Dead Jones, Ann. (2000). Next

¶ … Dead

Jones, Ann. (2000). Next Time, She'll Be Dead. Boston: Beacon Press.

Summary of the book: Jones asserts that her own father was "a drunk, a wife beater and a child abuser" (Jones, 1). She discusses her own experiences with violence in the first few pages of her Introduction. it's as if she needs to explain what got her into the subject, and she does it well. Her mother stood up to her father, so she got the worst of it sometimes, hiding under her bed. On page 2 she lets readers know that while her father did come into her room to launch "...weepy, groping attempts" to make up for his abusiveness, at the same time his hand would be "worming between my legs." Her role in the family was to be the "scapegoat" - that is, her mother would nag her father and he would take it out on the daughter.

The last time her father hit her was when she was seventeen, just coming home the first time from being away to college; she had scored only a "B" on her math midterm, and he was upset. She announced that if he ever laid a hand on her again, he would never see her; "I meant it," she adds (Jones, 3). Throughout the remainder of her Introduction she justifies the need to write this book based on the terrible struggle that abused women go through, the data regarding how many acts of violence are committed against women, and the need to "treat assault as the crime it is: to arrest batterers and hold them accountable" (Jones, 11).

In Chapter 1 ("Against the Law") she reviews the law and brings in numerous examples of incidents that help solidify her point-of-view. She takes issue with the law and with judges who refuse to help women in trouble. On page 26, she relates that in Massachusetts a court worker (in 1992) reported that of four hundred cases in which this court worker helped women get restraining orders against their violent love interests (spouses, boyfriends), "only three judges ordered temporary financial support and worked out child visitation arrangements." The bottom line for Jones is that while women face horrifying realities in dealing with the person who abuses them, they then face a double whammy in trying to get the justice system to help them.

On page 27 she explains that women are supposed to accept the fact that the U.S. Constitution doesn't guarantee them freedom from domestic violence; it is merely a document that provides "negative liberties," she writes. The state may not deprive citizens of "life, liberty, or property," she explains, but "in no way" is the state required to protect citizens against "private violence." That seems contradictory to the freedoms and the sense of justice that most Americans believe in, but author Jones takes this conundrum very seriously. She quotes the cryptic words of legal scholar Catherine MacKinnon (Jones, 27): "The law sees and treats women the way men see and treat women."

The chapter is written from an investigative reporter's point-of-view, which is very helpful for the reader because a book that is simply packed full of opinion without backup journalism gets boring in a hurry. For example, on page 36 she points out that judges in Massachusetts had been seemingly lax in terms of enforcing the law against batterers. She provides numerous cases, many of them heart breaking, others the kind that makes fair-minded people want to scream and rant. There are too many stories to relate any here in this paper, but some of stories of the men who have repeatedly hurt, harassed and stalked their wives and girlfriends - and gotten away with it by courts who failed to protect women - are borderline hard to believe.

In Chapter 2 she offers more painful examples of how unfair life is for women who are beaten, hounded, and not allowed to get free from violent men. The Tracey Thurman story is heart breaking (Jones, 50), and Jones milks it for all its worth. She was beaten, stabbed a dozen times in the back, kicked in the head and had her neck broken on her front lawn - all while a police officer sat in his squad car and watched. She was deformed and battered by the many assaults that her estranged husband had perpetrated against her, but she sued the city and the police (from her Connecticut town) in federal court and won a $2.3 million judgment for "compensatory damages." Cases like this, that help change laws, are among Jones' favorites.

In the third chapter she defines "domestic violence" in great and graphic detail. Among the horror stories she uses is a case involving Ohio courts; prior to 1990, courts in Ohio refused to admit expert testimony "about the experience and state of mind of battered women," and women who defended themselves against batterers could not legally testify in Ohio courts in order to defend themselves (Jones, 104).

She relates in depth about women who shoot and kill their spouses in self-defense - and wind up serving time for murder. Jones never makes any attempt to be objective in this book and at the end of this chapter, she launches an attack against the system of justice for imprisoning women who killed husbands and boyfriends after years of abuse and injuries committed by those men. In 1989, she writes (Jones, 105), 3,765 women were serving time for murder. "Most of them killed a man - a husband, boyfriend, a pimp," she explained. "You don't have to be a detective...to figure out why. You only have to glimpse the systematic, socially sanctioned brutality masked by that mild phrase: 'domestic violence.'"

In the remaining chapters Jones discusses "The Language of Love" (for women it's bruises and busted bones but for men it's "marital problems" or "lover's quarrels"), why women don't leave violent relationships, why women are blamed and men get off Scot free, and what can be done about this terrible situation. Her points are well made, but sometimes they are drawn out to great and unnecessary lengths, as though she is getting back at her father for his outrageous behavior, not to mention all the evil men who assaulted women throughout the pages of her book.

THREE: Main theme relevance: Author Ann Jones knows a thing or two about an abusive relationships in which the woman is psychologically and emotionally bruised or physically battered and beaten by the husband, boyfriend, or "significant other." She ought to; not only is she a respected researcher in the field, having interviewed and advocated for countless victims in many parts of the world, but she herself was a party to domestic violence in her childhood, a time when people are very impressionable. So the book is certainly relevant to Jones, and relevant to Human Relations because it embraces the issues of child abuse, sexual abuse, marriage, relationships, social justice and personal responsibility.

FOUR: Strengths of the book. On Jones' Web site, the home page shows a woman (presumably Jones) standing on the hood of a four-wheel-drive jeep-like vehicle in the desert. Her arms are outstretched to the sides and there is nothing but sand with a steel blue sky on the horizon. Everything an alert reader learns about this writer and her impressive career creates a fond interest and strengthens the desire to explore her book, Next Time She'll Be Dead.

In other words, Jones has great credibility as a photographer, teacher, writer, advocate, worldly-wise personality - and one who stands up for the rights of women in dangerous places like Afghanistan.

Meanwhile this is a very valuable book and there are numerous examples given throughout the book of terrible injustices that have been done to women. Not all of those injustices were perpetrated by men; many - perhaps half or more - were perpetrated by the criminal justice system. District attorneys, judges, policemen, detectives, courts and other aspects of the justice system have been terribly unfair to women.

In many cases that she brings attention to, the judge or the policeman had an obvious bias towards the male batterer. It seems that things have gotten better in recent years (her book is now eight years old) as police and courts seem to be responding to the problem. In her chapter on "What Can We Do?" Jones provides a good service to readers. Instead of hitting readers over the head again and again with these brutally painful scenarios of men beating the living daylights out of women and getting away with it, she offers guidance and advice that is well worth the time to read.

For example, on page 245 she suggests that media members (TV, print, broadcast) can get up-to-date on the facts of domestic violence by bringing in "battered women's advocates" to brief reporters on the latest wrinkles in the law and what and where to find help for women who are victims. Investigative stories can be written, Jones suggests, on how police handle calls that involve domestic disturbance, how the prosecutors approach the issue in that town, how the courts respond and what the "local conviction rate is." Media can also learn and report on what happens to men convicted of domestic assault, what local schools are doing about battered women and domestic violence, and what grants might be available from the federal Violence Against Women Act.

The help for women - in the context of educating people on the issues whether they come into contact with domestic assault or not - should also be planned for and provided in the workplace, Jones write on pages 240-242. Employers can and should sponsor workshops and seminars about violence in the home, and also they should be encouraged to make donations to local shelters or other groups that support women who have been abused.

FIVE: Critique of the book. This is an effective book in terms of its overall tone and theme and the factual, investigative narrative strategy. Its blunt, sometimes shocking stories of abuse and injustice done to women cry out for sympathy and empathy. Perhaps it was designed to be a shocking book for more than one reason (books that are provocative tend to get more notice, and an "in your face" with facts kind of book gets positive critiques), but whatever her purpose in presenting the gruesome cases she does a masterful job of keeping the attention of the reader. But there are instances when her narrative is on the seamy side. For example, her referencing of the book the New Joy of Sex: The gourmet Guide to Lovemaking for the Nineties (by Alex Comfort) drifts down into the gutter. Comfort writes that there is a "need" for "some degree of violence in sex" as opposed to the "pretty normal sex" (Jones, 108). The author of the sex book insists that women "dig" an "extra sensation of violence and/or helplessness" like being tied up and having men be violent with them.

But while that is clearly an unsavory aspect of love making, it's just one book and Jones does not offer any data as to how many women actually enjoy being put in restraints and having men be violent during intercourse. She brings psychologists into the discussion of violence during sex, saying (Jones, 108) that they tout "the beneficial effects of aggression." If a little violence along with sex is good for couples, Jones writes, "then unalloyed aggression must be positively therapeutic." Then she does what she has a habit of doing too often in this book: she makes a sweeping generalization about psychologists in reference to violence as part of the sexual culture. "A whole school of psychology said it was so," she write on 108.

There are instances where Jones goes on an unprofessional stereotyping spree without an apparent reason. She finds passages from books that back up her thesis that there is a built-in sense of misogyny in the justice system and in much of the male side of society. Some of those are valid and powerful. Some are not. Like the passage from author and "sexologist" Van de Velde's book Ideal Marriage: What men and women - "driven by primitive urges" - hope to feel during sex is "...the essential force of maleness, which expresses itself in a sort of violent and absolute possession of the women."

Van de Velde's quote is taken further by Jones: "So both of them can and do exult in a certain degree of male aggression and dominance." Van de Velde quotes from the "eminent British sexologist Havelock Ellis" (Jones' quote, 107) that "...a certain pleasure in manifesting his power over a woman by inflicting pain upon her" is "quite normal constituent of the sexual impulse in man" (Jones quoting Ellis, 107-108). Jones can't resist taking Ellis' words even further as he offers that in any event the "...normal manifestations of woman's sexual pleasure are exceedingly like those of pain."

Jones also makes generalizations that are very weak, and that lessen the impact of her otherwise valid points. For example, on page 107 she declares "Throughout history, men have had things their way, thanks in large part to their strategic use of coercion and violence." That is an across-the-board attack - impossible to back it up - but Jones doesn't have to.

SIX: The authoritative thinking of the book and her assumptions. Jones does in fact offer many facts and situations and theories that are mainstream and valid. But she assumes that because certain attitudes are out there, and controversial books support the abuse of women, that this explains the societal bias in favor of men and against women. A man has a right to control women in Muslim cultures, but not in Western culture; and yet men do get away with behaving in violent, irrational ways. But by dipping too often into clips from weird books, and by using generalizations and stereotypes, Jones, in the view of this paper, loses some of her authority. She's clearly an angry person, and her rage has weakened her argument somewhat.