50

“While there is always room to debate the most effective approach to criminal justice, that debate should be based on facts, not fear. It’s time to move past the campaign-style rhetoric of being “tough” or “soft” on crime. Justice and the safety of our communities depend on it.” – Sally Yates

The stereotypes are that women are “soft” and men are “tough;” men bully, and women cry. Therefore, women who step into “a man’s world” will either be inadequately soft, or they have to be tougher than tough to prove themselves. Across the board the women who were showcased during the DNC are proven competent survivors. But the stereotypes persist.

I agree with the statement by Sally Yates, former Attorney General, who says, “It’s time to move past the…rhetoric.”

It seems to make no difference to list the millions of women who are tough by any standard. It seems to make no difference to highlight events like the building of the Mwenezi Dam in Zimbabwe by women carrying the building materials on their backs. It seems to make no difference to report the immense hardships women endure in refugee camps. The stereotypes persist. The rhetoric continues.

But, as Sally says, proving tough or soft is not the point. Framing the discussion differently is the point. If the frame were Discipline, I would assert that soft and tough are irrelevant.

My younger daughter, the dancer, lost her foot in a train accident at the age of 19. Three weeks after the accident, she was back in the dance studio training on one foot. That’s not soft or tough; that’s discipline. What got her back in the studio was her prior training in the boot camp of the Philadanco Dance Company, and before that on the rhythmic gymnastics team, and before that in ballet class, all disciplines that are frequently thought of as “feminine,” all disciplines that push girls to their physical, emotional, and mental limits.

My daughter’s mentor, Joan Myers Brown, founded the Philadanco Dance Company to give Black dancers opportunity. But her daily lesson in class was discipline. Sitting outside the studio I heard Joan say, “If she can do it (referring to my one-legged daughter), you can do it.”

Training involves teaching a person a particular skill. When Sally Yates goes on to discuss crime, she does so in terms of thinking, studying, and documenting the science of crime and justice. Bullying or crying has nothing to do with it.

But the rhetoric of “tough” or “soft” on crime is a minefield. I am pretty sure it took out Hillary because people remembered Bill’s “tough on crime” policies. Kamala’s having to walk cautiously through the same minefield. Fortunately, the times have changed and the rhetoric is being seen for what it is: meaningless words.

The new rhetoric is “criminal justice reform.” It is neither tough nor soft. It aspires to be pragmatic and fair. It is based on the discipline of study and results.