Is criminal justice necessary for perpetrator accountability? (Probably, for now)

I was left with a resounding “this suuuucks” feeling after reading “Sexual Assault and the Meaning of Power and Authority for Women with Mental Disabilities” and an ever stronger “this suuuucks” feeling after discussing it in class.

Coming into this course, I was quite comfortable with the idea that the criminal justice system is not the end-all, be-all for many survivors of sexual assault. After all, the gathering of evidence and testifying at a trial may be a traumatic experience for some — if an investigation is even pursued. The justice system is simply unable to account for the vast structures of power in play during a sexual assault, and much healing can be done outside of the perpetrator being slapped with jail time (again, unlikely).

It’s not surprising, then, that the line “criminal law, by necessity, is focused on wrongs committed by individuals, not on redressing systemic discrimination” resonated with me (137). Criminal law is structured around proving a perpetrator, and the apparent lack of something (consent) is required to deem the accused a criminal. Clearly, survivors cannot rely pursuing an investigation or a judge’s decision to determine their healing for them. If we expected that to be their primary course of action, we would be robbing the majority of survivors’ agency to define healing on their own terms.

I’ve had to nuance this view of mine, though, since digging into much of the legal theory we’ve been reading so far. The court’s attitude (focusing on wrongs committed by individuals rather than redressing systemic discrimination) is no less prevalent in every other part of our public and private lives. Simply ignoring the legal aspects of sexual assault because they’re painful to become aware of does little to change the wider conversation on perpetrator accountability.

To what extent, I wonder, does the mainstream discourse of our society impact laws? And, more importantly, to what extent do these laws impact the mainstream discourse of our society? If these thoughts permeate the way most people think and talk about sexual assault, the survivor isn’t left with many other options. If life outside of the courtroom doesn’t hold perpetrators accountable, survivors have few options for pursuing “legitimate justice” other than entering the criminal justice system, which, as we’ve read in this article, has so many loopholes that are particularly damaging to those with mental and physical impairments.

There’s no doubt that our laws legitimize the way we live. I’ve spoke to a handful of people (some who identify would even identify feminists) who echo statements reflecting the problematic views of the court that we saw in Benedet and Grant's article. I’m particularly interested to keep reading about the legal aspects of sexual violence and (hopefully) turn some of these “this suuuucks” feelings into empowerment.