Victims in the Shadow of the Law: A Critique of the Model of Legal Protection
Author(s): Kristin Bumiller
Source: Signs, Vol. 12, No. 3 (Spring, 1987), pp. 421-439
Published by: The University of Chicago Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3174330 .
Accessed: 08/01/2014 15:52
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
.
The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Signs.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 129.171.178.62 on Wed, 8 Jan 2014 15:52:28 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
VICTIMS IN THE SHADOW OF THE
LAW:A CRITIQUEOF THE MODELOF
LEGALPROTECTION
KRISTIN BUMILLER
ofthe 1964 Civil RightsActmarkedtheend of
The twentiethanniversary
an era ofuncertainprogress.Despite dramaticvictoriesin constitutional
ofgroup-basedstruggles,civilrightsstrategies
litigationand thevisibility
had limitedsuccess in initiating
majoreconomicand social change.'The
limitedprogresshas prompteda new sense ofrealismamonggroupswho
experiencediscrimination-asense ofhowlittlethesituationhas changed
even thoughovertprejudicemaybe lessprevalent.The modestprogressof
the civil rightsmovementhas not made "rights-focused"
strugglesuna
in
there
is
of
civil
however; fact,
attractive,
proliferation
rightsstrategies
' For a longitudinal
ofcivilrightsreforms
on blackand whiteincomes,
studyoftheeffects
see Donald J. McCrone and RichardJ. Hardy,"Civil Rightsand the AchievementofRacial
EconomicEquality,1948-1975,"AmericanJournalofPoliticalScience22, no. 1 (February
1978): 1-17. These sentimentshave been expressedby CorettaScottKingon the twentieth
ofthe 1964Civil RightsAct:"'Segregationist'
anniversary
politiciansdon'tstandat theschool
house door anymore.But segregatedhousingpatternsand more subtle formsof racism
preventequal access to a qualityeducation.... All toooften'lasthired,firstfired'is stillthe
rule forminorities.. . . Recent Supreme Court decisionshave shownus how vulnerable
actionpoliciescan be when the Court'slongstanding
affirmative
commitment
to equalityis
undermined.It also showshowsusceptiblethe... [C]ourtis tothewindsofpoliticalchange"
(RobertPeer, "Civil RightsAct Is Accessed as a Modest Step," New York Times[July1,
1984]).
[Signs:Journalof Womenin Cultureand Society1987, vol. 12, no. 3]
? 1987 by The Universityof Chicago. All rightsreserved.0097-9740/87/1203-0010$01.00
421
This content downloaded from 129.171.178.62 on Wed, 8 Jan 2014 15:52:28 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Bumiller / LEGALPROTECTION MODEL
to extendthe samelegalprotecforreform.Organizedgroupsare striving
on thebasis ofsex,
tionswonforblacksin orderto prohibitdiscrimination
harassment
and pornograto
sexual
and
control
and
sexual
preference
age,
such
as
victories
These
see
and as
guarantees
symbolic
legal
groups
phy.2
initialsteps towardimprovedsocial status.
antidiscrimination
policiesarebased on a modeloflegal
Contemporary
this
the law is a powerfuland effective
From
perspective,
protection.3
The law providesvictimswitha toolby whichtheycan force
instrument.
perpetratorsof unlawfulconduct to comply with socially established
assumesthatthosewhohave suffered
norms.The modeloflegalprotection
harmswill recognizetheirinjuriesand invokethe protectivemeasuresof
on victimsto idenlaws relyprimarily
law. Since mostantidiscrimination
in enforceand
them
to
authorities,
violations,
participate
public
report
tify
ment proceedings,these laws tacitlyassume thatsuch behavioris reasonablyunproblematic.In otherwords, because protectivelaws place
on thevictimtoperceiveand reportviolations,theyassume
responsibility
thatthose in the protectedclass can and will accept these burdens.4
2
is translatedintolegalprotection
For an exampleofhowtheantidiscrimination
strategy
forsexual harassment,see CatharineMacKinnon,Sexual Harassmentof WorkingWomen
(New Haven, Conn.: Yale UniversityPress, 1979).
3 The constitutional
revolutionarisingfromthe civilwarestablisheda methodoffederal
antidiscrimination
thatformsthe"seeds offailure"withinpresent-day
intervention
strategies.
See C. Vann Woodward,"Seeds ofFailurein RadicalRace Policy,"in New Frontiersofthe
ed. Harold Hyman(Urbana: Universityof IllinoisPress, 1966);
AmericanReconstruction,
Harold Hymanand WilliamM. Wiecek,Equal JusticeunderLaw: Constitutional
Development,1835-1875 (New York: Harper & Row, 1982); StanleyKutler,JudicialPower and
Politics(Chicago: Universityof Chicago Press, 1968); ArthurBestor,"The
Reconstruction
AmericanCivil War as a ConstitutionalCrisis," AmericanHistoricalReview 69 (1964):
327-52. As the granddesignofreconstruction
policieswas metwithincreasingobstructions
and violence,theprotectionoftheblackcitizenwas delegatedto enforcement
bythecourts.
This markedthe end of the duty of reconstruction
politiciansto scrutinizecivil rights'
protectionand thebeginningoftherelianceon legalproceduresthatwereviewedas effective
was losttofaithinlegaleffectiveness.
remedies.The moralpurposeofthereconstruction
The
ofcivilrightslaw"becameall butinvisible"
blackcitizen,the"initialand primary
beneficiary"
(Hymanand Wiecek, 509).
4 Thisis an idealizationofthemodeloflegalprotection
as itreflects
thehistorical
purposes
ofantidiscrimination
policies.This modeland itscritiquehavebeen appliedto otherareasof
of
law: AnthonyPlatt,The Child Savers:The InventionofDelinquency(Chicago:University
Chicago Press, 1977);JosephGusfield,The CultureofPublicProblems(Chicago:University
ofChicagoPress,1981);MarthaFineman,"Implementing
Equality:Ideology,Contradiction,
and Social Change," WisconsinLaw Review,no. 4 (1983), 789-886. Legal protectionalso
reflectsassumptionsin dominantresearchparadigmsin law and society.See, forproactive
law, Donald Black, "The Mobilizationof Law," Journalof Legal Studies2 (1972): 125-49;
in
disputeprocessing,e.g., RichardAbel, "A ComparativeTheoryof Dispute Institutions
in
Society,"Law and SocietyReview8 (Winter1973):217-315. It alsohasbroadersignificance
GermanjuristJhering,
and instrumenlegal theory,e.g., theworkofthenineteenth-century
tal strainsof legal realism; see JeromeFrank, Law and the Modern Mind (New York:
Brentano's,1930).
422
This content downloaded from 129.171.178.62 on Wed, 8 Jan 2014 15:52:28 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Spring1987 / SIGNS
Researchon antidiscrimination
policieshasoftenreliedon themodelof
legal protection,and, as a consequence, it has been uninformed
by the
social-situational
viewpointofwomenand menofcolor.Strategiesofequal
protectionmayinadequatelyaddresstheburdensimposedon womenand
discourseoflaw rather
men ofcolorbecause theyaccepttheauthoritative
oflegal ruleswitheverydaylife. From a
thanquestionthe compatibility
feminist
perspective,legaldiscoursesare problem-solving
approachesthat
reflectthe ideology of the powerfuland ignore the realities of the
powerless.5The acceptanceofa situationofsexualor racialdiscrimination
isolateddispute)structures
as a legal problem(a bipolar,rights-oriented,
and outsiders.In sucha system
theinterpretation
forboththeparticipants
withthe law is alienatingforsocialvictimsjust as thelanguage
interaction
of legalityis alienatedfromeverydaydiscourse.
The voicesoftheexcludedclassesofblacksandwomenwithinWestern
cultureshave been quieted in academic work influencedby doctrinal
analysis and the methodologicalframeworkof the dispute processing
Thisprojecttakeson as itscentralfocusthestruggles
ofwomen,
paradigm.6
and in particularthe life situationsof women of color, because these
ofantidiscrimination
strugglesbear morerelevanceto theimplementation
policies than the abstractworld of legal enactments.The image of the
victim7
conditionsof
portrayedby thisstudyis a productofcontemporary
sexualand racialoppression:manyrespondin an ineffectual
and defensive
mannerto a complexnetworkofvictimizations
and a few(whoare exceptionallypreparedforstruggle)stage dramaticbattlesagainstdiscrimination.The studyexaminesthechoicesdiscrimination
victimsmakein light
and thevisionofprotectivelaw. Unlike
oftheperceivedsocialconstraints
theauthority
conventionallegal analysisthatmagnifies
oflegalrulesvis-athese in-depthportrayalsof responsesto
vis other social constructions,
illustratehow the linkbetweeneconomic,social, psychodiscrimination
5 For
Voice: PsychologicalTheoryand Women's
example,Carol Gilligan,In a Different
Development(Cambridge,Mass.: HarvardUniversityPress, 1982).
6
There are exceptions,includingstudiesfocusingon disputingoutsideofthecontemporaryAmericancontext;see, e.g., Boaventurade Sousa Santos,"The Law ofthe Oppressed:
The Constructionand Reproductionof Legalityin Pasargada,"Law and SocietyReview12
(Fall 1977): 5-126. For a studywithinthe U.S. context,see Sally Merry,"Goingto Court:
StrategiesofDispute Managementin an UrbanNeighborhood,"Law and SocietyReview13
(Summer 1979): 891-924. Both articlesattemptto examineattitudestowardlaw without
imposingthe model oflegal protection.
7 "Victim"is used in thiscontextto referto thediminishedrolecreatedand characterized
the
law, government
bureaucrats,and socialservicesdirectedat servingthe needs ofthe
by
disadvantaged.The word "victim"is used with hesitation,since the word evokes and
reinforcesits own social reality.The portrayalof victimswithinthe studyattemptsto
appreciatetheirstrengthunder extremeconditionsof oppression.The powerfuland the
powerlesscannotbe talkedabout in isolationofeach other:the politicalpsychologyofthe
victimis constitutedfromexchangesbetweenvictimsand thosewhoimposetheirauthority.
423
This content downloaded from 129.171.178.62 on Wed, 8 Jan 2014 15:52:28 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Bumiller / LEGALPROTECTION MODEL
logical,sexual,andlegalrolescreatesan ethicofsurvivalthatprecludesthe
protectiverole of law.
The research project
The initialsourceofdataforthisstudywas a householdsurveydesignedto
measurethe incidenceofcivildisputes.In the survey,conductedby the
Civil LitigationResearchProject(CLRP) in 1980,a sampleof560 discriminationclaims was obtainedfromapproximately
5,000 households.Rehad
orunfairtreatment"
if
asked
were
"illegal
they
experienced
spondents
because oftheir"race, age, sex, handicaps,unionmembership,or other
things."8In thisway,it was possibleto obtaina sampleofdiscrimination
grievancesthathad not reached courtsor public agencies. Preliminary
halfoftheaggrievedindividualsdid
analysisindicatedthatapproximately
did nothingfurther
notmakea claimto theotherparty,nearlytwo-thirds
and onlya verysmallpercentage
theirperceivedmistreatment,
to rectify
had achieved successfulresolutionoftheirclaims.9Discrimination
grievlowerrateofescalationintocourtcases thancivil
ances had a significantly
matterssuchas contractdisputesor landlord-tenant
problems.The size of
betweenvictims
thegap is indicativeofthemoreproblematicrelationship
cases comparedto othercivil cases. This
and the law in discrimination
thattobringthecomplaintintotherealm
studybeganwiththeanticipation
of public action forcedvictimsto encounterdeeper and more encompassing conflictsof racial, gender, and social identitythan complaints
arisingfromrelationshipsdefinedby legal roles (i.e., landlord/tenant).
What accountsforthe apparentacceptanceof defeatamongthose who
treatment?Why is it unlikelythatthose who
experiencediscriminatory
will
take theirclaimsto courtsor otherlegal
discrimination
experience
channels?
Althoughthe surveyprobedforopen-endedresponsesto thequestion
8 The initial
surveywas conductedby the CLRP by telephonein fivefederaljudicial
districts:SouthCarolina,EasternPennsylvania,EasternWisconsin,New Mexico,and CentralCalifornia.The districtswere chosento maximizegeographicaland demographicdiversity.The respondentswereaskedwhetheranyonein theirhouseholdhad experiencedone or
moreofa listofproblemsin the past threeyears.Ifthe respondentsindicatedtheyexperienced a discrimination
problemtheywere administeredan additional"problem"questionclosed-endedand open-endedquestions.The datareportedintable1 are
nairewithforty-four
derivedfromopen-endedquestionsincludedin the surveythatwere previouslyuncoded.
is describedin HerbertM. Kritzer,"StudyingDisputes:Learningfromthe
The methodology
CLRP Experience,"Law and SocietyReview15, no. 3/4(1980-81): 503-24.
9 RichardE. Millerand AustinSarat,"Grievances,Claims,and Disputes:Assessingthe
AdversaryCulture,"Law and SocietyReview15, no. 3/4(1980-81):525-66. The aggrieved
to the partyresponsiblefor
partymakesa "claim"when she communicatesher entitlement
the perceivedharm.
424
This content downloaded from 129.171.178.62 on Wed, 8 Jan 2014 15:52:28 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Spring1987 / SIGNS
"Why didn'tyou complain?"it could notprovidethe depthnecessaryto
fromthevictim'sperspective.A subsampresenta view ofdiscrimination
ple ofeighteenpersonsin Milwaukeeand Los Angeleswere selectedfor
The format
oftheinterviews
was unstructured
but
in-depthinterviewing.10
of the discrimination
directed at probingfor interpretations
incident,
people's attitudesabout themselvesand their social status,and their
fortheirbeliefsand actions."The interviews
wereconducted
justifications
interviewwas two to four
fromAprilto October 1982. Each face-to-face
in the interviewsare representative
hourslong. The participants
ofthose
affectedby the social inequalitiesand the patternof discrimination
in
Americansociety:sixblackand Hispanicwomen,ninewhitewomen,and
threeblack and AmericanIndian men.'2
The response to discrimination
In thecivillitigation
researchprojectsurveyon incidenceofcivildisputes,
each individualwho perceivedtheyexperienceddiscrimination
and made
no protestwas asked to explaintheirdecisionwiththe question "Why
didn'tyoucomplain?"In responsetothisquestion,participants
deniedthe
worthinessoftheirown interestsin comparisonto theiropponents'(table
1). Some respondentsaccountedfortheirinactionin termsof the harm
theiropponentcould imposeon them(e.g., responses5, 8, and 9 in table
1). Others acknowledgedtheyshould have done something,yet either
blamedthemselvesfornotpursuingthedisputeoracceptedtheinevitability of the situation(e.g., responses 1, 2, 3, 4, and 11 in table 1). The
ofimmediatecircumstances
rather
explanationsfocuson an interpretation
than normsor rights;forexample, the expense of legal actionand the
10The intensiveinterviewing
was conductedin twojudicial districts:EasternWisconsin
(Milwaukeemetropolitan
area)and CentralCalifornia(Los AngelesCounty).Interviewswere
attemptedwithall respondentsexperiencingdiscrimination
problemsin the two districts.
Cases wereeliminatedifan individualhad refusedtoprovidetheirname,address,and phone
numberand iftheirdescriptionofthe problemwas inappropriate.
" The prototypeofthismethodofresearchin politicalscience is RobertLane, Political
HochIdeology(New York:Free Press, 1962). A recentstudyofsimilardesignis Jennifer
schild,What'sFair? AmericanBeliefsaboutDistributive
Justice(Cambridge,Mass.: Harvard
UniversityPress, 1981).
12
The characteristics
oftheintervieweeswereas follows:race,ninewhite,fiveblack,four
Hispanic and AmericanIndian; sex, fifteenwomen, threemen; type of problem,eleven
twoemployment
and housing,twohousing,threeother;typeofdiscrimination,
employment,
ninesex,sevenrace,one age. These characteristics
correspondtotheoverallCLRP samplein
whichtheresponsesweredistributed
as follows:typeofproblem,56 percentemployment,
12
13 percent
percenteducation,18 percenthousing,14 percentother;typeofdiscrimination,
age, 22 percentsex, 31 percentrace, and 34 percentother.There was a disproportionate
numberofwomenin theintensiveinterviewsamplebecause theyhada higherresponserate.
425
This content downloaded from 129.171.178.62 on Wed, 8 Jan 2014 15:52:28 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Bumiller / LEGALPROTECTION MODEL
TABLE I RESPONSES TO THE QUESTION:
"WHY DIDN'T YOU COMPLAIN?"
Coded Responses*
Responses
I. Itwoulddo no good/endresults
the same/awayof life .............................
2. Not worthit/not
a majorproblem..............................................
3. Need to solvethe problemimmediately/situation
easilyreplaceable....................
4. Gave up/Idon'tknowwhyI didn'tcomplain/I'm
easygoing..........................
5. Fearof retaliation
or beingknownas a troublemaker
...............................
6. Don'tknowwho to complain
to ................................................
7. Could notprove/noevidence...............................
.... ...............
8. Avoiddealingwiththeminthefuture....................
.....
.... ..............
9. Don'twantto causetrouble...................................................
10. Excessivetime or cost ........................................................
I I. Rulescannotbe changed......................................................
12. Other .....................................................................
35
18
17
17
16
14
13
12
9
9
8
8
(19.9)
(10.2)
(9.7)
(9.7)
(9.1)
(8.0)
(7.4)
(6.8)
(5.1)
(5.1)
(4.6)
(4.6)
NOTE.-Numbers inparentheses
are percentages.
*Open-endedresponseswere coded intothesetwelvecategories.
motives(e.g., responses6, 7, and 10 in
inabilityto provediscriminatory
table 1).13
The modeloflegal protectionwouldsuggestthatthefailureofpersons
to use the law stemsfromthe victims'inabilityto servetheirown needs:
and knowledgeabout theirrightsand theirlimited
lack of information
resourcesforutilizinglegal channels.These personswere notrejectedby
oflawyers,orbarred
unresponsiveagencies,deterredbytheunavailability
frompursuinglegal claimsby technicalities.Althoughthe anticipation
of
thesefactorsplayeda roleintheirdecisionmaking,theydid nottakeaction
because theylegitimizedtheirowndefeat.Forthemostpart,the
primarily
problemis neverconceptualizedin termsofpublicaction.In thisuniverse
ofdiscrimination
problemsfarremovedfromlegalfora,thelabelingofacts
and the eventualdeflationofthe conflictby apologyor
as discriminatory
self-blameserveas copingmechanismsforsuppressing
disconburgeoning
tent.'4
These data reveal a generalpatternof responsebut providelimited
situation.Moreadequate explanations
insightintothesocial-psychological
13 Attribution
theoryattemptstoexplainwhyindividualsblamethemselvesforthedispute
(i.e., the need to maintainperceivedcontrol);thisprovidesa limitedpsychological
explanaSee
tionforbehavior,but it does notraisequestionsaboutthe consequencesofself-defeat.
Dan Coates and Steven Penrod,"Social Psychologyand the Emergenceof Disputes," Law
similartomyown,see
and SocietyReview15,no. 3/4(1980-81):655-80. Foran interpretation
Want?Re-examining
the Concept of
Sally Merryand Susan S. Silbey,"What Do Plaintiffs
Dispute," JusticeSystemJournal9, no. 2 (1984): 151-78.
14 Simonede Beauvoirhas describedthisas a "riteofjustice,"whichmanifests
society's
Whenproceduraljusticedoes notallowfora meaningrespectforeach citizen'sindividuality.
fulexpressionofindividualrights,thisriteofjusticebecomesa ritualofdegradation(Simone
de Beauvoir,The Ethics of Ambiguity[Secaucus, N.J.: Citadel Press, 1980]). See also the
ofindividualactionin MurrayEdelman, "Artas
ofthe problemas the stultification
framing
LiberatingPoliticalCommunication,"Institutfur Hohere StudienJournal6 (1982): 1-15.
426
This content downloaded from 129.171.178.62 on Wed, 8 Jan 2014 15:52:28 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Spring1987 / SIGNS
forlegalactionorinactioncan be foundinparticipants'
responsesexamined
withinthe contextoftheirlives: the social exchangebetweenauthorities
the social and psychological
and those who experiencediscrimination,
and theroleoflegalideologyin influencing
mechanismsthatstifleconflict,
individualchoice. In combinationwiththe generalsurveydata examined
above, intensiveinterviewscan elaboratethevictim'sviewofsocialreality
and theirperceptionof alternativecoursesof action.15
Ratherthan treatingparticipants'sociallyconstructedviewpointsas
ofelite ideology,the interpretations
mere reflections
ofthe interviewsin
thisstudywerefocusedon strategiestakenbyindividualsengagedin legal
conflict.'6
The specificobjectivesof interpretation
were: (1) to develop a
oftheconflict
in thecontextofindividuallives;
understanding
meaningful
foractionor inaction;
(2) to analyzethe structureoftheirrationalizations
(3) to discoverwhen and how law enterspersonal spheres; and (4) to
understandpower at the extremepointsofits exercise.'7
15
The interviewswere guidedbyfortyquestionson the following
topics:(1) thecircumstancesof the discrimination
incident;(2) the relationshipof the incidentto otheracts of
discrimination
orotherformsofperceivedmistreatment;
fortherespondents'
(3)justifications
actionsin responseto the incident;(4) theirfeelingsaboutfairness,competition,
merit,and
statusinequalities;(5) theirattitudesabout theirown self-worth
and competence;(6) their
politicalmind: degree of trustin government,politicalalienationand cynicism,extentof
and attitudestowardleadersand authority;
politicalparticipation,
(7) theirknowledgeofthe
ofantidiscrimination
politicaland legal processand theirinterpretation
law; (8) the consequences of the actions they took in response to the discrimination
problem and their
evaluations,in retrospect,abouthow theirstrategiesin the conflictsituationwere modified
over time; (9) theirbeliefsabout the effectiveness
ofpoliticaland legal action.
16
This issue is especiallyproblematicgiventhatthisstudydoes notrelyon an objective
of discriminatory
definition
treatment.To whatextentare these individuals'perceptionsa
reflectionof ideologyor "unmasked"personalknowledge?In termsof disputeprocessing
methodology,see David M. Trubek, "The Constructionand Deconstructionof a DisLaw and SocietyReview 15, no. 3/4(1980-81):
putes-focusedApproach:An Afterword,"
738-40; also see Karl Mannheim,Ideologyand Utopia(New York:Harcourt,Brace,Jovanovich,1936); GeorgLukdcs,Historyand Class Consciousness(Cambridge,Mass.: MIT Press,
1968); HerbertMarcuse,One-DimensionalMan (Boston:Beacon Press, 1964). These issues
have also been addressed withinthe dispute processingframework.See, e.g., William
Felstineret al., "The Emergenceand Transformation
ofDisputes,"Law and SocietyReview
15, no. 3/4(1980-81): 631-54; and LynnMatherand BarbaraYngvesson,"Language,Audiof Disputes," Law and SocietyReview15, no. 3/4(1980-81):
ence, and the Transformation
773-821.
17 This is a brief
forthe interviews.These
summaryof the methodologicalframework
objectives draw eclecticallyfromtheoreticalwritings:Ralf Dahrendorf'sconcept of "life
chances," Life Chances (Chicago: Universityof Chicago Press, 1979); Bruno Bettelheim's
ofthestructure
ofrationalizations
in "extremesituations,"
social-psychological
understanding
Surviving(New York: Vintage, 1980); Niklas Luhmann'sanalysisof law in interactional
aboutLaw in Interactional
Systems,"inAdvancesin Social Theory
systems,"Communication
and Methodology,
ed. K. Knorr-Cetina
and A. V. Cicourel(Boston:Routledge& KeganPaul,
ofpower,Power/Knowledge
1981);and MichelFoucault'smicrophysics
(New York:Pantheon
Books, 1980).
427
This content downloaded from 129.171.178.62 on Wed, 8 Jan 2014 15:52:28 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Bumiller / LEGALPROTECTION MODEL
The creation of illegitimatebonds
conflicts
Discrimination
usuallyoccurin situationswherethereare asymtheperpetrametricalpowerrelations.In mostinstancesofdiscrimination
role (employer,landlord,or teacher,e.g.). In
toracts in an authoritative
theserolespeople wieldpowerbyvirtueoftheirexpertise,theirabilityto
enforceorders,the permanenceoftheirpositions,or theirmystique.'8
The participantsin this studywho experienceddiscrimination
often
as
Several
individuals
referred
to
the
"reportrayedperpetrators tyrants.
of
those
who
discriminate
them.
Mrs.
when
against
gal" qualities
Perkins,
denied a job in a departmentstore,reactedtowardheremployerin these
words:"She is veryattractive.She'd wearclotheslikeshe steppedoutofa
else. You'd have
springgarden.She'd walklikea model;shewassomething
to see her. She had an officein thebackofthestore.She sitslikeshe's the
Queen, Queen Elizabeth. Like you'dhave to bow downto her. That'sthe
feelingI get when I see her." Mrs. Perkinswas intimidatedby the
sensitivetohow
regalappearance.She was particularly
personnelofficer's
the environmentsurroundingthe womanwas designed to impressher
"subjects"and protecther authority.Mrs. Perkinswas, in fact,afraidto
begin a disagreementbecause she feltshe lackedthe languageskillsand
her opponent.
the social presenceto confront
Carmenalso describedher supervisoron thejob in regalterms:"He
was a bit ofa tyrant-screameda lot and yelleda lot. The typeofperson
who would makeyou cry,thenapologizeinstantly.Like, heck, I am the
boss and the ruler,and I do thingsmyway,always."Carmenconsidered
her employer'sdemand fortotalcontrolimmature,like the actionsof a
brutal ruler. Even thoughshe responded more cynicallyto the regal
mannerthandid Mrs. Perkins,she feltcaughtin an explosiveand abusive
exchange.
Other tyrant-like
employersachieved total controlthroughverbal
abuse. Nora believes thatshe never receivedan explanationforher pay
withthe
because "tobe quitehonestwithyouwe wereterrified
differential
ownerofthecompany.He rana verytightshipand ifyoudisagreedwith
him you were sure to cause nothingbut trouble."The tacticof a less
was to imposea
effective
dictator),Virginia'ssupervisor,
tyrant(a military
chainofcommandthatallowedthe top ranksto reservecreditforaccomarmy
plishments.To Virginiahe was the"chickencolonel"(he wasa former
colonel)because he could exerciseauthority
onlybehindcloseddoors(but
18
For a similaranalysis,see RichardSennett,Authority
(New York:Vintage,1980); for
see Bettelheim;StanleyElkins,Slavery(Chicago:
applicationto otherformsofvictimization
Womanand Nature(New York:Harper&
ofChicagoPress, 1959);Susan Griffin,
University
Row,1978);Eugene Genovese,Roll,Jordan,Roll(New York:Vintage,1976);MalcolmX, The
Autobiographyof MalcolmX (New York:BallantineBooks, 1965).
428
This content downloaded from 129.171.178.62 on Wed, 8 Jan 2014 15:52:28 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Spring1987 / SIGNS
and so he claimedcreditfor
paper-thinwalls);Virginiawas his"secretary,"
her work.
behaveaccording
The authority
figuresdescribedbytheseparticipants
to The Prince:theycontrolby fearand simto Machiavelli'sinstructions
theperpetrators
are brutalsimplifiers
ofthe
ofreality.As tyrants
plification
of
situationthroughappearancesthatdisguiserealities.The effectiveness
theirrule accordingto Machiavellirestson the subject'swillingnessto be
"alwaystakenbywhata thingseems to be and bywhatcomesofit."19The
employeebelieves"whatseemstobe"-that hersupervisorexercisesroyal
of the authority's
total
supremacy-and "whatcomes of it"-the finality
interestsand demands are subdued by the emcontrol.All conflicting
ployee's retractionin fear.The bonds of the tyrantimage are powerful
is self-deceptive;
itallowsthesubjectsto
because thedisrespectforroyalty
regardtheirsuperiorsas immatureand arrogantand yetjustifiestheirown
impotence.Tyrantsare notlegitimaterulers;yetwithinthesedemoralized
oftherulerssustainsratherthandefeatsthem.The
bondsthe illegitimacy
the exchangebetweentheperpetrator
and
imageofthe tyranttransforms
victiminto a situationwhere the perpetratorcontrolsand the victim
transgresses.
The potentialfor explosion reinforcesthe inviolablebonds of the
victim/oppressor
relationship.Since the expressionofangeris unacceptwithinnormal
able in bureaucraticsettings,thereare no minorinfractions
is
rebellion
behavior:
there
and
of
submission.20
The victimsof
only
ranges
discrimination,therefore,perceive their own reactionsto injusticeas
explosiveand extreme.Mostoftheindividualsadmittedto extremeanger
(oftenviolent in intent),which persistedfor long periods of time. A
woman involvedin an age discrimination
seventy-two-year-old
dispute
said in referencetoheremployer:"I wantedtopunchher. I was angryfora
couple ofweeks. I would like to takea good swingat her and teachher a
couple ofthings.... I'd still[twoyearslater]liketo punchher." Another
woman,afterbeing fired,claimed:"I feltlike bombingthe place." John
indicatedthathe was so angrythathe could notdeal withitverbally;ifhe
expressedhisrage,he wouldhaveto "takeitouton thestreet."Debbie, in
a sexualharassmentdisputewitha fellowemployee,felt:"Thereare times
I would love to punchhimout-to get out thefrustration."
Patricia,after
fired
from
a
because
were
newly
being
acquiredjob
they
"lookingfora
whiteperson"to filltheposition,was angryformonths.Two tothreeyears
itwouldmakeherangrywhenevershe thoughtaboutit. In only
afterward
19Niccolo Machiavelli,The Prince,in Masterworksof Government,
ed. L. D. Abbott
(New York:McGraw-HillBook Co., 1947), 162.
20See Genovese; and Franz Fanon, The Wretched theEarth(New York:GrovePress,
of
1963).
429
This content downloaded from 129.171.178.62 on Wed, 8 Jan 2014 15:52:28 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Bumiller / LEGALPROTECTION MODEL
one case did angerlead tophysicalviolence:whena blackwomanslappeda
white,fellowemployeewho had made a racistcomment.
These people seem to respondto the violationoftheirdignitywithin
thesepowerrelationswithintenseanger,expressedin theverytermsthat
had been prohibited-immediatephysicalretaliation-butthe resultwas
that anger silenced the victims.2'They were intimidatedby the social
oftheiranger;therefore,
theiremotions
theyconfronted
unacceptability
byexercisingcontrol.As Patriciaexplains,she can onlyremainangryifitis
"vital,"otherwiseifshe let herselfget angry,"thenI'd be angryall the
time." Othersadmitthey"don'tknowhow to fight,"they"stayquiet,"
"calm down," or "absorb a lot of anger before [they]let go." These
rationalizations
aboutthedesirability
ofcontrolmaystifletheexpressionof
injusticein any form.
An ethic of survival
The attitudeabout theirsuccesses and failuresof those individualswho
is bestdescribedin Virginia'swords:"The main
confronted
discrimination
measurementof success [was] basicallysurvival."The ethic of survival
meansdifferent
thingsto different
people, dependingon howtheydefine
and theirbases forself-respect
and how theyview
theirresponsibilities
theirstrugglesand needs.22
Carmen, forexample, considersher encounterwith discriminatory
an inevitableeventin thelifeofa womanofcolor.Carmen,who
treatment
workedas a clerk in a discountdepartmentstoreforalmostten years,
discoveredthataftera promotionto a moreresponsiblepositionas an area
supervisorher salarywas lowerthanthoseof men in the same position.
Carmen chose not to make a formalcomplaint.She made thisdecision
thatrevealsthatherpowerlessness
because ofa complexset ofconstraints
inobtainingequal payis linkedtoherpowerlessnessinotherdomains.She
as a singleparentforfour
needs thejob because she has responsibilities
children.She also recognizesthatin anydisputeitwouldbe "me againsta
21
When victims,consumedby anger, avoid face-to-face
confrontations,
theylose the
When Patriciareturnsto pickup herfinalpaycheck,
to exercisetheirauthority.
opportunity
she findsheremployer"embarrassed"like"someonewhomadea decisiontheyare notproud
theemployer"wouldgetveryupset."This
of."Patriciafeltthatifshe starteda confrontation
natureofthe firing,
confirmedPatricia'ssuspicionsaboutthe discriminatory
yetshe did not
pursue the matterwiththe employer.Johndescribesa similarincidentwithhis district
supervisor:"Allofa suddenhe getsloud and tellsme he is notprejudiced,I didn'taskforthat.
I just looked at him,walkedout, and I let it go at that... thatlet the cat out ofthe bag."
2 For an interesting
analysisofhow an individual'sethicofsurvivalis definedin oppressive situations,see BarringtonMoore, Injustice(New York:M. E. Sharpe, 1978); Robert
Coles, ChildrenofCrisis(Boston:Little,Brown& Co., 1964);and RobertColes and JaneH.
Coles, Womenof Crisis (Boston: Little,Brown& Co., 1978).
430
This content downloaded from 129.171.178.62 on Wed, 8 Jan 2014 15:52:28 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Spring1987 / SIGNS
and thenitbecomes"yourwordagainst[a morepowerlargecorporation,"
else's."
There are risksinvolvedin "notknowingwhatthe
ful]somebody
outcomewillbe," and she has reasonto suspectthechancesforsuccessful
resolutionare low, havingseen "too manypeople let go forthethingsthat
makeyou wonder."Carmenjustifiesher acquiescenceby explainingthat
she is like manypeople who,when somethingbad happens,"get it out of
the way and don't make waves."
oftheproblemas
She avoidsthefullimpactofacceptingthedefinition
herselfas the victim,withcareful
and thus identifying
discrimination,
aboutthenatureofhermistreatment.
Her employermayhave
distinctions
her
"without
even
discriminated
against
realizingit." It is onlywhen she
thatwomenare incompetent
at theirjobs thatit
hearscertaininsinuations
Carmen
to
avoid
thelabel ofvictim
conscious
importance.
attempts
gains
it
is
While
for
her
impossible her to denyher
grouporigins.
by denying
her
can
disavow
ethnic
she
womanhood,
identitybecause ofher coloring
and marriedname. Therefore,she is notvulnerableto otherswho would
is to
say, "She is PuertoRican,so we treather thisway." Discrimination
at
Carmensomething"theyare constantly
acts
of
pushing you." Avoiding
its
nature
is
discrimination
what
is
dreaded
given ever-present
impossible;
is the statusof "being a victimof discrimination,"
a role thatseizes and
marksits possessor.
to see her mistreatment
as something
Despite her deliberateefforts
she confronts
the realityofher circumstances,
otherthandiscrimination,
thatshe was doinga goodjob and yetnotreceivingjust rewards.For herto
acknowledgean undeniableinjusticeshe mustcome firstto believe that
she has failedto live up to some preconceivedstandardofself-protection,
thatshe was byherownestimation"notthatbraveofa person."Confrontunder these circumstancesis a no-winsituationthat
ing discrimination
"dependsuponyouas an individualand howmuchyoucan take"(whether
or postcomplaint
retaliayou are enduringprecomplaintunjusttreatment
When
Carmen
feels
about
what
has
to
tion).
depressed
happened her,she
has to remindherselfthatshe "has nothingto be ashamedof."
Ironically,at the heart of the trap of victimhoodis the strongand
of her experiences.Carpositivedimensionto Carmen's self-evaluation
menpridesherselfon herabilityto downplaytheproblemand act realistically. She is proud ofher independenceand her success in the personal
domainofher familylife.The pride in her own strengthis linkedto her
of
identityas a woman. For example,in referenceto her accomplishment
a
house
on
her
for
five
own
she
"I
maintaining
years
proclaims, keep it
I
did
a
it
She
finds
woman."
it
goingmyself,
myself,
necessaryto remind
herselfthata partofher identity,
herwomanhood,is capable ofsurviving.
Thus Carmendrawsstrength
fromher abilityto endure,yether energies
are drainedintothe act of survival.
John'sethicofsurvivalis "makingit throughthe rain." Like Carmen,
431
This content downloaded from 129.171.178.62 on Wed, 8 Jan 2014 15:52:28 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Bumiller / LEGALPROTECTION MODEL
is to his child, thoughone of his
his primarysense of responsibility
on thejob is thatitmadehim
complaintsabouttheordealofdiscrimination
moreirritablearoundhis youngdaughter.Johnbelievesthateach person
has the responsibility
to do thejob theiremployersassignbecause "they
are theones thatgiveme mypaycheck,youshoulddo themright."When
theemployeris discriminatory
itdoes notchangethebasicrequirements
of
the relationship:"What rightdoes someone have to hassle me like that
whenI am doingmyjob? I tookitfromthem,but I don'ttakeitfromvery
manyindividuals-theygiveme mypaycheck;[with]individualsmyboiling pointis a littlelower."
is revealed in the two ways in whichhe
This sense of responsibility
to "steal fromthe
demonstrateshis loyalty.First,despite opportunities
has
"a
little
code
of
John
wishy-washy"
company,"
honestythatprevents
him. Second, he feelsmoreloyaltyto theemployerthanto theunion,not
because he believesthecompanyserveshisbestinterests
but"because the
unioncan onlyhelp so much."He expectsthatifhe fileda complaintwith
himand theywouldfinda reason
theunionthecompanywouldinvestigate
to firehim whethertheyhad groundsor not. Even thoughhe does not
expect fairtreatmentfromhis employer,he has even less faithin his
co-workers'support.
His overallphilosophyis "I don'tneed a lot."Johndoes notattribute
his
situationon the job to
abilityto endure the strainof a discriminatory
ofcharacterbut,rather,to theabilityto "weatherthestorm."By
strength
his own estimation,in his weaknesshe endures:"My personalityis what
keptmyjob, mycolorcreatedtheproblem.Ifitcametoa pointwhereI felt
less thana manfortakingtheabuse, I wouldhavequit; [as thingswere]ifI
had quit I would have feltless of myself."
These two portrayalsillustratehow victimsof discrimination
protect
themselvesfromthe hardshipsimposed by relyingon an illusive and
privatehonor.Their sense ofhonoror pride,seen in the contextofhow
and constraints
withinan ethicof survival,is a
theycreateopportunities
to submitpersonalneeds to thedemandsofpowerfulinstitujustification
tions. Thus the discrimination
victimupholdsthe appearanceofjustice
even withina systemthatdenies her equality.The victim'sethics are
maintainedwithinan individual,self-defined
realm. Institutionaland
bureaucratic grievance procedures invade this personal ethic and
the illusionthatinstitutions
are fairand thatdiscrimination
is
strengthen
notprevalentas longas thevictimsofdiscrimination
believe theirindividual misfortune
stemsfromthe acts ofaberrantindividualsand frombusiness practices.23
Honor subdues aggression-as in John'scommitment
to
23Lukacs, speakingof the bureaucrat'sconscientiousness,
saw thatit is "preciselyhis
thatexacthistotalsubmission.... It pointsto thefact
'honor'and his 'sense ofresponsibility'
thatthe divisionoflabor ... invadesthe realmofethics .... This strengthens
the reified
432
This content downloaded from 129.171.178.62 on Wed, 8 Jan 2014 15:52:28 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Spring1987 / SIGNS
honestdealingswitha firmthatinstitutes
business
raciallydiscriminatory
practices. Pride subdues powerlessness-as in Carmen's need to "like
herself"when she is powerlessto combatpay differentials
she acknowledges as unfair.When neitherinstitutional
practicesnorthe law ofequal
a moralcommitment
affirm
to standards,the victimsof disopportunity
criminationcannotfindpurposebeyondtheirindividualfate.24
The discriminationvictim's view of the law
Claimingdiscrimination
In orderforan individualtopressa claimthatunfavorable
treatment
stems
fromdiscriminatory
practicesshe mustassumetheroleofthevictim.This
transforms
a social conflictinto a psychologicalcontestto reconcile a
withtheimageofthevictimas powerlessand defeated.
positiveself-image
whether
or not to make a public claim of discrimination
thus
Deciding
becomes intertwined
withthe processof reconcilingthese self-images.25
In this study,those intervieweddiscussed the discrimination
they
experience in qualified terms. Some approached it by denyingselfinvolvement:"SometimesI don't even feel like I was personallybeing
discriminated
against,as iftheydid notknowwhoI was or sawwhoI was."
Anotherapproach characterizedacts of discrimination
as the resultof
personallikesand dislikes:"You come acrossit so oftenit is reallyridiculous."
To experiencediscrimination,
bytheseaccounts,is to sense one's own
and to graspthe realityofdifferential
treatment.The women
invisibility
northeirresponsetoitfocusedon
perceivedthatneitherthemistreatment
a deliberateattackagainstthem,but injusticesresultedfrombeing discountedor ignored.26
The legal conceptofdiscrimination
has a historicaland analyticalbasis
in the identification
witha groupcause.27To put thisconceptintooperaofconsciousness... as longas thefateoftheworkerstillappearstobe an individual
structure
fate"([n. 16 above], 99-100).
4 Max Weber, Economyand Society,2 vols., ed. GuentherRoth and Claus
Wittich
(Berkeley:Universityof CaliforniaPress, 1968), 2:884-85.
25The law createsa juridicalpersonin itsimage. See JosephVining,Legal Identity(New
Haven, Conn.: Yale UniversityPress, 1978); JohnNoonan,Personsand Masks of the Law
(New York:Farrar,Strauss,& Giroux,1976).
26RalphEllison, InvisibleMan (New York:VintageBooks, 1957); GordonAllport,The
Nature of Prejudice(Boston:Beacon Press, 1954).
27 Owen
Fiss, "Groups and the Equal ProtectionClause," in Equalityand Preferential
Treatment,ed. MarshallCohen et al. (Princeton,N.J.: PrincetonUniversityPress, 1977),
arguesthatthenormsofthejudicialcraftaccentuateantidiscrimination
laws'narrowfocuson
and individualism.Fiss describes,on thedoctrinallevel,thehighlyindividualistic
objectivity
433
This content downloaded from 129.171.178.62 on Wed, 8 Jan 2014 15:52:28 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Bumiller / LEGALPROTECTION MODEL
tion, so to speak, involvesfindinga basis forthe claim in termsof the
individual'sgroupidentity.28Yet,theserespondentsresistperceivingtheir
situationas the resultoftheirgroupidentity.In some cases, theydeperratherthanidentify
sonalizetheirmistreatment
withthegroupfate:"[Discrimination]
depends upon who you are workingfor,changesin supervisors [solve the problem]";"[discrimination]
occurredbecause he has a
problemand I was sortofa scapegoat."Or "I expected[discrimination];
that'sthewaymentreatwomen."These statements
disassociatetheexpefromgroupidentity,
rienceofdiscrimination
causes,orconcerns,eitherby
natureof the perpetrator'sactionsor by
emphasizingthe idiosyncratic
Several respondentssupuniversalizingthe presence of discrimination.
portedtheserationalizations
bypointingoutthateveryoneis vulnerableto
A blackmanexplained:"I don'twalkaround
some typeofdiscrimination.
withmyhead buriedinthesand. People discriminate
and
againstanything
directedat their
anybody."Two respondentsreferredto discrimination
"fatrelatives"as examplesoftheprevalenceofdiscrimination.
A fewmen
as unavoidable:"I even discrimieven attemptto defenddiscrimination
feltthatitwas self-defeatnateagainstMexicans."In sum,therespondents
witha
ing to associatean illogicaland irrationalprocessofmistreatment
realcause. When someonedid statetheirclaimintermsofgroupconcerns,
theymetresistance:"Most ofthepeople I talkedto thoughtI overreacted
. . . [I thinkit was] because I was
[whenI complainedofdiscrimination]
labeled a feminist."
Even thoughthese individualsexpressambivalenceabout claiming
discrimination
publicly,theybelieve theyhave been seriouslyharmed.
Theirambivalenceplaces themin a self-imposed
trap.Theystrugglewith
an imageofthemselvesand theiractionsthatproducesan uncomfortable
Whileantidiscrimination
lawostensibly
senseofexceptionality.29
promotes
law giventhe designers'deliberateprotectionofpersonsrather
natureofantidiscrimination
thanclasses and the court'srejectionofnaturalclasses. In the SupremeCourt'sinterpretato groupsarecontinually
scrutinized
toassuretheydo notoffend
thevalueof
tions,references
individuality.
28 Realizingdiscriminatory
treatmentis like recognizinga group-identified
mask that
partlyreflectsthe identityofthe wearer,racialor sexualstereotypes,and the imageofthe
victimfound in antidiscrimination
doctrine.Sylvia, who encountereddiscrimination
in
"I wouldhave thoughtmoreofme, myself."She was
school,feltthatwithoutdiscrimination
aboutbeinglabeledas "Latin"or"Mexican"byotherstudents.She explained,
uncomfortable
"Sometimesitwouldhurt,sometimesitwouldmakeme feelfunny,
and well,I am Mexican."
ofthelabel demeansher,and at thesametime,thelabel deeplyreflects
The all-inclusiveness
her socialand personalself.Whatseemsalien at the same momentis essentialto herbeing.
See Franz Fanon, Black Skin,WhiteMasks (New York:Grove Press, 1967).
29
HannahArendtdescribestheneed toescape fromthegroupidentity
inherbiography
of
Rachel Varnhagen(1771-1833), a womancaughtin the dilemmasof a period of GermanJewishassimilation.Arendtassesses the mood: "A politicalstruggleforequal rightsmight
havetakentheplace ofa personalstruggle... [but]Jewsdid notevenwanttobe emancipated
434
This content downloaded from 129.171.178.62 on Wed, 8 Jan 2014 15:52:28 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Spring1987 / SIGNS
dignityand universalhumanrights,in practiceindividualsmaypreferthe
to an attemptto exercisetheirrights
dignityfoundin theiranonymity
under such law.30
The reluctanceto move beyond the perceptionof discrimination
to
the protectionofantidiscrimination
law is partlydue to a
claim formally
resistanceto thenegativeimageofthevictim.Moreover,thisambivalence
deflectspotentialconflictbecause they choose not to categorizetheir
withinnarrowboundariesofdiscriminatory
mistreatment
activity,
thereby
the
its domain.31
Their relucaccepting
power of the law but restricting
tanceto crosstheboundarybetweennormalcy
andvictimhood
forcesthem
actions.Those whotransgress
tojustifytheperpetrators'
thesocialboundaries of discrimination
experiencesanctions-the label ofthe victim(the
the
label ofa groupstereotype
or
powerlessoutsider)
(thepotentialzealot).
The intrudingpresencein everydaylife
Despite thefactthatvictimsare reluctantto use thelaw, theyclingto the
beliefthatitbenefitsthem.Mrs. Perkins,whenaskedto reportherage on
an employmentapplication,explained,"I toldher I thoughtyou weren't
asking that anymore."She also indicatedthat she was sure she could
"reporther . . . rightthen and there." She knew that "theyweren't
supposedtoconsideryourreligion,age, yourcolor,orwhatevertheheckit
was and she suredid." All therespondents,whenaskediftheyfeltthelaw
was on theirside in the dispute,suggestedthat,at leastin principle,the
law would have supportedtheirposition.For example,one respondent
involvedin a housingdisputeexplained:"I knewI had the right.It made
me feel good, thatI knew ifI wantedto [I could make a claim]."
as individualsifpossible.Their
as a whole; all theywantedwas to escape fromJewishness,
urgewas secretlyand silentlyto settlewhatseemed to thema personalproblem,a personal
Arendt,Rachel Varnhagen:The Lifeof a JewishWoman [New York:
misfortune"(Hannah
Harcourt,Brace, Jovanovich,1974], 7).
30 Tocquevillewarnsthatdemocratic
freedomcan silencetheproclamation
ofright:"The
bodyis leftfreeand thesoul is enslaved."The "master"says:"You arefreetothinkdifferently
fromme, and to retainyour life, your property,and all thatyou possess; but you are
a strangeramongyourpeople. You will retainyourcivilrights,but theywillbe
henceforth
useless to you ... foryou will neverbe chosenby yourfellowcitizens .... You willremain
among men, but you will be deprived of the rightsof mankind."The claim of right,
Tocqueville explains,bringswithit the severestsanctionin a democraticsociety(Alexisde
Tocqueville, Democracyin America,ed. RichardD. Heffner[New York:Mentor,1956],
118).
31 For
example,theirreluctanceto pursueclaimsis fosteredbytheperceptionthatin the
legal realmtheiraccountsare worthlesswithout"objectiveproof."Theybelieve thelaw will
notrecognizetheirclaimbecause "everything
is verbal,""thereis no formalbookkeepingor
wenton behindclosed doors,nobodyheardwhatI asked
job descriptions,"and "everything
him."These statementsdevalue theirself-knowledge
in relationto the opponents'administrativeproceduresand the legallyimposedstandardsofburdenofproof.
435
This content downloaded from 129.171.178.62 on Wed, 8 Jan 2014 15:52:28 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Bumiller / LEGALPROTECTION MODEL
Theirassumptionthatthereareabsoluteguaranteesinthelawseemsto
Afterthey
contradicttheirattitudestowardthe law once it is employed.32
engagedthe apparatusoflaw or even consideredinvokingit, the respondents saw legal resolutionas a riskycourse of action.They fearedlegal
would worsentheirsituation.
intervention
The prospectoflegalintervention
heighteneda senseofpowerlessness
and produceda fearofloss ofcontrol.Norabelievedthatthedecisionto go
to court was like opening up a "Pandora's box." Delma describedher
feelings:"I mighthave takenit to court;I mighthave done that.I wentto
me and I feltso helpless.It
the[unemployment
office],and she confronted
was just his wordagainstmine,and I am dumb . .. and thereis nothingI
officewas a previewofthe confrontation
in
can do." The unemployment
court,whereshe wouldfeelexposed,forcedtodefendherselfwithnothing
otherthanher own wordsand intelligence.
also fear that theirpowerlessnesswill be
Victimsof discrimination
accentuatedin the legal forumbecause the legal dispositionwill address
As one respondentreasoned,thelawwill"not
onlya partoftheproblem.33
it is cutand dry-there [is] notroomforemotion."
representpersonality:
Behaviorand loyaltiesmaychangewhenallies are asked to participatein
legalproceedings:"[Goingtocourt]wouldmeanthatpeople wouldhaveto
speakup. In theloungetheymightsayyouare reallygettingscrewed.To
When yourneckis on the chopping
say thatin a courtoflaw is different.
block,you ain't goingto starttalking."
also had theeffectofrestructuring
accordconflict,
Legal intervention
The respondents
ing to respondents,by provokingextremehostility.34
claimed thattheyavoided legal actionin orderto maintaincivilitiesor
remainemployed:"If I didn'twantto workthereanymore,thenI thinkI
law is potentially
broadin itsapplication.For example,in TitleVII
Antidiscrimination
discriminationis definedbroadly,includingsituationswhere employersfail to hire, to
withrespectto compensation,terms,conditions,and
discharge,or otherwisediscriminate
and practicesthat"limit,segregate,or classify... in anywaythat
privilegesofemployment
his[sic]status."The wordingofthestatute
woulddepriveortendtootherwiseadverselyaffect
The statute,
suggeststhe law was designed to prohibitsubtle formsof discrimination.
however,has been narrowly
appliedbythecourtsbecause theburdenofproofrestswiththe
A primafaciecase is establishedwhentheplaintiff
shows"(i) thathe [sic]belongstoa
plaintiff.
racial minority;(ii) thathe applied and was qualifiedfora job forwhichthe employerwas
he was rejected;and (iv)that,afterhis
seekingapplicants;(iii)that,despitehisqualifications,
rejection,the positionremainedopen and the employercontinuedto seek applicantsfrom
(McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green,411 U.S. 792
personsofcomplainant'squalifications"
[1973]). Factorsthatmayinvalidatea claimincludefailureto bringa claimwithinspecified
toprovediscriminatory
timelimits,failuretopursueproperadministrative
channels,inability
to maintainpracticesthatare
impactoftestsorotherprocedures,and theemployer'spriority
"businessnecessities."
33See W. Lance Bennettand MarthaS. Feldman,Restructuring
RealityintheCourtroom
(New Brunswick,N.J.: RutgersUniversityPress, 1981).
34Luhmann(n. 17 above).
32
436
This content downloaded from 129.171.178.62 on Wed, 8 Jan 2014 15:52:28 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Spring1987 / SIGNS
would take legal action." When law is effective,it is at best a stopgap
measure,to use when defeatis alreadycertainto salvagea situationafter
one is resignedto defeat.The respondentsfeltthatthelaw can onlydelay
whattheyperceive as the inevitablerevenge.35
withthe
Severalrespondentsrevealedthatwhentheywereconfronted
a legalactiontheyworriedabouttheirownguilt,as if
prospectofinitiating
they were charged with criminaloffenses.Delma, while considering
whetherto filea complaint,mused, "Maybe it is me, maybeI am doing
somethingwrong."Anotherwoman,one who precipitatedan act ofviolence afterwhichshe lostherjob, reflected,"WhatI had done was against
the rules,but whatshe had done was also againstthe rules. I didn'ttake
legalactionagainstitbecause I knewI had donea wrongpart,I didn'ttryto
takeawayfromwhatI had done." Johnalso revealshisfeelingofguiltonce
treatment.He feltas if
he discovershimselfsingledout fordiscriminatory
hiswholelifewas on trial;he was alwayson thedefensiveand compelledto
prove he was doinghis best possiblework.
victimsfeltit was necessaryto
More generally,these discrimination
theirsituations.Oftenthismeantblocking
preventlaw fromaggravating
the law fromtakingover the relativenormalcyof day-to-daylife.36As
to me at the timewas tryingto erase
Carmensaid, "Whatwas important
the situation.I was splitbetweenthe idea ofpursuingit in courtand just
lettingitdie. I couldn'tstandthestress."Anotherwomanexplained,"The
situationis reallyblocked out, because I don'twantthemto take action
againstme."
Conclusion
These descriptionsof the social realityof victimsexplainwhy only an
exceptional few who perceive they have experienced discrimination
Luhmannhas developed a model ofthe communicative
processthataccountsforthe
transformation
ofa conflictonce a legalthemehas been introduced.Once a disputehas been
thematizedas a legal conflict,theparticipants
requiresocialsupport.In some cases, law can
be advantageousto the weakerpartybecause it removeslaw to a rule-oriented
context.But
Luhmannexplains,"notall interaction
systemscan handlethiskindofalienation"(244-45).
The legal thematization
mayrudelydisplacethepowerrelationsand movethe communicationinteraction
intothesphereofthelegalsystemthatis incompatible
withthesubsystems
of
interaction(meaningeverydaylife).
3fThe view of the law held by victimsof discrimination
is in starkcontrastto the
anticipatedresponseto protectivelaw. The collectionofstatementsby individualswho feel
createsa compositepictureanalogousto the themes
theyhave experienceddiscrimination
about law presentedin Kafka'sThe Trial. "IfI had behaved sensibly,nothingfurther
would
have happened,all thiswouldhave been nippedin thebud. Butone is so unprepared."The
solutionseems to be to reestablishboundariesthatpush legalityawayfromthe victim'slife
(Franz Kafka,The Trial [New York:SchockenBooks, 1968], 20).
437
This content downloaded from 129.171.178.62 on Wed, 8 Jan 2014 15:52:28 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Bumiller / LEGALPROTECTION MODEL
This studyoffersthree
achieve successfulresolutionof theirproblems.37
explanationsforvictims'reluctanceto assertthe worthinessof theirinterestsand their acceptance of defeat as inevitable. First, the bonds
and thediscrimination
betweentheperpetrator
victimdrivetheconflict
to
self-destructive
or explosive reactions. Second, these individualsare
ratherthan
guided by an ethic of survivalthatencouragesself-sacrifice
action.Andthird,thepotentialforlegal remediesis diminishedbya view
of the law that engendersfear of legal intervention.Injured persons
because theyshuntheroleof
reluctantly
employthelabel ofdiscrimination
willdisruptthedelicatebalance
thevictim,and theyfearlegalintervention
of power between themselvesand theiropponents.
The hostile image of the law held by respondentsconsideringlegal
recourseis a harshrealitycomparedto the spiritof protectivelaw that
lives. In contempromisesto givepurposeandjusticeto itsbeneficiaries'
poraryAmericansocietyit is typicallyassumed thatthe "rule of law" is
of
strengthened
powers,the clarification
by the increasein enforcement
is protected.
goals, or the removalofdiscretion,so thatthe right-bearer
therightof"equaltreatment
Yetwhenpeople contemplateinvoking
under
law,"theyfindthemselvesin a positionwithonlyundesirablealternatives.
law does not enable the victimto
The invocationof antidiscrimination
in situations
whereshe orhe is pittedagainst
overcomepowerdifferentials
the more powerfulopponent.The bonds of victimhoodare reinforced
ratherthanbrokenby the intervention
oflegal discourse.
The civilrightsmovementhas producednumerouslessonsabout the
limitsofthe law. Evaluationsofdoctrinaldevelopmentand policyimplementationhave demonstratedthe limitedrole ofcourtsin restructuring
socialand economicrelations.38
Championsoflitigation
maymisrepresent
ofsystematic
theproblembyignoringthecomplexity
processesofdiscriminationthatoperatethroughout
thesolution
societyand thenmisrepresent
oflegalbarriersis sufficient
bycreatingtheimpressionthattheelimination
to achieve racial equality. Litigationthus becomes the focal point of
activismat the costofpossiblymoredynamicattackson therootcauses of
37Otherstudieshaveattemptedtoaccountforunsuccessful
resolutionofclaimswhenthey
are broughtto legal agencies. See Leon Mayhew,Law and Equal Opportunity
(Cambridge,
Mass.: HarvardUniversity
Press,1968);PatriciaWardCrowe,"ComplainantReactionstothe
MassachusettsCommissionagainst Discrimination,"Law and SocietyReview 12, no. 2
(Winter1978): 217-36; JoelHandler, Social Movementsand the Legal System(New York:
AcademicPress, 1978). These studiesfoundthatcomplaintswere systematically
"dismissed
due to thedegradaforlackofprobablecause," therewerefrequent"double-victimizations"
tion imposed by the hearingprocess, and manyroutinecases were abandoned due to a
preferenceforclass actionsand agencyco-optation.
8 For example,see StuartScheingold,The Politicsof Rights(New Haven, Conn.: Yale
UniversityPress, 1974); Charles A. Bullockand CharlesM. Lamb, The Implementation
of
Civil RightsPolicy(Monterey,Calif.:Brooks/Cole,1984);Donald Horowitz,The Courtsand
Social Policy(Washington,D.C.: BrookingsInstitution,1977).
438
This content downloaded from 129.171.178.62 on Wed, 8 Jan 2014 15:52:28 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Spring1987 / SIGNS
racialand sexualsubordination.39
Moreover,legalideologiescan constrain
the social visionof the victimand promoteself-blame.The mythologies
whichperpetuateracismand sexismare reflectedin boththe benevolent
policies of legal reformersand the self-imageof those who experience
discrimination.
The inactionofdiscrimination
victimsis problematicfromthevantage
of
the
of
point
ideology legal protection.From the social realityof the
victim,however,we findthat"survivalis a formof resistance."'4In this
study,the majorityof these individualsview protestas contraryto their
well-beingand livelihood.The situationcreatesa paradoxofirrationality,
inwhichpeople engagedin discrimination
conflicts
believetheyare better
offiftheydecide not to pursue theirinterests.4'
To act aggressivelyand
battlefora principlerequires"irrational"sacrificesand defeatsthe individual's ethicof survival.
law may have produced positive social
Though antidiscrimination
change, legal strategiesput unacceptable burdens on disadvantaged
groupswithlittlepromiseofsuccess.The gap betweenthesymboliclifeof
thelaw and theineffectiveness
ofthelaw in actionimposesa costborneby
the intended beneficiariesof civil rightspolicies. The inabilityof civil
rightsstrategiesto fulfilltheirpromiseappears to have leftmanywho
on uncertaingroundbetweenpublicandprivate
experiencediscrimination
actionwhere theyare withoutfaithin themselvesor the law.
Departmentof PoliticalScience
JohnsHopkinsUniversity
39
DerrickBell, "Foreword:The Civil RightsChronicles,"HarvardLaw Review99, no. 1
(November1985): 4-83.
40For example,see theuse ofthephraseinGerdaLerner,BlackWomeninWhiteAmerica
(New York:Vintage,1972), 287.
41 The
is employedin the studyofpolice behaviorto accountfor
paradoxofirrationality
are impossiblewitha suspectwhohas nothingto lose. See William
whyrationalnegotiations
Ker Muir,Police:StreetCornerPoliticians(Chicago:University
ofChicagoPress,1977). For
an analogyto criminaldefendants,see MalcolmFeeley, The ProcessIs thePunishment
(New
York:Russell Sage, 1979). He observesthatfordefendantsthe costofinvokingone's rights
frequentlyis greaterthanthe loss ofthe rightsthemselves.
439
This content downloaded from 129.171.178.62 on Wed, 8 Jan 2014 15:52:28 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions