Historical Context and Importance

The historical context of violent victimization against sexual minorities is rooted in systemic discrimination. The LGBTQ+ community has historically faced higher rates of violence and harassment, often due to societal stigma and discriminatory laws. Understanding this victimization is important for recognizing progress and identifying areas needing further intervention.

Findings

The data shows major differences in violent victimization rates among different sexual orientations:

1. Overall Violent Crime: Bisexual individuals experience the highest rate of violent crime at 129.1 per 1,000 persons, followed by lesbian/gay individuals at 43.5, and straight individuals at 19.0. This disparity shows the vulnerability of bisexual individuals to violent victimization.

2. Rape/Sexual Assault: Bisexual individuals again report the highest rate of rape or sexual assault at 27.6, compared to 3.1 for lesbian/gay and 1.5 for straight individuals. The higher rates among bisexual individuals may be due to to both societal stigma and the unique vulnerabilities faced by bisexuals, including lack of acceptance from both heterosexual and homosexual communities.

3. Robbery and Assault: The rate of robbery for bisexuals is 15.7, significantly higher than the 6.4 for lesbian/gay and 1.8 for straight individuals. Similarly, assault rates are highest among bisexuals at 85.8, compared to 34.1 for lesbian/gay and 15.6 for straight individuals.

4. Domestic and Intimate Partner Violence: Bisexuals also face higher rates of domestic violence (32.3) and intimate partner violence (20.9), compared to 10.3 and 3.4 for lesbian/gay individuals and 4.2 and 2.5 for straight individuals, respectively.

These findings show that there's a need for interventions and support for bisexual individuals, who face the highest rates of violent victimization across various categories.

Feminist Theory Analysis

Using feminist theory to analyze these findings, the societal power structures and gender norms play a significant role in the victimization of sexual minorities. The higher rates of violence against bisexual individuals can be seen as biphobia and the marginalization of non-heteronormative identities. The intersectionality of gender and sexual orientation further makes these groups vulnerable, as they navigate both sexism and heterosexism.

In conclusion, the differences in victimization rates among lesbian/gay, bisexual, and straight individuals show the need for inclusive policies and protective measures. By understanding these patterns through the lens of feminist theory, we can better address the root causes of violence and discrimination against sexual minorities. Future research should continue to explore these intersections and work towards creating a safer, more equitable society for everyone, regardless of their sexual orientation.

Findings

Based on linear regressions, the dataset shows that the marginal effect line for females is much steeper than the marginal effect line for males. There is a clear distinction between the two genders in terms of how long their request takes to process. For cases that do not deal with direct "VAW" (Violence Against Women), a difference is present but not much different. However, the difference is hugely amplified at the tail ends of the lines. It took roughly three times as long for a woman's case to be registered for review than a man's case for VAW cases. 

Data Feminism Analysis

The main goal of data feminism is to think critically about data, specifically under the feminist lens. It serves as a guide to think about any implicit patriarchal biases that have existed within society to either hide results in data or show inaccuracies within the data. In this case, it is clear that there is a difference in registration times between cases of men and cases of women. An observation of such a difference is a requisite first step towards finding reasons and biases for such a difference. Feminist Theory states that there is a clear gender inequality between men and women, oftentimes at the disadvantage of women. The data clearly shows that it is important to find reasons for such a discrepancy. However, only one lens is not enough most of the time. In order to get a clearer picture, it is important to combine theories and consider as many factors as possible. For example, how different would the data be if this study was done in the U.S? Would the discrepancy in delay time be larger or smaller? How does culture and logistical differences in legal systems between countries affect how the cases of men and the cases of women get processed? These are the questions that Data Feminists would try to answer through an intersectional approach and is further elaborated upon in the Data Critique section. 

HIstorical Context

This data may provide a reason as to why women are generally more hesitant to seek out legal help when it is appropriate to do so. This clear discrepancy is a statistic that requires further investigation, perhaps through an intersectional approach, to determine what factors contribute to such a large difference in days required for processing. Statistically, it is estimated that around 60% of sexual assaults against women go unreported. Amongst the unreported cases, around 13% of the victims do not report because they believe law enforcement would not do anything to help. (RAINN) This clear delay in registration time for women may contribute heavily to the belief that the gravity of their reports would be lower than those of men. This clear discrimination is extremely harmful and unjust as legal systems should aim to judge in the most objective manner possible. 

Research and Findings on the Criminal Injustices in the US Based on Race

Moving on from gender biases within the criminal justice system, we analyze police brutality within the context of race. Police brutality and killings are critical public safety issues disproportionately impacting specific demographics. This analysis examines racial disparities in fatal encounters with police in the United States, utilizing data from Mapping Police Violence. As shown in the data, police have killed 591 VICTIM people in the U.S. so far in 2024.

Critical Race Theory Analysis

Using Critical Race Theory (CRT) as a framework to analyze racial disparities in police killings helps uncover the systemic nature of racism embedded within law enforcement practices. 

CRT asserts that racism is a common, everyday experience for people of color, not an aberration (Delgado & Stefancic, 2001). This is evident in the data showing that Black Americans are disproportionately killed by police compared to their white counterparts. The frequency and regularity of these incidents highlight how ingrained racial biases are within law enforcement.

Additionally, CRT posits that race is a social construct rather than a biological reality (Delgado & Stefancic, 2001). The disproportionate killings of Black individuals by police reflect the socially constructed nature of racial categories and the stereotypes associated with them. Black individuals are often perceived as more threatening, which can lead to biased policing practices and excessive use of force.

Progress for racial minorities often occurs only when it converges with the interests of the white majority. This principle can be seen in the lack of substantial reforms in policing practices despite the ongoing public outcry against police violence. The persistence of these disparities suggests that the current system serves to maintain the status quo, benefiting those in power.

In conclusion, the analysis of racial disparities in police killings using Mapping Police Violence data reveals significant and troubling patterns. Black Americans are disproportionately represented among those killed by police, underscoring the need for urgent reforms within law enforcement agencies. Utilizing critical race theory as a framework helps contextualize these findings within the broader scope of systemic racism and historical injustices. Addressing these disparities requires a multifaceted approach that includes policy reforms, such as implicit bias training for officers and stricter use-of-force guidelines, as well as broader societal changes to combat structural racism. Furthermore, amplifying the voices and experiences of those affected by police violence is crucial for fostering a more equitable and just society. Future research should continue to explore the intersections of race, gender, and other identities to provide a more nuanced understanding of police violence. By acknowledging and addressing the systemic nature of racism within law enforcement, we can work towards creating a safer and fairer society for all citizens.

Research and Findings on Criminal Injustice in the United States through analyzing arrest rate based on race

Lastly is our analysis on arrest rates based on race.

Methodology

This data was gathered from official United States Government created sources, in order to minimize any bias whatsoever. The issue at hand is such a large scale problem with such a large sample size that it can be concluded that there are almost certainly inaccuracies in the data, but in hopes of reducing that as well, these sources should be the best data possible. 

For the data analysis, the data was downloaded from the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program on arrests from 2019 based on race and ethnicity. Using the Microsoft Excel software, visual representations were made in the form of pie graphs and bar graphs to help the viewer understand the data in an intuitive and simple way to make it easy to compare.

The pie chart is simply sourced from the data provided from the FBI database and placed into a visualization to show the proportion of people arrested based on their race. The bar graph shows the proportion of people arrested based on their race, relative to the population of people in the specific race. The two charts show the concept of data misrepresentation that the United States criminal justice system may be trying to hide.

Historical Context

This problem is rooted deep in the United States history originating in the early 1600s, when African slaves were brought to Jamestown, Virginia to assist in a multitude of heavy labor tasks. This systemic oppression was carried on all throughout the country’s history until the Union’s Civil War Victory in 1865, where they proceeded to ratify the 13th amendment, that effectively prohibited slavery and involuntary servitude. However it failed to put to end the mistreatment of African American people; although this scripture was put in place, the legal system was structured in a way that placed African Americans as the second class race. Segregation was prominent all throughout the country and individuals would go under the radar to further oppress and bring harm to the African American community, until the overturning of Plessy v. Ferguson which had effectively established the constitutionality of segregation. Over time and through many movements, oppression based on race has significantly decreased, but we still see injustice through our criminal injustice system specifically.

Findings

By analyzing the charts we can see how the government initially portrays the data to show that white individuals are arrested at much higher rates than any other race. In the pie chart, we can see this in full effect, where 69.4% of arrests during 2019 were from white people and all of the other races are seemingly slim slices of the whole. Although this visualization is true, this data is masking the fact that this calculation does not take into account the population size of each of the race groups in the report. When taking into account the size of these groups using statistics also provided from the government we see contrasting results. In the bar graph we see that the arrest rate for African Americans and other minority races are more than double, with 5.81% for African Americans and only 2.73% for white individuals. This is a 2.13:1 ratio of arrests from African Americans to white, showcasing the injustice that we see persistent in the United States.

Critical Race Theory (CRT)

Critical Race Theory allows us to incorporate both the analytical data with the history of oppression for minority races to help us analyze this issue at hand. We can conclude that although there was and is an extremely large effort to abolish any sort of racism or exclusion based on race, there is still systemic injustice and racial profiling apparent in our country that significantly hinders minority population abilities to achieve the American dream. By reviewing this analysis, we can recognize that these two data visualizations only showcase the tip of the iceberg, and mask the many issues that our country needs to fix. From unequal job opportunities, to lower wages, to unequal admissions to universities based on race, through using CRT, which studies the transformation of relationships between race and power, we can try to tackle these issues and bring positive change to our country.

Conclusion

Our exploration of the criminal justice system through the lenses of gender and race reveals disparities that reflect broader societal biases and inequalities. The analysis of violent victimization by sexual orientation, registration delays by gender, and racial disparities in police killings and arrest rates shows that marginalized groups face disproportionate challenges within the justice system. 

By using feminist theory and critical race theory, we can better understand how systemic power structures and historical contexts contribute to these inequities. Feminist theory helps illuminate the intersectional vulnerabilities of sexual minorities and the gender-based disparities in accessing justice. Critical race theory, on the other hand, exposes the racial biases that result in disproportionate police violence and arrest rates against racial minorities.

Our findings underscore the urgent need for policy reforms and inclusive measures to address these disparities. Interventions must focus on protecting the most vulnerable groups, ensuring equal access to justice, and promoting equity within law enforcement practices. Future research should continue to explore these intersections, considering additional dimensions such as class, disability, and immigration status to provide a more holistic understanding of criminal justice issues.

Ultimately, by acknowledging and addressing the systemic nature of discrimination and bias within the criminal justice system, we can work towards creating a more just and equitable society for all individuals, regardless of their gender, race, or sexual orientation.