Hostname: page-component-5db58dd55d-jhf8m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-06-02T09:46:13.576Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

High profile rape trials and policy advocacy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 June 2014

Kristine Coulter  and
David S. Meyer
Kristine Coulter
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, University of California, USA E-mail: kcoulter@uci.edu
David S. Meyer
Affiliation:
Department of Sociology, University of California, USA E-mail: dmeyer@uci.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Activists try to use high profile trials to advance their political agendas, and we want to understand why they occasionally succeed in promoting policy reforms. We begin by reviewing literature on agenda setting and social problem construction, conceptualising high profile trials as “focusing events” that offer activists a chance to advance their definitions and remedies for particular social problems. We next outline the feminist movement against sexual violence as a useful example of activists trying to use trials for their own political purposes. Using events data from the New York Times and the secondary treatment of 13 high profile trials from 1960 to 1997, we examine factors that help or hinder activists’ efforts to use a trial to forward their cause. We see that both the nature of the trial and the political context surrounding it affect the likelihood that a movement gains control of its meaning and secures policy reform.

Keywords

agenda settingfocusing eventsgenderpolicy reformsocial movements

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Public Policy , Volume 35 , Issue 1 , April 2015 , pp. 35 - 61
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press, 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Ainsworth, S. H. and Hall, T. E. (2010) Abortion Politics in Congress: Strategic Incrementalism and Policy Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Armstrong, E. A. and Crage, S. M. (2006) Movements and Memory: The Making of the Stonewall Myth. American Sociological Review 71(5): 724–751.Google Scholar
Armstrong, L. (1994) Rocking the Cradle of Sexual Politics: What Happened When Women Said Incest. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Barron, J. (1994) Vigil for Slain Girl, 7, Backs a Law on Offenders. New York Times, p. 4, 3 August.Google Scholar
Baumgartner, F. R. and Jones, B. D. (1993) Agendas and Instability in American Politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Belknap, M. R. (1994) American Political Trials. Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
Benedict, H. (1993) Virgin or Vamp: How the Press Covers Sex Crimes. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Berg-Schlosser, D., De Meur, G., Rihoux, B. and Ragin, C. C. (2009) Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) as an Approach. In Rihoux B. and Ragin C. C. (eds.), Configurational Comparative Methods: Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and Related Techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc, 1–18.Google Scholar
Berger, R. J., Neuman, W. L. and Searles, P. (1991) The Social and Political Context of Rape Law Reform: An Aggregate Analysis. Social Science Quarterly 72(2): 221–238.Google Scholar
Berrick, J. D. and Gilbert, N. (1991) With the Best of Intentions: The Child Sexual Abuse Prevention Movement. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Bevacqua, M. (2000) Rape on the Public Agenda: Feminism and Politics of Sexual Assault. Boston: Northeastern University Press.Google Scholar
Bevacqua, M. (2008) Reconsidering Violence Against Women: Coalition Politics in the Antirape Movement. In Stephanie G. (ed.), Feminist Coalitions: Historical Perspectives on Second-Wave Feminism in the United States. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 163–177.Google Scholar
Birkland, T. A. (1997) After Disaster: Agenda Setting, Public Policy, and Focusing Events. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Brownmiller, S. (1975) Against Our Will: Men, Women, and Rape. New York: Ballantine Books.Google Scholar
Chancer, L. S. (2005) High Profile Trials: When Legal Cases Become Social Causes. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chong, D. and Druckman, J. N. (2007) A Theory of Framing and Opinion Formation in Competitive Elite Environments. Journal of Communication 57: 99–118.Google Scholar
Christenson, R. O. N. (1986) Political Trials: Gordian Knots in the Law. New Brunswick: Transaction Books.Google Scholar
Cohen, M. D., March, J. G. and Olsen, J. P. (1972) A Garbage Can Model of Organizational Choice. Administrative Science Quarterly 17(1): 1–25.Google Scholar
Corrigan, R. (2006) Making Meaning of Megan’s Law. Law & Social Inquiry 31(2): 267–312.Google Scholar
Crenshaw, K. (1991) Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence Against Women of Color. Stanford Law Review 43(6): 1241–1299.Google Scholar
Cuklanz, L. M. (1996) Rape on Trial: How the Mass Media Construct Legal Reform and Social Change. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Davis, J. E. (2005) Accounts of Innocence: Sexual Abuse, Trauma, and the Self. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Donat, P. L. N. and D’Emilio, J. (1998) A Feminist Redefinition of Rape and Sexual Assault: Historical Foundations and Change. In Odem M. E. and Jody C.-W. (eds.), Confronting Rape and Sexual Assault. Wilmington, DE: Scholarly Resources Inc, 35–50.Google Scholar
Earl, J., Martin, A., McCarthy, J. D. and Soule, S. A. (2004) The Use of Newspaper Data in the Study of Collective Action. Annual Review of Sociology 30: 65–80.Google Scholar
Frantzich, S. E. (2008) Citizen Democracy: Political Activists in a Cynical Age. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers Inc.Google Scholar
Freeman-Longo, R. E. (2002) Revisiting Megan’s Law and Sex Offender Registration: Prevention or Problem. In Hodgson J. F. and Debra S. K. (eds.), Sexual Violence: Policies, Practices, and Challenges in the United States and Canada. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers, 223–238.Google Scholar
Gamson, W. A. (1998) Discourse, Nuclear Power, and Collective Action. In Smith P. (ed.), The New American Cultural Sociology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 202–216.Google Scholar
Gornick, J. C. and Meyer, D. S. (1998) Changing Political Opportunity: The Anti-Rape Movement and Public Policy. Journal of Policy History 10(4): 367–398.Google Scholar
Gornick, J. C. and Meyer, D. S. (1999) Issue Frontiers Project.Google Scholar
Gottschalk, M. (2006) The Prison and the Gallows: The Politics of Mass Incarceration in America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hanley, R. (1992) Jury Chosen in Glen Ridge Assault Trial. New York Times, p. 7, 15 October.Google Scholar
Harriman, R. (1990) Popular Trials: Rhetoric, Mass Media, and the Law. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.Google Scholar
Hilgartner, S. and Bosk, C. L. (1988) The Rise and Fall of Social Problems: A Public Arenas Model. American Journal of Sociology 94(1): 53–78.Google Scholar
Hoffman, J. A. N. (1994) New Law is Urged on Freed Sex Offenders. New York Times, p. 1, 4 August.Google Scholar
Jones, B. D. and Baumgartner, F. R. (2005) The Politics of Attention: How Government Prioritizes Problems. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kerbo, H. R. and Shaffer, R. A. (1992) Lower Class Insurgency and the Political Process: The Response of the U.S. Unemployed, 1890–1940. Social Problems 39: 139–154.Google Scholar
Kingdon, J. W. (1995) Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. New York: Harper Collins College Publishers.Google Scholar
Largen, M. A. (1985) The Anti-Rape Movement: Past and Present. In Burgess A. W. (ed.), Rape and Sexual Assault: A Research Handbook. New York: Garland Publishing Inc, 1–13.Google Scholar
Larkin, R. W. (2007) Comprehending Columbine. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Laufer, P. (1994) A Question of Consent: Innocence and Complicity in the Glen Ridge Rape Case. San Francisco: Mercury House.Google Scholar
Laura, X. (1999) Accomplishing the Impossible. Violence Against Women 5(9): 1064–1081.Google Scholar
Marsh, J. C., Geist, A. and Caplan, N. (1982) Rape and the Limits of Law Reform. Boston: Auburn House Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Matthews, N. A. (1994) Confronting Rape: The Feminist Anti-Rape Movement and the State. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Meyer, D. S. (2006) Claiming Credit: Stories of Movement Influence as Outcomes. Mobilization: An International Quarterly 11(3): 281–298.Google Scholar
Meyers, M. (2007) African American Women and Violence: Gender, Race, and Class in the News. Critical Studies in Media Communication 21(2): 95–118.Google Scholar
Ortiz, D. G., Myers, D. J., Walls, E. and Maria-Elena, D. D. (2005) Where Do We Stand With Newspaper Data? Mobilization: An International Journal 10(3): 397–419.Google Scholar
Ragin, C. C. (1987) The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Ragin, C. C. (2000) Fuzzy Set Social Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Ragin, C. C. (2005) Core Versus Tangential Assumptions in Comparative Research. Studies in Comparative International Development 40(1): 33–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ragin, C. C. (2008) Redesigning Social Inquiry: Fuzzy Sets and Beyond. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Rihoux, B. and Ragin, C. C. (2009) Introduction. In Rihoux B. and Charles C. R. (eds.), Configurational Comparative Methods: Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and Related Techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc, xvii–xxv.Google Scholar
Rose, V. M. (1977) Rape as a Social Problem: A Byproduct of the Feminist Movement. Social Problems 25(1): 75–89.Google Scholar
Schechter, S. (1982) Women and Male Violence: The Visions and Struggles of the Battered Women’s Movement. Cambridge: South End Press.Google Scholar
Scheel, E. D. (1997) The Transformation of the Anti-Rape Movement and its Impact on Survivors. Doctoral Dissertation, University of California, Irvine.Google Scholar
Scott, E. K. (1993) How to Stop the Rapists? A Question of Strategy in Two Rape Crisis Centers. Social Problems 40(3): 343–361.Google Scholar
Seawright, J. (2005) Qualitative Comparative Analysis vis a vis Regression. Studies in Comparative International Development 40(1): 3–26.Google Scholar
Siegel, L. W. (1995) The Marital Rape Exemption: Evolution to Extinction. Cleveland State Law Review 43: 351–378.Google Scholar
Simon, J. (2000) Megan’s Law: Crime and Democracy in Modern America. Law & Social Inquiry 25(4): 1111–1150.Google Scholar
Soule, S. A. and King, B. G. (2006) The Stages of the Policy Process and the Equal Rights Amendment, 1972–1982. American Journal of Sociology 111(6): 1871–1909.Google Scholar
Spector, M. and Kitsuse, J. I. (1977) Constructing Social Problems. Menlo Park, CA: Cummings.Google Scholar
Stone, D. (2002) Policy Paradox: The Art of Political Decision Making. New York: W.W. Norton and Company Inc.Google Scholar
Tierney, K. J. (1982) The Battered Woman Movement and the Creation of the Wife Beating Problem. Social Problems 29(3): 207–220.Google Scholar
TIME (1979) Law: Against a Wife’s Will? TIME, p. 86, January.Google Scholar
Uniform Crime Statistics (2013) http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/crimestats (accessed 8 January 2013).Google Scholar
Whittier, N. (2001) Emotional Strategies: The Collective Reconstruction and Display of Oppositional Emotions in the Movement Against Child Sexual Abuse. In Goodwin J., James M. J. and Francesca P. (eds.), Passionate Politics: Emotions and Social Movements. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 233–250.Google Scholar
Winick, B. J. (2003) A Therapeutic Jurisprudence Analysis of Sex Offender Registration and Community Notification Laws. In Winick B. J. and John Q. L. F. (eds.), Protecting Society from Sexually Dangerous Offenders: Law, Justice, and Therapy. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 213–230.Google Scholar