Conferring Sameness

Abstract

There is little agreement in modern American society about what constitutes appropriate and healthy sexual behavior for juveniles. There are, however, institutions that proceed as though consensus exists. It is important, therefore, to take a critical look at institutionally embedded definitions of appropriate juvenile sexuality. In a previous article, I showed that embedded in the laws and practices of Washington State are implicit definitions of appropriate juvenile sexual behavior. In the present article, I look at how these definitions affect decision making within the juvenile justice system. My analyses suggest that these definitions have the effect of reducing or eliminating the possibility that decision makers will recognize cases that do not conform to these definitions (i.e., cases of nondeviant juvenile sexual behavior). This in turn creates the appearance of consensus among decision makers, when in fact, such consensus does not exist.