Scholars have repeatedly attempted to dissect the cognitive aspects of rape and sexual assault. The most frequently employed means of accomplishing this goal has been to ask convicted rapists about their past offending patterns. Offender based research reveals that most rapists are driven by a will to degrade or dominate their victims, not by a quest for sexual gratification. It seems that the sex at is characterized as a convenient and especially effective way to assert control or revenge over a particular individual or class of individuals. At the same time, rapists can sometimes be driven by instrumental motives. A violent sex acts can be used as a way of settling a score or satisfying an elusive sexual desire. Clearly, the use of such extreme forms of conflict resolution are not condoned or pursued by most individuals. However, in the mind of a sexually aggressive individual, the wrong set of situational and cognitive variables can make rape take on acceptable or even desirable qualities. Planning does not seem to be a well-defined component of most violent sex crimes. In the case of acquaintance or intimate rape, the violent sex act may spontaneously surface as a form of frustration reaction; perhaps the perpetrator expected more sexual interaction with his date or a husband becomes upset with the way his wife acted while they were out that night. Regardless of the catalysts, most acquaintance rapes spontaneously emerge out of a dangerous combination of cognitive, cultural, and social factors and there exists little time for mindful planning. The serial rapist stands as the noticeable exception to this rule. These predators often exhibit highly routinized predatory habits. They are known to operate in selective environment and/or to target specific types of victims. #RandolphHarris 1 of 23

Normative neutralizations occupy an important role in the rapist’s mental repertoire. Like other criminals, the rapist sees a need to justify or rationalize his or her aberrant behavior. Most scholars agree that the key to this mental mechanism lays in the offender’s view of what constitutes acceptably social or intimate relations. Many rape offenders are exposed to emotional or physical trauma (often sexual in nature) early in their lives. These traumas, when mixed with patriarchal gender norms, provide a convenient cognitive canvas for the male rapist to work with. The perpetrator’s anger thus allows one to distort cultural messages about intimate relationships and women in general in such a way that rape becomes an acceptable means of problem solving. The male rapists that were interviewed offered up a host of excuses ranging from revenge, to adventurous sex, to sexual fetishes to account for their violent sexual acts. In almost every case, these offenders attributed the blame for the act onto the victim or some external forces beyond their control. Scholars acknowledge that societal gender norms play an important role in the rape equation. Cognitive and behavioral aspects of intimate relations are considered a continuum of sexual behavior. At one end the continuum, locates healthy sexual behavior that serves to empower and liberate both men and women. Then one can position acts of sexual violence at the other end of the continuum. Between these two extremes, there exists a whole range of sexual behaviors. The closer one gets to the rape end of the continuum, the more deviant and oppressive the sexual norms and behaviors become. #RandolphHarris 2 of 23

However, there is an important departure point. For most men, exposure to domineering sex scripts has little effect. Given the fact that they are normatively grounded toward the nonrape end of the continuum, they reject these messages as deviant. However, an oppressive or overly patriarchal upbringing can leave an individual firmly entrenched in a location close to the pro-rape end of the continuum. This person becomes receptive to violent sexual messages and is thus more likely to act and think in ways that represent the psychological and behavioral environments with which one is most familiar and comfortable. Most rapists operate as colleagues. Although they commit their crimes without the assistance of other offenders, they maintain frequent contacts with the sexual underworld. They are often habitual consumers of pornographic materials and may exhibit peculiar sexual tastes and fantasies. Routinized contacts with other sexual deviants provide the rapist with vicarious reinforcement (id est, socialization scripts) for the sexually aggressive ideas and behaviors. These contacts do not replace the types of mundane socialization contacts that were previously mentioned. Instead, they represent supplements to the biased gender norms and traumatic life events that are part and parcel of these individuals’ social Worlds. Violent sex crimes generally elicit a harsh response from the criminal justice system. Rape is granted a two-tiered offense categorization in most jurisdictions. #RandolphHarris 3 of 23

Those rapes in which nonconsensual sexual penetration occurs, but the victim incurs minimal physical injuries, are generally graded as a second degree felony. If convicted, the perpetrator faces the prospect of 1 to 10 years in prison; however, the court may choose to upgrade this type of rape to a felony in the first degree if there is evidence that the offender inflicted serious bodily harm to the victim. In these more severe cases, the offender faces a sentence ranging from 1 year to life in prison. Most jurisdictions classify statutory rape as a first-degree felony. Sexual assault or those less serious instances that involve the forceful or coercive unwanted sexual touching of another are generally classified as misdemeanors and carry a sentence of up to 1 year in prison. Some courts have leeway to upgrade sexual assault case to a second- or third-degree felony. Police have a difficult time combatting violent sex crimes. U.S.A. police received 101, 491 forcible rape reports in 2022. Less than 50 percent of those were cleared for arrest. This translated to an arrest rate of 9.6 per 100,000 inhabitants. This clearance rate is significantly less then the 60 to 70 percent levels that were realized that year for the crimes of murder and aggravated assault. Once arrested, violent sex offenders receive heavy-handed treatment from the U.S.A. court system. Rapes cases represent only about 5 percent of all felony cases processed through state courts each year; however, the available amount set in excess of $10,000 (average = $63,500) and 12 percent were denied bail entirely. These high dollar amounts led to nearly half of all rape defendants that year being held in custody from the point of arrests to final disposition. #RandolphHarris 4 of 23

Rape defendants face a 50/50 chance of being convicted and sentenced to some term of imprisonment (jail or prison). When the prosecution is able to secure a guilty verdict or plea, they generally waste no time getting the person off the streets. Eighty two percent of the state-level rape and sexual assault trial convictions in 2022 resulted in a prison term. (The high conviction rate is probably why a significant amount of case never make it to court. Some are hard to prove, so the prosecutor does not want to take the case to trial, and people do file false reports.) The average sentence was nearly 10 years (median length of 6 years), with 2 percent receiving a life term. It is estimated that a convicted rapist will serve 5 years, or roughly half of their prison sentence. At year-end 2022, convicted rapists comprised 3 percent of the total state prison population and 6 percent subpopulation of persons serving time for a violent crime. While we as society are taking a relatively strong formal stance toward rape and sexual assault, our informal social control efforts are lacking. Studies of high school and college students reveal that boys and girls alike feel ill-equipped to deal with aggressive sexual behavior in relationships. These studies suggest that young males often misinterpret the sexual desires of women and that young women tend to do a poor job in communicating their displeasure with progressively intrusive sexual acts. In these cases, there appears to be a breakdown in dating relationships that opens the door for increasingly problematic levels of unwanted sexual contact. #RandolphHarris 5 of 23

Many scholars contend that the long-term social and emotional costs of rape outweigh that of any other form of violent crime. This would suggest that violent sex crimes warrant an especially stringent societal response. Apart from traditional imprisonment options, what other forms of innovative sanctions might we pursue in response to rape and sexual assault? Perhaps they can go to mental hospitals and be forced to watch Law and Order SVU every day for a year, and then write a report about what they learned, what they did wrong, and pay restitution to their victims, as well as apologize. Feminist scholars have focused a great deal of attention on the way that conventional gender norms serve to implicitly reinforce pro-rape messages. At the same time, a sizable portion of American women are content with the sexual politics of the day and oppose significant changes to the way males and females interact in the courtship process. What can and should be done to resolve this structural impediment to gender norm revision? Well, since many rapes happen after 6 p.m., only meet prospects for breakfast or lunch. Lunch is a safe meal. Perhaps do not go to bars or parties and get drunk because some of your friends are not really your friends and want you to get hurt. And if you notice something is off or uncomfortable about a person you meet, stop seeing them. We hear so little about male rape—the forced penetration of a male victim. Why is this such a rarely reported phenomenon and what can be learned from this indisputable reality? A lot of men rarely report because not only is it embarrassing, it is seen as demeaning to admit to. Not only that, but complaints by men are not usually taken seriously, and often times sexual assault to a male is seen as hazing. Just horsing around. And reporting the incident can truly make matter worse. #RandolphHarris 6 of 23

Also, I think with men there comes a different sense of shame. You do not want anyone to know. You feel you are scarred for life, and it also may mean to a heterosexual male that he is homosexual because he was assaulted, and that may not be the case. It is kind of like the lyrics of that Blueface song Thotiana, “You gon’ take these damn strokes Thotiana” (because I said you’re gay). Also, the way that it is talked about. Many people, when talking about male rape say that most men who are raped are homosexual, but one has to realize that is not always the case. I have friends who are heterosexual who were raped and they went on to marry and have families, and the only people who know about are the ones who heard the offender joking about the assault, or their guy friend who set it up. A lot of guys think they are safe around their boys, it is okay to drink, nothing will happen. However, as they become mature adults, the rules change. There are a lot of men who are still in the closet, and they rape other men so no one finds out they are interested in guys. They see a guy they like, have his friend get him drunk, and then insert themselves in the situation. Often times the male victim is just thankful that he was not brutalized nor infected with anything and that he sees his new associates are filthy heathens and is thankful he did not get gang raped. Often times men just chalk it up to something that happened that they wished did not happen and move on. They may feel more shamed about private pictures of them being distributed. It is commonly held that some maladjusted men revert to rape as an extreme manifestation of gender socialization gone awry. In effect, the average rapist is portrayed as suffering from a dangerous mix of psychological trauma and hypermacho cognition. Is there a female equivalent to the male rapist? That is, do you get the same extreme deviant manifestation when you mix a hyperfeminine upbringing with serious psychological trauma? If so, what are the costs? I think that is something Paris Hilton might be better at answering. #RandolphHarris 7 of 23

Six motivational themes among rapists were uncovered. Some of the rapists interviewed claimed that they committed their crimes out of revenge or as an act of punishment. Others committed rape in conjunction with another felony offense—faced with one pending violation they viewed their sex crimes as an “added bonus.” A third manifestation saw individuals using rape as a means of sexual access or a way to fill wild fetishes or fantasies. The fourth motivational category had men using the rape act as an impersonal means of establishing or regaining self-esteem or power over the other gender or individual. Still other rapists emphasized the recreational or adventurous aspects of the rape act, insisting that it provided them with a sense of excitement or challenge. Finally, some men used rape as a simple source of self-gratification, claiming that the act represented an emotional or physical release. The consistent presence of rational, self-gratification-orientation motivations leads to the conclusion that gender norms play a critical role in the impetus and proliferation of male-on-female sexual violence. Over the past several decades, rape has become a “medicalized” social problem. That is to say, the theories used to explain rape are predicated on psychopathological models. They have been generated from clinical experiences with small samples of rapists, often the therapists’ own clients. Although these psychiatric explanations are most appropriately applied to the atypical rapist, they have been generalized to all men who rape and have come to inform the public view on this topic. #RandolphHarris 8 of 23

Two assumptions are at the core of the psychopathological model: that rape is the result of idiosyncratic mental disease and that it often includes an uncontrollable sexual impulse. For example, the presumption of psychopathology is evident in nonsexual nature of rape (power, anger, sadism). Rape is always a symptom of some psychological dysfunction, either temporary and transient or chronic and repetitive. Thus, in the psychopathological view, rapists lack the ability to control their behavior: they are “sick” individuals from the “lunatic fringe” of society. In contradiction to this model, empirical research has repeatedly failed to find a consistent pattern of personality type or character disorder that reliably discriminates rapists from other groups of men and women. Indeed, other research has found that fewer than 5 percent of men were psychotic when they raped. Evidence indicates that rape is not a behavior confined to a few “sick” men but many men have the attitudes and beliefs necessary to commit a sexually aggressive act. In research conducted at a midwestern university, it was discovered that 85 percent of men defined as highly sexually aggressive had victimized women with whom they were romantically involved. More than 20 percent of college women are the victims of rape and attempted rape. These findings mirror research published several decades earlier which also concluded that sexual aggression was commonplace in dating relationships. In their study of 53 college males, it was found that 51 percent indicated a likelihood that they, themselves, would rape if assured of not being punished. Some men even talk about the type of women they would rape and describe acts of rape, where a woman said “No, stop” but they ripped her undergarments off and reported she enjoyed the encounter. #RandolphHarris 9 of 23

In addition, the frequency of rape in the United States of America makes it unlikely that responsibility rests solely with a small lunatic fringe of psychopathic men. When calculating the lifetime risk of rape to girls and women aged twelve and over, it was calculated that, excluding sexual abuse in marriage and assuming equal risk to all women, 20 to 30 percent of girls not 12 years old will suffer a violent sexual attack during the remainder of their lives. Interestingly, the lack of empirical support for the psychopathological model has not resulted in the de-medicalization of rape, nor does it appear to have diminished the belief that rapists are “sick” aberrations in their own culture. This is significant because of the implications and consequences of the model. A central assumption in the psychopathological model is that male sexual aggression is unusual or strange. This assumption removes rape from the realm of everyday or “normal” World and places it in the category of “special” or “sick” behavior. As a consequence, men who rape are cast in the role of outsider and a connection with normative male behavior is avoided. Since, in this view, the source of the behavior is thought to be within the psychology of the individual, attention is diverted away from culture or social structure as contributing factors. Thus, the psychopathological model ignores evidence which links sexual aggression to environmental variables and which suggests that rape, like all behavior, is learned. People who have been raped often feel that they are at night, all alone in the World, standing in pitch darkness, trying to clean all that is dirty. #RandolphHarris 10 of 23

No matter how much you clear, there is always more dirt, and more dirt, and more dark nights, more loneliness, more and more. One feels like a lone figure becoming swallowed up by darkness. If the individual is silent, locked in a shell, if one appears retiring and a bore, if one seems withdrawn, unreachable, shattered, empty; if one seems to be tearful, sad, quiet; if one does not respond with enthusiasm; if one seems dying in one’s ways; if one seems secluded; if one seems bitter; if one seems simple, and at times too gentile; if one seems that way, do not reproach, do not scorn, as this is the one way left in which one can preserve some sense of self-respect, preserver some room for one’s self that will not be shattered, will not be destroyed; that will not give up; that dares not die; that wants still live. If there is only silence, only in this way can one still be oneself; still hang on to a piece, a thread, a slight connection with life, with sanity, before one falls to pieces, before the darkness sets in and envelops one completely before blackness covers one’s World. One wants to remain quiet and burst forth into the vibrant, multivaried colors of a new dawn, sprinkled with the freshness of wet rain, for in silence there is a growing that takes place; in silence there is a birth about to be born; and in the darkness there is a dawn. It takes time to come out of that very numb and lonely existence because an individual is deeply experiencing a sort of tragic loss of self for the first time, and they cannot outrun that loneliness, the betrayal. #RandolphHarris 11 of 23

Why are evil spirits able to get men to receive their teachings? There are three basic reasons: Some people naively believe that anything supernatural has its source in God: occult forces do not exist. Any spiritual revelation or teaching is assumed to be divine because it is supernatural. Any “flash of light” on a text, any “vision of Christ” or of an “angelic being” is considered as sent by the Holy Spirit. The possibility of deception from a demonic source is never given thought. Such persons, obviously, are wide open to arcane doctrines—even if they should be Christians. Most Christians, however, would be greatly surprised to have an explicitly supernatural experience—a vision or some other paranormal revelation. Though they believe that both God and Satan exist, and angels and demons also, a direct encounter with any of them would be considered abnormal and possibly suspect. So with these less gullible persons deceiving spirits will normally take a more subtle approach. They will attempt to mix their “teachings” with the man’s own reasonings, so that he thinks he has come to his own conclusions on the matter under consideration. The teachings of the deceiving spirits in this form are so natural in appearance that they seem to come from the man himself as the fruit of his own mind and reasoning. The spirits counterfeit the working of the human brain, and inject thoughts and suggestions into the human mind; for they can directly communicate with the mind, quite apart from gaining possession (in any degree) of mind or body. #RandolphHarris 12 of 23

Those who are thus deceived believe that they have come to their own conclusions by their own reasonings, ignorant that the deceiving spirits have incited them to “reason” without sufficient data, or on a wrong premise, and thus come to false conclusions. The teaching spirit has achieved his own end by putting a lie in the man’s mind, through the instrumentality of a false reasoning. However, perhaps even more common is the indirect means: by the use of deceived human teachers, supposedly conveying undiluted divine truth—instructors who are implicitly believed because of their godly life and character. The trustful students says, “He is a good man, even a holy man, and I believe him.” The life of the man is taken as a sufficient guarantee for his teaching, instead of judging the teaching by the Scriptures, apart from his personal character. This has its foundations in the prevalent idea that everything that Satan and his evil spirits do is manifestly evil, the truth not being recognized that the work under cover of light (2 Cor. 11.14). If demons can get a “good man” to accept some idea from them, and pass it on as “truth,” he is a better instrument for deceptive purposes than a bad man who would not be believed. In order to have a right attitude about things, we must learn to think differently, and to have longer thoughts. Each of our thoughts is too short. Until one has experience from one’s own observation of the difference between long and short thoughts, this idea will mean nothing to you. #RandolphHarris 13 of 23

As long as we allow our thinking to depend entirely upon habitual association, it will not improve; but by introducing new point of view, we can create new associations. For instance, we are accustomed to think in absolutes—all or nothing—but it is necessary to understand that anything new comes at first in flashes. It comes, then it disappears. Only after a certain time these flashes become longer and then still longer, so that you can see and notice them. Nothing comes at once in a complete form. Everything that can be acquired comes, then disappears, comes again, again disappears. After a long time it comes and stays a little, so that you are able to give a name to it, to notice it. I do not want to give an example because it would lead to imagination. All I want to say is that, for instance, by certain efforts of self-remembering one could see certain things that one cannot see now. Our eyes are not as limited as we think. There are many things that they can see but do not notice. We cannot perceive differently until we think differently. We have control only over thoughts; we have no control over perception. Perception does not depend upon our desire or decision, it depends particularly on our state of consciousness, on our being more awake. If one awakens for a sufficient time, say for one hour, on can see many things that one does not see now. #RandolphHarris 14 of 23

In social establishments, as has already been suggested, a particular member may serve as guardian of situational order, being obliged to see that all present maintain a suitable allocation of involvement. A school teacher, for example, may interpret her pupils’ noise and byplay as forms of impermissible involvement which challenge her dominance in the classroom. She may be called upon to bring to her classroom with a crack of the ruler the kind of order that a judge brings to his court by means of the gavel, and in her own way will be able to hold the unruly in contempt of court. In such cases, certain kinds of involvement that are prohibited in the establishment may be presented as acts of interpersonal defiance and be understood as such. Sometimes such affronts are means of testing the limits, to determine how far the guardians can be pressed; sometimes, apparently, the offender may act in this way to see if the guardian will be true to him whatever he does. The use of situational improprieties as way of doing something about one’s relation to an official in the situation is merely one illustration of the more general fact that situational niceties and offenses are constantly used as a reflection of some kind on one’s relation to specific other individuals who are present. This can be seen in the link in our society between degree of required interpersonal respect, on the one hand, and degree of tightness of conduct on the other. At homes with his family, a lower-middle-class American may lounge in a chair, polish his eyeglasses with his shirt-tail, treat his children as if in many ways they were not really present, blech, and lay on the sofa, perhaps, only if his wife is not present. The same man in the same setting, but with his employer present, might be the very model of tight middle-class decorum. #RandolphHarris 15 of 23

Hence, when an individual wishes to show hostility to someone before whom he would ordinarily conduct himself tightly, extreme expressions of looseness become an available means. If the relationship is already one where informal looseness is appropriate, something implying social distance can be expressed by reasserting tight proprieties. These aggressive devices are especially apt when the offender and the victim cannot leave the scene (for whatever psychological or social reasons), for these devices allow the offender to remain in the situation with the target of his offense. That the offender incidentally offends all others who enter the situation is a price he must pay for his choice of weapon—and is sometimes connected with his eventual commitment to a mental hospital. Correspondingly, if the individual chooses to use situational proprieties as a means of showing regard for a specific person, then, as was suggested earlier in connection with perfume, any case, it is understandable that a standard mechanism in the organization of involvement is found in the “by-your-leave” interchange whereby permission for relaxations is asked of and given by, or proffered by and acknowledged to, the individual present to whom marks of deference are due. In this way the actor can partially disentangle the involvement structure from the deference system. Here, incidentally, is a pertinent type of dominance. The individual in the situation to whom the tightest conduct is owed (as opposed to those whom loose conduct is appropriate) tends to “govern” the gathering regardless of the extent to which he is outnumbered by persons present who are on symmetrically familiar terms with one another and could act loosely were he not present. #RandolphHarris 16 of 23

Thus, for example, the change men manifest in their conduct when women are present is not much influenced by how many women are present; often, one will do. Similarly, at Lindon socials, after the games and presentations of awards had been run through, and the dance had begun, all the adult gentry tended to leave. Apparently they felt that, if even one should remain, his presence might cause the whole occasion to keep time too slow a tune. This kind of dominance seems to be at the base of our understanding about what can be accomplished by the presence of one chaperone. In situations where only two persons are present, situational proprieties are likely to carry a particularly heavy load of relationship information, especially, perhaps, in the handling of side involvements. Thus, men and women of the “evening” have been said to demonstrate disregard for their clients by smoking or doing their nails during the transaction of business, and men have been reported to counter this move by leaving their hats on during the engagement. One man even got married while smoking a cigarette throughout the entire ceremony. The relationship between situational improprieties and the offender’s emotional involvement in particular witnesses is, of course, something about which psychiatrists of the Sullivanian persuasion have given us much information. Some psychiatrists, in fact, would see this as the central problem in a consideration of improprieties. A very important example of that fits this analysis is the domestic behavioral disorganization that often characterizes an individual just before one’s family finds it necessary to commit him. #RandolphHarris 17 of 23

While the difficulty he is having may well be caused by his relation to his spouse or parents, the expressions largely available to him, if he is not to desert the home, involve the rejection of domestic situational duties. It is open to him to become, in the language of case histories, slovenly, lazy, unclean, preoccupied, inattentive, careless, vulgar, sleepless or too sleepy, unconcerned with the tidy care of the children, and so forth. The “recovery” of some of these offenders, when they find themselves in a hospital setting, is sometimes due, of course, not to the security and therapy claimed for these institutions, but to the fact, which psychiatrists themselves often point out, that the special targets for the offense are no longer present. The way the U.S.A. judicial system works, a defendant is first found to be innocent or guilty. The punishment sentence is determined only after a defendant has been found guilty. It might seem that this is a relatively minor procedural issue. Yet, the order of this decision-making can mean the difference between life and death, or even between conviction and acquittal. We use the case of a defendant charged with a capital offense to make our point. There are three alternative procedures to determine the outcome of a criminal court cause. Each has its merits, and you might want to chose among them based on some underlying principles. Status Quo: First determine innocence or guilt, then if guilty consider the appropriate punishment. Roman Tradition: After hearing the evidence, start with the most serious punishment and work down the list. First decide if the death penalty should be imposed for this case. If, after proceeding down the list, no sentence is imposed, then the defendant is acquitted. #RandolphHarris 18 of 23

Mandatory Sentencing: First specify the sentence for the crime. Then determine whether the defendant should be convicted. The difference between these systems is only one of agenda: what gets decided first. To illustrate how important this can be, we consider a case with only three possible outcomes: the death penalty, life imprisonment, and acquittal. This story is based on a true case; it is a modern update of the dilemma faced by Pliny the Younger, a Roman lawyer working under the Emperor Trajan around A.D. 100. The defendant’s fate rests in the hands of three judges. Their decision is determined by a majority vote. This is particularly useful since the three judges are deeply divided. One judge (Judge A) holds that the defendant is guilty and should be given the maximum possible sentence. This judge seeks to impose the death penalty. Life imprisonment is her second choice and acquittal is her worst outcome. The second judge (Judge B) also believes that the defendant is guilty. However, this judge adamantly opposes the death penalty. Her most preferred outcome is life imprisonment. The precedent of imposing a death sentence is sufficiently troublesome that she would prefer to see the defendant acquitted rather than executed by the state. The third judge, Judge C, is alone in holding that the defendant is innocent, and this seeks acquittal. She is on the other side of the fence from the second judge, believing that life in prison is a fate worse than death. (On this the defendant concurs.) Consequently, if acquittal fails, her second-best outcome would be to see the defendant sentenced to death. Life in prison would be the worst outcome. #RandolphHarris 19 of 23

Judge A’s Ranking: Best is death sentence. Middle is life in prison. Worst is acquittal. Judge B’s Ranking: Best is life in prison. Middle is acquittal. Worst is death sentence. Judge C’s Ranking: Best is acquittal. Middle is death sentence. Worst is life. Under the status quo system, the first vote is to determine innocence versus guilt. However, these judges are sophisticated decision-makers. They look ahead and reason backward. They correctly predict, that is the defendant is found guilty, the vote will be two to one in favor of the death penalty. This effectively means that the original vote is between acquittal and the death penalty. Acquittal wins two to one, as Judge B tips the vote. It did not have to turn out that way. The judges might decide to follow the Roman tradition and work their way down the list of charges, starting with the most serious ones. They first decide whether or not to impose a death penalty. If the death penalty is chosen, there are no more decisions to be made. If the death penalty is rejected, the remaining options are life imprisonment or acquittal. By looking forward, the judges recognize that life imprisonment will be the outcome of the second stage. Reasoning backward, the first question reduces to a choice between life and death sentences. The death sentence wins two to one, with only Judge B dissenting. A third reasonable alternative is to first determine the appropriate punishment for the crime at hand. Here we are thinking along the lines of a mandatory sentencing code. Once the sentence had been determined, the judges must then decide whether the defendant in the case at hand is guilty of the crime. #RandolphHarris 20 of 23

In this case, if the predetermined sentence is life imprisonment, then the defendant will be found guilty, as Judges A and B vote for conviction. However, if the death penalty is to be required, then we see that the defendant will be acquitted, as Judges B and C are unwilling to convict. Thus the choice of sentencing penalty comes down to the choice of life imprisonment versus acquittal. The vote is for imprisonment, with Judge C casting the lone dissent. You may find it remarkable and perhaps troubling that any of the three outcomes is possible based solely on the order in which votes are taken. Your choice of a judicial system might then depend on the outcome rather than the underlying principles. When it comes to the global sell—the existence of a global image market has led some companies, including media companies, to a simple, linear conclusion. The time had come to “globalize,” meaning they would now try doing on a global scale what they had successfully done before on a national scale. This straight-line strategy had tuned out to be a loser. Advanced wealth creation presupposed the globalization of a good bit of manufacturing and the parallel development of global means of distribution. Thus, as manufacturing and distribution corporations began forming cross-border alliances, or merging across national frontiers, ad agencies followed suit. Taking advantage of the low dollar, Britain’s WPP, for example, swallowed up both J. Walter Thompson and Ogilvy & Mather, each an American giant in its own right. In its drive to become the World’s biggest agency, Saatchi & Saatchi gulped down Compton Advertising and Dancer Fitzgerald Sample, among other firms. #RandolphHarris 21 of 23

The rationale for the “global sell” strategy was supplied in part by marketing guru Theodore Levitt of Harvard, who preached that “the World’s needs and desires have been irrevocably homogenized,” and who celebrated the coming of “global” products and brands—implying that the same product, back by the same advertising, which once old nationally could now be sold to the whole World. The same industrial-style standardization that earlier took place on the national level would now take place on a global level. What is wrong with the global sell theory is that it makes little distinction among the World’s regions and markets. Some are still in a pre-mass-market condition; others are still at the mass-market stage; and some are already experiencing the de-massification characteristic of an advanced economy. In these last, consumers demand greater individualization and customization of products and positively shun certain homogeneous goods and services. The same marketing or advertising can hardly be expected to work in all of them. The Levitt theory also drastically underestimates the economic impact of cultural preferences and assumptions at a time when culture is growing more, not less, important. As you now know, as far back as 1989, Hill Samuel merchant bank for the Confederation of British Industry suggested that even a unified Europe could not be regarded as uniform. According to its report, French housewives preferred washing machines that load from the top, while the British like front-loaders better. #RandolphHarris 22 of 23

Germans regard low blood pressure as a problem needing heavy medication, while British doctors did not. The French, the Hill Samuel study notes, worry about a “heart/digestive condition known as ‘spasmophilia,’ the existence of which the U.K. doctors do not even recognise.” Are attitudes toward food, beauty, work, love, play—or, for that matter, politics—any less diverse? In practice, the simplistic “global sell” theory proved disastrous for firms that applied it. The agonies of Parker Pen when it tried to follow the formula made them go into the red, sacking the responsible executives, and eventually having to sell off its pen division. When an attempt was made to peddle an Erno Laszlo skin-care brand to fair-skinned Australians and dark-skinned Italians alike, the pitch, not surprisingly, flopped. Even McDonald’s, it turns out, accommodates national differences, selling beer in Germany, wine in France, and even, at one time, mutton pot pie in Australia. In the Philippines it offers McSpaghetti. If diversity is necessary in consumer products, is it likely to be less necessary in culture or political ideology? Will global media really homogenize away the differences among peoples? The fact is that with some exceptions, culture, too—like products—are de-massifying. And the very multiplicity of media accelerates the process. Thus it is high diversity, not uniformity, that the marketers of political candidates or ideas will be forced to confront. If products, with only rare exceptions, fail when they try to sweep the World market, why should politicians or policies succeed? Rather than homogenizing the planet, as the old Second wave media did, the new global media system could deepen diversity instead. Globalization, therefore, is not the same as homogeneity. Instead of a single global village, as forecast by Marshall McLuhan, the late Canadian media theorist, we are likely to see a multiplicity of quite different global villages—all wired into the new media system, but all straining to retain or enhance their cultural, ethnic, national, or political individuality. #RandolphHarris 23 of 23

Magnolia Station at Cresleigh Ranch