Double Penalty Cases

The Double Bind of Gender Inequality in Capital Punishment Cases

Many groups in American history have traveled various paths to challenge the one dimensional thinking that has been etched in our cultural thought process due to the Constitutional language this country was built on. While these pathways have their individual twists and turns, they all have intersected for the common cause of equality. Hispanic, African American, Homosexual, and Disabled Americans are just a few of the groups that have each raised a cohesive voice to synergize the cause. One group that sometimes gets overlooked but still continues to carry the torch is Women. Apart from the Equal Rights Amendment and the Suffrage movement, the path of gender equality
Beinen believes that this phenomenon has to do with the symbolism of capitol punishment. Since its inception, there have been longstanding debates about executions and their linkage to cruel and unusual punishment. Regardless of how evil the perpetrator may appear, many people have not been comfortable with the taking of another life in an eye for eye/tooth for tooth situation. The idea of execution has been linked to hostility, roughness and something that has to be truly deserved by our unthinkable worst offenders. This uncomfortable feeling has led to the situation where only those who are painted inhumane, violent and uncompassionate get the death sentence. Using this ideology as the foundation for action, women gain the upper-hand when it comes down to capitol punishment cases. Society has the subconscious perceptions of the role that females play and are designed for. We see them as home-makers, family leaders, and educational advocates due to the caring and soft disposition bestowed upon them. Females are shunned so frequently to a domestic capacity; it makes it hard to believe that a woman could be capable of sheer violence and uncompassionate action that would warrant a death sentence. The sameness/difference bind is related and presents
The sameness argument comes into play by positioning these women in violent roles such as gang leaders, abusive, and hard core criminals with no compassion. Based upon others analysis, it appears that some prosecutors viciously feel like they have such a mountain to climb in this sameness argument that they resort to labeling the defendant as a lesbian. If they do not accomplish the goal of de-feminizing the defendant, then the subconscious view of women not being capable of such atrocity to warrant a sentence of execution will reign. In this situation, women appear to benefit from the sameness/difference bind due to the fact that society sees them as different and in this case, they want to be different. As opposed to having to change a person’s entire way of thinking, all a defense attorney has to do is creatively remind people and reinforce the fact that women “are” traditionally more soft and caring. In the overall grand scheme of things, the sameness/difference bind seems to be more malignant to the cause of equality due to the major pitfall Jamieson pointed that was aforementioned in this