Say What?

Syracuse University Professor Linda Alcoff , Director of Women's Studies, will be discussing the Duke Lacrosse case at UNC Charlotte Sept 6th in a lecture entitled;

Racial Profiling as Epistemic Practice: When is Identity Relevant?

The last time we heard from Professor Alcoff was Sept 19th 2006 at a forum sponsored by the The Institute for the Study of the Judiciary, Politics, and the Media at Syracuse University.

"Lacrosse Justice: Gender, Race, and Fairness in the Duke Lacrosse Legal Saga"

In Professor's Alcoff's presentation that day she stated;

"There are three main narratives being invoked in the Duke case, two false and one true, in my view. One of the false narratives is relatively old, and the other two narratives—one false and one true—are quite recent. Perhaps the most lasting significance of this case will be its effects on these narratives, and thus what I find most interesting about the public realm of discourse over Duke is to see how these narratives are being fought over, and by whom."

The Professor then proceeds to educate us as to the Narratives and whether they are True or False.

Narrative One
"One narrative is that sex workers lie. Sex workers are generally not given epistemic credibility, by the courts, the police, or the public. They are seen as morally debased, or as strategic opportunists who have had to lie so much to make a living that they have forgotten how to be honest, or as human refuse too ignorant to have a conscience. Today, more people now know such claims to be distortions at best.."

Narrative Two
The second narrative under contestation concerns the history of privileged white men at elite universities who are involved in collective high status activities like sports and fraternities. This narrative—much newer, much less widely accepted—is that such groups sometimes abuse their status and power to break laws, both small ones and more serious ones.

Narrative Three
The third narrative involved here is the narrative about the so-called victim culture, in which people (especially white women and people of color) desire to be victims, to "wallow" in victimhood, and so on. Some have argued in this case that the commentators from the African American community who are condemning the Lacrosse players are driven by a strong self-identification as victims, or the desire to perpetuate their status in the public mind as victims. This narrative, I suggest, is quite false, and obviously self-serving to those who would rather not have their boat rocked by groups demanding social change.

A Final Point
The point of this argument, then, is that narratives are not irrelevant to the process of trying to make sense of new events. No matter how this legal case turns out, those who have raised these and other narratives, contesting some and supporting others, have engaged in good epistemic practices.

LieStoppers Recommendation: Since Crystal Gail Magnum did lie, no lacrosse player sexually assaulted her, and she did portray herself as a victim of a crime that never happened, we recommend a pass on the lecture and a reevaluation of the use of Narratives when dealing with matters of Guilt or Innocence.

Skip the Lecture!