In the case of Rhinelander v. Rhinelander, Leonard Kip met Alice jones after his car broke down in New Rochelle, New York. At the gas station one of Kip’s friend started a conversation with a young girl, who was willing to ride with them but when Leonard met her 22 year old sister he seemingly fell in love with her. This love story quickly takes a turn when conflicts of interracial marriage comes into play.
In this case there was a brilliant defence against the plaintiff. This was surprising because it was in a courtroom that seemed to sway in favor of the white plaintiff, Leonard Rhinelander. The jury was filled with 12 white men all of whom were fathers, you could say that this was about as unequal a jury could get for a case like this and …show more content…
White women were seen as pure bodies, who did not lust for sex and were the true image of womanhood. But since Alice by definition of the ‘one drop rule’ was of black heritage that changed her entire womanly image in society. The plaintiff tried to paint her so she was seen as a woman many years older than that Leonard looking for socioeconomic gain by taking advantage of a foolish disabled boy. The plaintiff constantly used her race/gender as an attacking point in her morals. This created a bridging device between the jury and their personal image of black women during that time. They used the racist-sexist ideals that existed in that time and connected with the 12 white males who most likely had been socialized enough to know those ideals already existed. This was too a bridging device used by the plaintiff and although this is not the bridging device that is being asked about in the prompt I found it important to …show more content…
Instead of affirmative fraud, which required proof that Alice lied to Leonard, they wished to charge negative fraud, which required proof only that Alice had never said she was black. During this phase the bridging device was defined as such, “A bridging device is a symbol that shares substantive elements of more than one social category, creating those “areas of ambiguity” from which one can transform meaning.” The defense tried its very best to separate Alice from her race and create an image of her focusing on her gender. The reason for this was because then the plaintiff could no longer attack Alice for being a black woman, if she was only being seen as just a woman. The defense began to construct the argument of using gender as a bridging device. To hone in on the sympathy and understanding of the jury. Instead of Alice being consumed by images of racial stereotypes she was a victim of the gender rolls of her class. She was a housemaid with a working class family and Leonard was a son of a wealthy family. His social dominance over Alice surely countered the argument that he age was used as a tool to manipulate
In this case there was a brilliant defence against the plaintiff. This was surprising because it was in a courtroom that seemed to sway in favor of the white plaintiff, Leonard Rhinelander. The jury was filled with 12 white men all of whom were fathers, you could say that this was about as unequal a jury could get for a case like this and …show more content…
White women were seen as pure bodies, who did not lust for sex and were the true image of womanhood. But since Alice by definition of the ‘one drop rule’ was of black heritage that changed her entire womanly image in society. The plaintiff tried to paint her so she was seen as a woman many years older than that Leonard looking for socioeconomic gain by taking advantage of a foolish disabled boy. The plaintiff constantly used her race/gender as an attacking point in her morals. This created a bridging device between the jury and their personal image of black women during that time. They used the racist-sexist ideals that existed in that time and connected with the 12 white males who most likely had been socialized enough to know those ideals already existed. This was too a bridging device used by the plaintiff and although this is not the bridging device that is being asked about in the prompt I found it important to …show more content…
Instead of affirmative fraud, which required proof that Alice lied to Leonard, they wished to charge negative fraud, which required proof only that Alice had never said she was black. During this phase the bridging device was defined as such, “A bridging device is a symbol that shares substantive elements of more than one social category, creating those “areas of ambiguity” from which one can transform meaning.” The defense tried its very best to separate Alice from her race and create an image of her focusing on her gender. The reason for this was because then the plaintiff could no longer attack Alice for being a black woman, if she was only being seen as just a woman. The defense began to construct the argument of using gender as a bridging device. To hone in on the sympathy and understanding of the jury. Instead of Alice being consumed by images of racial stereotypes she was a victim of the gender rolls of her class. She was a housemaid with a working class family and Leonard was a son of a wealthy family. His social dominance over Alice surely countered the argument that he age was used as a tool to manipulate