Friday, June 26, 2020

Marginalization Of A Race Tthrough The War On Drugs - Free Essay Example

  The issue of mass incarceration due to drug-related crimes is a highly debated topic, especially in the United States of America because of the prevailing statistics. Today, the U.S. has 5% of the worlds total population, but at least 25% of this populace is incarcerated (Drug Policy Alliance, 2018). Indeed, the U.S. is the country that imprisons most people globally. While the rate of incarceration in the country is a problem, the debate delves further into the issue of race because people of color, particularly men; have an unusually high rate of incarceration; a statistic that is associated with the misguided laws on the war on drugs accompanied with harsh sentences. Although reports indicate that the frequency of drug use and sales among all races is relatively the same, there is a huge disparity in the criminalization of the users, whereby blacks and Latinos are more likely to be incarcerated or reprimanded than their white counterparts. Therefore, it is difficult to term the trend as a mere coincidence because it appears as if it is systematic marginalization on these minority groups. Currently, African American men have a twenty-nine percent chance of going to prison while their Latino male counterparts have a sixteen percent chance and their white counterparts have a four percent chance. Although whites have made up majority of the population up until recent years, blacks have outweighed numbers in the prison system as the black male comprises about 55% of persons convicted for drug possession, 35% of those detained for drug possession, and 74% of individuals seized for drug possession (Alexander West, 2012). Moreover, the skewed drug enforcement pattern continues to have a catastrophic effect on these minority groups, particularly African American men. Between the age of 20-29, one in three African Americans are presently either on probation, prison, or parole (Alexander West, 2012). Hence, one in every five African American men have been convicted of a felony before. It is also estimated that within seven states, about eighty to ninety percent of the populat ion serving time for drugs are blacks.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Likewise, the statistics for Latinos is also alarming. It was discovered that even though Latinos are around twelve percent of the population and sell and use drugs less than Caucasians, they represented 46% of those charged in 1999 for any federal drug transgression. As time has progressed, people of color have continued to be the primary focus of anti-drug guidelines and rhetoric. At the start of the 20th century, drug lords managed to paint a picture that African Americans were highly involved in the drug business, as king-pins and dope dealers. In 1930, nearly sixteen states had managed to deny the growing of marijuana since the main target was the Mexican society who had flooded the job market in the U.S. (Alexander West, 2012). The formation of the Boggs Act ensured that there were stringent measures in a response to opium that was being ferried from Asia. Since New York wanted to attain stricter drug laws, they enacted the Rockefeller drug legislation and after a quarter century, which ninety-four percent of the people who had been apprehended were Latino and African Americans. By the year 1980, the relationship between crime, drugs, and minorities had been firmly cemented in the War on Drugs that was revamped by Regans hysteria about crack (Alexander West, 2012). In addition, the media hysteria concerning the unconfirmed crack widespread amid African Americans prompted the passing of the draconian minimum sentencing of legislation on crack cocaine by president Bill Clinton. Even though this drug had been linked to mostly white users, these issues managed to remain light when it came to prosecution and harsh sentencing on white counterparts. Ultimately, race allowed for society to evade the trade-off betw een societies demand to get tough on crime and its demand to retain civil rights, through unequal implementation of the law; which allowed for blacks to be targeted and marginalized. Additionally, the war on drugs was never focused on rooting out violent offenders or drug kingpins. However, it is important to note that federal funding flows to agencies that focus on prioritizing private institutions, which dramatically increase the number of drug arrest on minority groups. Therefore, it is clearly evident that the reward of the war was offered to institutions that retained the highest incarceration rates. Besides, the federal drug forfeiture legislation permits local and state enforcement agencies to keep eighty-percent of the money, homes, and cars that are seized from the drug suspects, allowing law enforcement to directly profit in the drug market. Therefore, it has been predicted that people of color are more likely to be apprehended for non-violent and minor drug offenses. In 2005, four out of five drug related cases were pertaining to possession charges, while just one out of five was about sales (Alexander West, 2012). Furthermore, it was apparent that mo st people of color who were arrested and sentenced to state prison had no history of violence. In the 1990s, about eighty-percent of the increase in drug arrest were related to marijuana, a drug that was considered to be less harmful than tobacco or alcohol.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Primarily, the effects of the systematic marginalization of race in mass incarceration were severe, and detrimental to the black communities as many of their head-of-household and providers were being hauled off to jail and prison for very long sentences. One of the largest effects of mass incarceration was and still is the destruction of families. For example, statistics indicate that an estimated 2.7 million children are growing up in homes with one or both parents in prison (Drug Policy Alliance, 2018). Furthermore, two-thirds of these parents are imprisoned for offenses that are not related to violence, with a large percentage of these guardians being incarcerated for the violations of drug laws. A study comparison of black, Latinos, and white parents who are imprisoned revealed that 1 in 9 African American children (11.4%), 1 in 28 Hispanic children (3.5%), and 1 in 57 white children (1.8%) in the United States have an incarcerated parent. (Drug Policy Alliance, 2018). It is unfortunate that children suffer the consequences of a system that depicts inequality, affecting the quality of life and the sense of touch and belonging that a child needs from having both parents present. Thus, it is necessary that these consequences are discussed and used to support the debate on the need to create equality within the justice system or at the very least prevent discriminatory treatment of individuals based on race or the color of their skin.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Moreover, the consequences of mass incarceration extend to the collateral factors that are associated with an extended form of punishment as a directive of the criminal justice system. Notably, incarcerated individuals are denied child custody, they lose their voting rights, they can barely attain any form of employment due to their criminal record. They do not have the credibility to access any loans, they are denied licensing capabilities to start-up their businesses, and they do not have the privilege of public housing or government benefits. All these restrictions lead to frustrations among convicted criminals even after they have finished their time because they ultimately have been demoted to a second-class status in society. In fact, these restrictions account for the vicious cycle of crime whereby the same people who have completed their time are very likely to engage in criminal activities, leading to more offenses and being incarcerated yet agai n. It has been noted that One in thirteen African Americans of voting age is disenfranchised due to a felony conviction, a rate four times greater than that of non-Black people. (Drug Policy Alliance, 2018) This is merely a result of all of the restrictions and barriers that are placed upon Felons including the label of being a felon which ultimately hinders these individuals in all aspects of life.   Furthermore, these restrictions downgrade millions of U.S. citizens to a lower socioeconomic status, usually affecting majority people of color. Again, it is an affirmation that mass incarceration may have been a result of government policy, however; these policies merely sustained its notoriety through the marginalization of a race and institutionalized racism.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Evidently, the available statistics support the ideology that there is systematic marginalization on African Americans through the war on drugs and mass incarceration. The trend is upsetting because these drug laws were and still are unrealistic. The criminal justice system is structured in such a manner that African Americans are continuously targeted which keeps them disenfranchised and disadvantage. Hence, they suffer from longer and heavier sentencing in drug-related offenses. Moreover, federal agencies are more focused on the number of arrests and convictions they make as opposed to targeting the real issue and not the drug or the user itself. In this entire situation, families are broken and the socioeconomic effects are long-lasting, condemning the minority group to lower-class living. Therefore, it is important for the opposers of this debate to accept that actual action needs to be taken to address the problem of marginalization in the criminal justice system and what it has ultimately done to the African American community. In America, the land of the free, regardless of opinions, the fact remains that every person, whether white or black deserves an equal treatment and opportunity.

Monday, June 1, 2020

Gender Roles in Frankenstein and Fantomina - Literature Essay Samples

It is no surprise that the function of men and women in a society plays a huge role in the pieces of literature that would arise during a specific time. The roles of both men and women in the 18th century, for example, may even align with those in the next century. For instance, both Eliza Haywood’s Fantomina: Love in a Maze (1735) and Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein (1818) depict women as nothing more than objects. In Haywood’s novella, Fantomina is described as a â€Å"Victory† after she is assaulted by Beauplaisir whereas in Shelley’s novel, Elizabeth is introduced, after the death of Caroline, as a â€Å"pretty present† for Victor. However, because they were written a century apart, the two texts also demonstrate a difference in response to the roles that were upheld in each of the societies the texts took place in. Both Haywood and Shelley critique the traditional roles of women during their time period but while Fantomina challenges the tra ditional roles of a woman, the women of Frankenstein uphold them. One of the ways that Fantomina challenges the role of a woman in British society is by changing her appearance from a lady of higher social standing to a woman of lower standing a prostitute. When Haywood states that there is no authority figure nor anyone Fantomina knew in town to whom she is accountable, she is suggesting that a lady should not be acting in such a manner, but the protagonist is still able to get away with it (Haywood 36). At the Playhouse, she resides in a gallery box at the theater, which is a key symbol of wealth and class, but as a prostitute, Fantomina smoothly enters the Pit, where the prostitutes mingled with the men, in a â€Å"free and unrestrain’d Manner† (Haywood 36). It is here that Haywood reveals the impact of one’s behavior and clothes on their social status. When the protagonist changes both her behavior and clothes, she is no longer a â€Å"Lady,† but a â€Å"Woman.† Yet with the downgrade of her status, she is ab le to experience a new sense of freedom, where she also mingles with men. One of the men Fantomina converses with is Beauplaisir and by doing so, she defies the societal restriction of women pursuing men, while also carrying out long sojourns outside of her town. Whereas a woman of low birth possessed the freedom of interacting with any man she wished, a lady did not. Fantomina had spoken to Beauplaisir before, but â€Å"then her Quality and reputed Virtue,† or in other words, her virtuous status, kept her from making advances (Haywood 36). Because she is unrecognizable now, Fantomina finds pleasure in freely conversing with him. However, if an authority figure or anyone Fantomina knew were around, she would not have attempted to pursue Beauplaisir at the Playhouse as herself. Furthermore, as her feelings for him strengthen, Fantomina goes to great lengths to win the affection of Beauplaisir, especially embarking on â€Å"whimsical Adventures† on the false pretence of visiting a relative in the country (Haywood 52). The protagonist’s severely virtuous mother abruptly arrives upon hearing rumors about her daughter to constrain the vast deal of freedom that she was exploiting. This suggests that British women were restricted from traveling outside of their town and were to be kept in check of taboo behavior. Lastly, Fantomina challenges the societal expectation of unmarried women’s sexuality as being a restrained quality. Under her disguises as Fantomina, Incognita, and Celia, the protagonist engages in intercourse, which she refers to as her â€Å"Virtue† and â€Å"Honor,† multiple times with Beauplaisir (Haywood 38). While unmarried men in 18th century Britain exercised their freedom to have intercourse before marriage, women were expected to remain virgins until marriage, which is evident in Fantomina’s deliberate plan in hiding her charades for the security of her reputation (Haywood 40). If women had done oth erwise, they were unfit to be married because they would have â€Å"nothing left to give† to their husbands (Haywood 39). By having intercourse before marriage, the protagonist establishes a new sense of freedom that she will use as a way to manipulate Beauplaisir while she is Incognita. Typically, a man would have more power than a woman but in this case, the protagonist uses her sexuality as a way to gain some control over him. Incognita had him â€Å"always raving, wild, impatient, longing, dying† and this newfound power that the protagonist now possessed differed from the stereotypical image of power between men and women (Haywood 50). Frankenstein reveals that it was a crucial responsibility for women to provide happiness to their male counterparts. Elizabeth adheres to this norm by believing that it is the â€Å"most imperious duty† to deliver happiness to her uncles, cousins and Victor and she is â€Å"determined to fulfill her duties with the greatest exactness,† even after the death of her aunt (Shelley 26). Shelley’s usage of the words â€Å"imperious† and â€Å"greatest exactness† suggest that Elizabeth’s priority was not to render happiness to herself, but to the men in her life. It also shows that women were expected to be forgetful of themselves, especially their own emotions, in respect to men. In order to fulfill her duties, Elizabeth was expected to sweep her feelings under the rug, as if they were insignificant and insubstantial. Another instance where Elizabeth demonstrates her dedication to providing happiness to her male counterparts is when she writes to V ictor, even after suspecting him of cheating: â€Å"Be happy, my friend; and if you obey me in this one request, remain satisfied that nothing on earth will have the power to interrupt my tranquility† (Shelley 135). The word ‘cheating’ can be defined as acquiring feelings for a person while being in a commitment to another. Elizabeth displays a lack of anger or sadness when she accuses Victor of loving and seeing another while committed to her and urges him to seek his own happiness. This would bring Elizabeth â€Å"tranquility† and when she states that nothing in the world would be able to ruin her tranquility, Elizabeth insinuates that Victor’s happiness is the source of her everlasting happiness. Thus, Shelley indicates that the happiness of women was dependent upon the happiness of men. Shelley’s purpose of Elizabeth’s character in the novel was to accentuate the effects of Victor’s transgressive science, which ultimately le ads to her death. While Elizabeth is portrayed as merely collateral damage in a fight between Victor and his creature, Margaret Saville demonstrates no significance to any of the major characters and is only included for the enhancement of the plot. Women were presented as passive figures whose presence, or lack thereof, emphasized the dominance of a male voice. Although Shelley introduces Margaret as the very first character in the novel, she provides little to no information regarding Margaret’s personal life even though she is whom Walton’s letters are directed towards. Additionally, she is not even granted a voice because she only reads the letters and never writes back even when Walton informs her of the harsh weather, which could put his life in danger, thus proving she is passive. For instance, Walton writes to his sister, â€Å"You will not hear of my destruction, and you will anxiously await my return† (Shelley 153). As a result, the readers are left to infer how Margaret must feel knowing that her brother’s life is at risk. On top of that, the reader must also infer whether Margaret would condemn or pardon Victor’s transgressive and harmful experiment. Hence, she is merely an idea because in addition to being written as a figure of moral support for Walton because of his loneliness, Shelley does not confirm whether or not Margaret is still alive. Not only was Elizabeth portrayed as collateral damage in the fight between Victor and his creature, but also Justine. Justine’s character revealed that women were submissive and held no power in their male dominated societies. After being falsely accused of murdering William, Justine confesses to the court, â€Å"I did confess; but I confessed a lie. I confessed, that I might obtain absolution; but now that falsehood lies heavier at my heart than all my other sinsever since I was condemned, my confessor has besieged me, he threatened and menaced, until I almost bega n to think that I was the monster that he said I was†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (Shelley 58). Justine is seen as an object of undeserving blame and despite knowing that the accusations brought upon her are false, she admits to murdering William. Justine falls as victim to a corrupt justice system and an unforgiving priest who manipulates her into believing that she is the monster he said she was. This implies that women are easy to control and are scapegoats to the wrongdoings of men. Furthermore, no one but Elizabeth made an effort to continue the investigation but, even Elizabeth’s stance against the accusations proved no significance in turning the execution over. As Anne K. Mellor states in â€Å"Possessing Nature: The Female in Frankenstein,† â€Å"the impassioned defense she gives of Justine arouses public approbationbut does nothing to help Justine,† (357). However, Victor was the only one who could prove her innocence. He was the one who possessed the power to reveal who the real killer was yet, he chose not to for the protection of himself. Therefore, it is evident who held the power in Victor’s and Elizabeth’s relationship. In both Fantomina: Love in a Maze and Frankenstein, women were seen as nothing more than objects of love and purity whose ultimate faith was marriage. While Fantomina challenged the traditional roles of women, Elizabeth, Margaret and Justine adhered to those in their society. Haywood’s and Shelley’s texts succeeded in exposing the traditional roles of women during the time they were written in.