playing the race card.” When students share that they have never personally experienced racism or that they are not racist, they further emphasize that they do not understand how racism is problematic. Lastly, some of my students have shared that racism is something that only happens in very isolated areas with uneducated individuals. They see racism apart from themselves as “people different than them” because they themselves do not see the “color” of people. When these views are combined with a lack of sociological insight and a lack of understanding of the structure behind racial and social stratification in America, this becomes an obstacle for students’ development and learning. This lack of understanding creates a distinct barrier for many students as they fail to develop insight to and knowledge surrounding the reality of racism and social discrimination present in the criminal justice system.

In order to address their resistance, “The Social Construction of a Monster” lecture is effective as it shifts the focus from specific racial groups and moves it to important sociological concepts. This lecture aids in the understanding of race specifically and how the media plays into the social construction of reality, generally. This is accomplished by using concepts recognizable to many readers within sociology, but applying them to an uncommon subject material for most social science courses: the American Pit Bull Terrier (APBT). This strategy helps break students’ barriers of discomfort and stimulates them to be open and receptive to concepts surrounding race in America.

Student resistance

The idea of race as a social construction is common in Sociology. Winant (2000, p.172) provides an insightful definition of this concept, “At its most basic level, race can be defined as a concept that signifies and symbolizes sociopolitical conflicts and interests in reference to different types of human bodies … categories employed to differentiate among … groups reveal themselves, upon serious examination, to be imprecise if not completely arbitrary.”

Due to the socio-political nature of the discussion on race, my in-class experiences have demonstrated that students struggle to accept this idea. They often respond by either tuning out or showing minimal interest in the topic. This has led to trying to find new ways of connecting race to discrimination in contemporary America (Gamson, 1992).

Student resistance to the idea of modern racism is routinely encountered. Modern racism is the idea that prejudice has become a labyrinth of subtle, complex, and negative foundations, where the expression of racial hostilities happens indirectly (Healey, 2010). Many students struggle with this notion because they focus on racism as an isolated, random problem caused by ill-intentioned people that involve overt behaviors. Students blame “old people” or extremists for racism in society (Harlow, 2009), rarely viewing themselves as displaying potentially discriminatory behaviors.

When race is brought up in sociology or criminology classrooms, often European American students contend that racism is not a problem. These students struggle to view themselves as people of privilege regarding race and often talk about race in terms of minorities receiving special treatment due to affirmative action. They use examples such as their parents losing jobs or that they will be limited in their local job prospects after graduation due to affirmative action. These stereotypes make it difficult for them to see how groups are disadvantaged. Haddad and Lleberman (2002, p.331) stated “once white students recognize their advantages, they have to acknowledge that institutionalized inequality not only exists but favors them.” It is difficult for students to come to the realization of their own systemic privilege and shift away from viewing society as individualistic where one’s conditions are largely the product of their own choosing (Obach, 2000). Concepts developed by researchers of mass media and race can be used to facilitate these changes. That is, through a demonstration of how the media influences public opinion students are able to see how stereotypes are formed and how these stereotypes become social facts.

The American Pit Bull Terrier

I specifically chose the American Pit Bull Terrier (APBT) for this lecture because of its consistent negative portrayal by the news media for the past thirty years. This portrayal has led to the development of institutionalized discrimination against the breed. The media has been a driving force behind the social construction of the APBT’s image, though any coverage on the breed’s history and temperament are often lacking. Instead, the reporting reflects the phrase “if it bleeds, it leads” when framing the use of violence in the news (see Entman and Rojecki, 2000). In the 1980s, the U.S. media exploded with stories focusing on the APBT. The breed was tied to dog fighting, drug dealers, and gang members. In the early 1980s, the APBT was already on pace to become the breed known as the super predator (Delise, 2007).

The solidification of the breed as “natural born killers” came in a series of magazine articles published in the late 1980s. On July 6, 1987, People magazine published a story titled “An Instinct for the Kill” focusing on the APBT and addressing the ferocity and power of the breed. The APBT was labeled “the Rambo of the dog world” and was reported “to have a biting force of 1800 lbs per square inch” (Green, 1987, p.30). Following suit, Sports Illustrated (Swift, 1987) featured a front cover of an APBT in an attacking stance showing snarling teeth with the accompanying words, “Beware of this Dog.” The article’s focus was on dog fighting in general, though it portrayed the APBT as ferocious and unreliable.

Time, which is recognized as one of the most popular magazines in the United States and is also competitive worldwide (Time Inc., 2013), ran an article on the APBT in the same month as Sports Illustrated. The title of the article was “Behavior: Time Bomb on Legs,” and began:

Fire burst from its open mouth, its eyes glowed with a smoldering glare, its muzzle and hackles and dewlap were outlined in flickering flame. Never in the delirious dream of a disordered brain could anything more savage, more appalling, more hellish, be conceived than that dark form and savage face. It is as if the vicious hound of the Baskervilles that burst upon Sherlock Holmes out of the fog has returned to haunt the streets of America. The creature last week attacked …

(Brand, 1987, p.60)

This portrayal continued through coverage by both print and broadcast media outlets. No longer a dog, the APBT had become a monster. With powerful and consistently negative media coverage, more myths than facts continued to be fed to the public. Throughout the 1990s, the media remained focused on the APBT as an aggressive, dangerous dog. The mass hysteria that was conjured in the 1980s carried through the 1990s and has become a normalized opinion of the APBT (Delise, 2007).

The concerns generated by the media led to the creation of Breed Specific Legislation (BSL) in a number of states. This is “legislation that attempts to deal with the valid concern over vicious dog attacks by irrationally banning or strictly regulating the ownership of pit bulls …” (Burstein, 2004, p.314). The BSL relayed messages to the public that have plagued the APBT based on irrational and unfounded scientific claims. For example, “some experts even believe that the presence of hormones in children of puberty age can set off Pit bulls” (Delise, 2007, p.113) without identifying a single expert, noting that most dog breeds have the ability to detect hormones, or providing empirical evidence of such statements. More specifically the APBT has been singled out and determined to be like no other breed based on claims of behavior exclusive to the APBT. “Pit bulls inflict more serious wounds than other breeds because they tend to attack the deep muscles, to hold, to shake, and cause ripping of tissue” (p.121). What is not mentioned, however, is that this behavior, tearing, shaking, and holding, is characteristic of most cases of dog bites by many breeds of dogs that have been recorded in official court records (Delise, 2007). Countless claims have been made of actions or characteristics supposedly exclusive to the APBT, though, it is rare to find evidence of such claims or relation to any specific case involving the APBT. Actions taken against the APBT are proof of how pseudoscience and discrimination can lead to laws enacted to confront what people have been told to fear.

This legacy of negative media coverage and established societal norms makes the use of this animal an ideal example to demonstrate sociological concepts surrounding the social construction of our reality. Students can further connect the social constructions of a breed while trying to navigate their own ideas of institutionalized racism. Analyzing these ideas through non-human subject matter, students are able to freely grapple with these concepts and realize the applicability within their own lives, viewpoints, and society. By focusing on dogs, students typically do not feel defensive, worry about who is listening to what they say, or carefully judging exactly what they say in order to remain politically correct and in “good standing” with those around them. The focus on dogs allows them to speak freely and openly without any worries of being judged or critiqued regarding their views. They also move away from their rigid ideas that typically target people or society allowing them to be more willing to learn new things that would typically immediately challenge their ideas.

The interactive lecture

Students in general commonly use the media as a source of understanding the topics discussed in criminal justice classrooms. Given the lack of racial diversity in many students’ hometowns, media and the images it portrays is used as a guide when thinking about the many themes within criminal justice, and in this case, specifically race and race relations. The use of three main concepts helps translate media images into this lecture’s material: schema, prototypical thinking, and terministic screen, all of which can help students better understand their cultural assumptions about race in America. Combining these three concepts allows students to develop insight into how people view and interpret their social environments. Many students are unaware of their own filters, as well as how these filters have been constructed for them, when making decisions about animals and people. Focusing on the APBT aids in identifying how their views are formed, often with little or no direct experience. By showing them how their attitudes toward the APBT have been created and maintained, we can often make a smoother and more comfortable transition into discussions of race. Basically, before students can fully grasp the racial inequalities in the criminal justice system, they must first address their own socially constructed ideas of race.

In order to transition to discussions of race, I deliver the “The Social Construction of a Monster” lecture with PowerPoint™. To begin I instruct the class to not take notes during the presentation because each person’s involvement is important. I engage students by asking questions based on the content associated with each slide. As I ask them questions it helps bring their attention and engagement to the forefront of the lecture helping make them part of the teaching process.

First, I introduce the concept of schema which is defined as “a set of related concepts that allow people to make inferences about new information based on already organized prior knowledge. Schema (is) abstract generic knowledge that holds across many particular instances” (Entman and Rojecki, ...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• Acknowledgments
• Notes on contributors
• Introduction
• 1 The social construction of a monster: a lesson from a lecture on race
• 2 Research on teaching sensitive topics: a review of the challenges and opportunities for enhancing the classroom experience
• 3 Self-reflection in motion: the victimology classroom
• 4 Still at the periphery: teaching race, ethnicity, crime, and justice
• 5 The invisible minority: making the LGBT community visible in the criminal justice classroom
• 6 Filling the void: classroom strategies for teaching about crimes of the powerful
• 7 Women are more than victims: gender, crime and the criminal justice system
• Conclusion
• Index