Trends in victimization in schools and elsewhere, 1974–1981

Trends in the rate of victimizations of juveniles in three settings-schools, homes, and streets/parks-are examined monthly during the period 1974–1981. The relationship between in-school victimization rates and those occurring outside of school are analyzed with multivariate ARMA models informed by previous research on school victimization (Gottfredson and Gottfredson, 1985) and an importation perspective on the source of crime and victimization in institutions such as schools. Results indicate that the overall in-school victimization rate remained relatively stable during this period but that victimization rates of juveniles in other settings had significant effects on in-school victimizations. This suggests that underlying causes of victimization in general are important determinants of victimization in schools. These results are limited, however, as we examine these sources of victimization only indirectly via relationships among the different victimization rates in dynamic models and by the aggregate nature of the monthly data from the National Crime Survey.     

International relations theory and Japanese pacifism: Why didn’t Tokyo go ballistic over North Korean nukes?

Seen from the perspectives of the various Western theories of international relations, Japan’s peculiar armed pacifism can appear very different. Prominent neorealists have predicted that Japan will inevitably develop nuclear weapons; prominent liberals have cited Japan as the model pacifist nation of the future. Over the last five years, it became clear to Japan that North Korea either possessed, or was on the brink of acquiring, nuclear weapons. How would the Japanese government respond to such a critical threat to its security? The case of North Korean nukes suggests that policymakers should be wary of the grim expectations of Western neorealists, at least in regard to Japan.     

Sex research and the construction of sexuality: A tool of male supremacy?

The social construction of sexual knowledge is analyzed by examining the model of sexuality which underpins ‘scientific’ sex research. It is an essentialist model, in which ‘sex’ is equated with heterosexuality, and coitus is assumed to be a biological imperative; male violence against women is legitimated; and sexual practices based on dominance and submission are ‘normalized’ on the basis of biological determinism. Male-defined sex research can thus be seen as constructing and promoting, by means of spurious scientific legitimation, a model of sexualiy which both reflects and reproduces the interests of male supremacy. The particular form of male sexuality that exists under male supremacy has been ‘naturalized’ and ‘universalized’, and presented as the scientifically objective model, not merely of male sexuality, but of sexuality in general. Conceptions of female sexuality based on the same model must be rejected, if feminist sexual practices are to be developed.