Small Sources, Big Voices
by selena truong
Schaffer and Smith, the authors of “Conjuctions,” explain in the section “Other Sites of Narration,” that popular sources such as published life narratives may not the only useful source for addressing human rights issues (19). As they discuss in the previous section, the unpredictability of the reception of published life narratives can lead to both positive and negative outcomes (19). An example of a possible issue is that the popularity of these publications may influence the public to believe that there is no way that there may be flaws in the way an issue is being put forward and as a result, important aspects of an issue may go unmentioned. In order to avoid such negative outcomes, Schaffer and Smith suggest that human rights campaigns take into consideration a variety of sources when searching for voices of oppressed groups (19).
If taken into account for, individual voices from various sources have the power to change certain flaws in human rights campaigns. An example of how one voice could make a difference if it were paid attention to is Belle Jar’s blog entry, “I Am Not Your Wife, Sister or Daughter,” posted in The Belle Jar. In this blog post, the author brings about a critical point that the wider public has seemed to miss when addressing the issue of victim blaming when it comes to rape. She explains that the process of asking men to imagine if the victim were their “wives, sisters, or daughters” for the purpose of eliciting their sympathy, is actually detrimental to women’s rights (Jar).
Although this phrase may help men see the event as more “relatable” and thus make them more sympathetic to the situation, what it is really doing is supporting rape culture by inferring that “a woman is only valuable” if she is “loved or valued by a man” (Jar). When speaking about men’s issues, men are not referred to only as husbands, sons, or brothers. Rather, it is more likely that they are simply referred to as people. Thus, not addressing women as “people” is denying their status as a person. Instead of humanizing the victim, this phrase devaluates the woman’s position as an individual person down to a “possession”. The author states that this phrase teaches young girls that if they are not someone’s wife, mother, or (if perhaps they do not have parents in their life) a daughter, that they are not worthy of being protected from rape (Jar). Girls should have value and not be raped, not because of their relationships to men, but because they are people (Jar). Additionally, Jar notes that President Obama has used this phrase in one of his speeches, which proves that even popular and well-recognized sources may miss important perspectives and therefore unintentionally contribute to an aspect of the issue they address.
The issue this author brings up is not common. Therefore this is proof that a variety of voices are essential in order to better address a human rights issue to the public. As important as it is to have a well-known representative and speaker of an issue, it is just as important that a diverse amount of voices are taken into consideration on the same issue to promote constant critical analysis on an issue. With the collaboration of a number of voices from different, popular or unpopular sources, a more well-rounded and progressive solution becomes possible. It is important then, as Schaffer and Smith suggest, that we do not ignore the less prevalent “sites of narration,” (19) for they may be equally as important.
Works Cited
Jar, Belle. “I Am Not Your Wife, Sister or Daughter.” The Belle Jar. N.p., 2014. Web. 06 Nov. 2016.
Schaffer, Kay, and Sidonie Smith. “Conjunctions: Life Narratives in the Field of Human Rights.” Human Rights and Narrated Lives 27.1 (2004): 19. Web. 20 Oct. 2016.
Selena, in her blog post, discusses how men may only be able to relate to a victim if they view then in a way that they can connect to. Selena uses “I Am Not Your Wife, Sister or Daughter,” a blog entry by Belle Jar, as a way to display this.
“She explains that the process of asking men to imagine if the victim were their ‘wives, sisters, or daughters’ . . . Although this phrase may help men see the event as more ‘relatable’ and thus make them more sympathetic to the situation, what it is really doing is supporting rape culture by inferring that ‘a woman is only valuable’ if she is ‘loved or valued by a man.’
This idea is also discussed by Yasmin Jiwani and Mary Lynn Young in “Missing and Murdered Women: Reproducing Marginality in News Discourse.” They go into detail as to how referring to the missing and murdered women, in downtown eastside Vancouver, as mothers, daughters, and sisters, perpetuates that for women to be worthy of saving, they need to be loved and valued first.