the feminist librarian reads

The legal system is largely constructed to privilege “forensic evidence” and dismiss feelings as “insufficient.” Absent forensic evidence, however, affective evidence is permissible, provided that it is the affect of the officer (operating from a position of privilege), not the citizen (operating from a position of oppression). Put another way, because there is not a photograph of Mike Brown with his hands up, the law defers to whether or not Darren Wilson feared for his life. Consequently, Wilson can give biased testimony in which he describes Brown as a “demon” who made Wilson feel “like a five-year-old,” and that counts as evidence which exonerates Wilson of a crime. Affect prevailed in this case due to, not in spite of, a lack of evidence. At the same time, however, if a woman feels threatened by a man, she is challenged to present “hard evidence” to justify her claims, and is faulted for not having sufficient standing to make a claim.