Ticktin’s article really opened my eyes to the social constructions of innocence and its consequences. One of the statements which really resonated with me was: “Innocence establishes a hierarchical relationship between those who care and those who are cared for.”

As the author also explains, who we define as “those who are cared for” reflects societal implications of who we define as “those who are worthy. ” Empathy ultimately plays a pivotal role in these implications, as we often define those who are cared for and therefore worthy of help as those who we can relate to or those are associated with a higher degree of privilege; any challenge towards this privilege is seen as a threat to all who possess this privilege. In the case of the death of Aylan Kurdi, for example, many believe that European countries addressed the refugee crisis with a very high level of efficacy and concern because of the child’s appearance. More than innocence itself, it was really about this “his shoes, shorts, and red shirt…[it] made him look like a Euro-American middle-class child. He looked like “one of us.Appearances matter in whether we feel sympathy or not.”

This article also led me to entertain thoughts about the  social constructions surrounding danger and helplessness. In most situations involving rescue or aid, women and children are prioritized over men, and as noted in previous discussions in class, women and children are often portrayed in refugee social awareness campaigns and media. This portrayal is perhaps  contradictory in its own way.  We save those who are “innocent” or, in other words, worthy of saving: in situations where we help women before men, we are categorizing women as valued individuals  and also vulnerable and helpless, which illustrates how hegemonic masculinity is present in situations deemed “dangerous.”