Advertisement

Date Rape: The Intractability of Hermeneutical Injustice

  • Debra L. JacksonEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Library of Public Policy and Public Administration book series (LPPP, volume 12)

Abstract

Social epistemologists use the term hermeneutical injustice to refer to a form of epistemic injustice in which a structural prejudice in the economy of collective interpretive resources results in a person’s inability to understand his/her/their own social experience. This essay argues that the phenomenon of unacknowledged date rapes, that is, when a person experiences sexual assault yet does not conceptualize him/her/their self as a rape victim, should be regarded as a form of hermeneutical injustice. The fact that the concept of date rape has been widely used for at least three decades indicates the intractability of hermeneutical injustices of this sort and the challenges with its overcoming.

References

  1. American Law Institute. 1985. Model penal code: Official draft and explanatory notes: Complete text of model penal code as adopted at the 1962 annual meeting of the American Law Institute at Washington, D.C., May 24, 1962. Philadelphia: The Institute.Google Scholar
  2. Brownmiller, Susan. 1975. Against our will: Men, women, and rape. New York: Fawcett Columbine.Google Scholar
  3. ———. 1999. In our time: Memoir of a revolution. New York: The Dial Press.Google Scholar
  4. Burgess-Jackson, Keith. 1999. A history of rape law. In A Most detestable crime: New philosophical essays on rape, ed. Keith Burgess-Jackson, 15–31. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Cochran, Augustus. 2004. Sexual harassment and the law: The Mechelle Vinson case. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
  6. Fricker, Miranda. 2007. Epistemic injustice: Power and the ethics of knowing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Haslanger, Sally. 2012. What are we talking about?: The semantics and politics of social kinds. In Resisting reality: Social construction and social critique, ed. Sally Haslanger, 365–380. Oxford: Oxford University.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Janoff-Bulman, Ronnie. 1992. Shattered assumptions: Towards a new psychology of trauma. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  9. Jenkins, Katherine. 2017. Rape myths and domestic abuse myths as hermeneutical injustices. Journal of Applied Philosophy 34 (2): 191–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kanin, Eugene J. 1957. Male aggression in dating-courtship relations. American Journal of Sociology 63: 197–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. ———. 1965. Male sex aggression and three psychiatric hypotheses. Journal of Sex Research 1: 221–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. ———. 1967. An examination of sexual aggression as a response to sexual frustration. Journal of Marriage and the Family 29: 428–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. ———. 1969. Selected dyadic aspects of male sex aggression. Journal of Sex Research 5: 12–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. ———. 1971. Sexually aggressive college males. The Journal of College Student Personnel 12: 107–110.Google Scholar
  15. ———. 1984. Date rape: Unofficial criminals and victims. Victimology 9 (1): 95–108.Google Scholar
  16. ———. 1985. Date rapists: Differential sexual socialization and relative deprivation. Archives of Sexual Behavior 14 (3): 219–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kirkpatrick, Clifford, and Eugene J. Kanin. 1957. Male sex aggression on a University Campus. American Sociological Review 22: 52–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Koss, Mary P. 1985. The hidden rape victim: Personality, attitudinal, and situational characteristics. Psychology of Women Quarterly 9 (2): 193–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. MacKinnon, Catharine A. 1979. Sexual harassment of working women: A case of sex discrimination. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Medina, Jose. 2013. The epistemology of resistance: Gender and racial oppression, epistemic injustice, and resistant imaginations. New York: Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. ———. 2017. Varieties of hermeneutical injustice. In The Routledge handbook of epistemic injustice, ed. Ian James Kidd, Jose Medina, and Gaile Pohlhaus Jr., 41–52. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v. Vinson. 1986. 477 U.S. 57.Google Scholar
  23. Mills, Charles W. 2017. Ideology. In The Routledge handbook of epistemic injustice, ed. Ian James Kidd, Jose Medina, and Gaile Pohlhaus Jr., 100–111. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Peterson, Zoe D., and Charlene L. Muehlenhard. 2004. Was it rape? The function of women’s rape myth acceptance and definitions of sex in labeling their own experiences. Sex Roles 52.3 (4): 129–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Phillips, Lynne M. 2000. Flirting with danger: Young Women’s reflections on sexuality and domination. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  26. U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. 2010. Enforcement guidance: Vicarious employer liability for unlawful harassment by supervisors. https://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/harassment.pdf. Accessed 1 June 2018.
  27. Warshaw, Robin. 1988. I never called it rape: The Ms. report on recognizing, fighting, and surviving date and acquaintance rape. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.California State UniversityBakersfieldUSA

Personalised recommendations