We find the defendant guilty of sexual abuse. A phrase I could never have fathomed would be spoken in reference to my name. But November 30, 2012 was the day, I was wrongfully convicted of a crime I did not commit and I ended up spending 950 days (2.5 years) of my life, approximately 70 which were spent in solitary confinement, wrongfully incarcerated as a result of being wrongfully accused by a fellow female student while I was attending the University of Iowa in the fall of 2010 and being to found to have violated the “Student Conduct Code” after a Title IX Administrative Hearing. The personal experiences I will detail below will highlight the inherent prejudices and distorted perceptions the various actors were influenced by during my wrongful
…show more content…
These normative structures are social or cultural norms that contribute to structural active ignorance those that strive for and value agreement and consensus rather than remaining open to dissent and resistance. Medina further expands on this by requiring epistemic friction for epistemic resistance and notes that it’s especially effective when it is aimed at particulars rather than generalizations. Medina explains that insensitivity to the lives and experiences of others by striving for idealizations with the need for consensus desensitize us from existing everyday injustices and minimize the importance of problems and obstacles of others. To move away from insensitivity, Medina suggests encouraging and welcoming dissent by valuing diversity, interaction, and dynamism, and the contributions to the invisibility of everyday injustices can be reduced instead of perpetuated. Media mentions that epistemic resistance bears a number of duties: fighting against ignorance, knowing oneself and others, to learn and facilitate the learning of others, resist epistemic vices and to work towards epistemic virtues, to meliorate epistemic habits and attitudes, and to collaborate in the pursuit of epistemic justice. While Medina focuses his definition of
These normative structures are social or cultural norms that contribute to structural active ignorance those that strive for and value agreement and consensus rather than remaining open to dissent and resistance. Medina further expands on this by requiring epistemic friction for epistemic resistance and notes that it’s especially effective when it is aimed at particulars rather than generalizations. Medina explains that insensitivity to the lives and experiences of others by striving for idealizations with the need for consensus desensitize us from existing everyday injustices and minimize the importance of problems and obstacles of others. To move away from insensitivity, Medina suggests encouraging and welcoming dissent by valuing diversity, interaction, and dynamism, and the contributions to the invisibility of everyday injustices can be reduced instead of perpetuated. Media mentions that epistemic resistance bears a number of duties: fighting against ignorance, knowing oneself and others, to learn and facilitate the learning of others, resist epistemic vices and to work towards epistemic virtues, to meliorate epistemic habits and attitudes, and to collaborate in the pursuit of epistemic justice. While Medina focuses his definition of