*Women’s criminality often linked to their victimization and traumatization, according to Dirks. Dirks suggests we approach the issue of women in prisons by asking “how current structures and relations of power facilitate the incarceration of an increasingly high number of nonviolent women.” Do you agree? Do you disagree? Discuss by reflecting on Woman at Point Zero, after writing a short review on what the novel is about, and the key questions it addresses.

Your review should not be a mere summary of the book. You should identify and discuss the key argument(s) the author is making, and what you think about these arguments.

* Have you watched “Orange is the new Black”? If you have watched the series, reflect on one incident or character in light of the readings for this session.

*Try to link your analysis to what we have discussed in the previous sessions on intersectionality and on the politics of representation.

Use the questions above to guide your writing.

Please submit a maximum of 3 pages (700 words). Use Times New Roman 12pt font.

-Your writing should be clear, concise and free of grammatical and other mistakes
The Feminist Press at the City University of New York is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access
to Women’s Studies Quarterly.
http://www.jstor.org
Sexual Revictimization and Retraumatization of Women in Prison
Author(s): Danielle Dirks
Source: Women’s Studies Quarterly, Vol. 32, No. 3/4, Women, Crime, and the Criminal Justice
System (Fall – Winter, 2004), pp. 102-115
Published by: The Feminist Press at the City University of New York
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40004582
Accessed: 06-07-2015 16:15 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
This content downloaded from 160.39.86.104 on Mon, 06 Jul 2015 16:15:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Sexual Revictimization and
Retraumatization of Women in Prison
Danielle Dirks
When women in foreign countries are sexually abused or sexually exploited by
government employees, it is a human rights violation (e.g., Fitzgerald, 1992),
but when the same thing happens in the United States, it is a “prison sex
scandal” (e.g., Meyer, 1992) (excerpt from Baro, 1997).
Understanding of the role of victimization and traumatization in
women’s lives has recently begun to inform the growing body of
knowledge on women’s offending (Arnold, 1995; Faith, 1993).
Examining the life histories of incarcerated women reveals an extensive
and pervasive array of physical, emotional, and sexual abuses
(Browne, Miller, & Maguin, 1999; Girshick, 1999; Lake, 1993; Owen
8c Bloom, 1995; Singer, Bussey, Song, 8c Lunghofer, 1995). Many of
these women have experienced at least one form of sexual victimization
in their lifetimes, many of them before the age of 18 (Bloom,
Chesney, 8c Owen, 1994; Heney, 1990). For women with previous histories
of abuse, prison life is apt to simulate the abuse dynamics
already established in these women’s lives, thus perpetuating
women’s further revictimization and retraumatization while serving
time. Women’s experiences of revictimization and retraumatization
need to be addressed by prison staff, policy, procedure, and programming.
A feminist framework may offer a lens by which to view
these experiences and offer insight for change.
Arnold (1995) suggests that the interrelated processes that govern
women’s victimization and criminalization begin with abuse –
including physical, sexual, economic, and racial. Through a process
of “structural dislocation,” institutional forms of oppression such as
sexism, racism, and classism aid in the removal of girls and women
from primary socializing agents such as families and schools. Facing
lives filled with “poverty, illiteracy, substance abuse, mental illness,
childhood sexual abuse, and an intricate web of life-threatening
physical, psychological, racial, and social problems,” many of these
women’s experiences mark their advent into the criminal justice system
(Johnson, 2002, p. 103).
102
This content downloaded from 160.39.86.104 on Mon, 06 Jul 2015 16:15:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Women ‘s Studies Quarterly 2004: 3& 4 103
Feminist criminology has moved beyond examining the crimes
of women, and has begun to examine the broader links that may
explain women’s offending. For example, a study by Widom (1989)
found that abused girls were more likely than girls without histories
of abuse to become criminals or delinquents. Girls who had been sexually
abused as children also have an increased risk for adult arrest
for prostitution (Widom 8c Ames, 1994). Other studies have also
linked early childhood abuse with later criminal activity (American
Correctional Association, 1990; Lake, 1993). Much of the research in
this area has focused on the links between childhood abuse, depression,
substance abuse, and subsequent criminality (McClellan,
Farabee, & Crouch, 1997; Singer et al., 1995; Smith & Thornberry,
1995).
Prevalence and Severity of Women’s Histories of Abuse
Given the link between victimization and criminalization, the extant
research literature suggests that women in prison have extensive histories
of emotional, physical, and sexual abuse. Incarcerated women
are estimated to have rates of abuse six to ten times that of women in
the general population (Pollock, 2002). Although victimization and
traumatization rates vary among samples and research methods, the
lives of women in prison have often been characterized by the “prevalence
and severity” of physical and sexual abuse throughout their
childhoods and adult lives (Browne, Miller, 8c Maguin, 1999).
Women in both state and federal prisons are more likely to have
histories of abuse than men in prison (McClellan et al., 1997; Snell 8c
Morton, 1994). A 1991 study by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS)
revealed that nearly half (48%) of women they interviewed had been
physically or sexually assaulted prior to their incarceration (Snell 8c
Morton, 1994). Citing that the BJS study (1991) methodology may
have suppressed reporting, more recent research has tackled the
goal of filling in the gaps of previous literature to elucidate a more
comprehensive understanding of the victimization and traumatization
experiences of incarcerated women (Browne et al., 1999; Owen
& Bloom, 1995).
Owen and Bloom (1995) found that 80% of their sample of
women in the California penal system had experienced some form of
physical or sexual abuse in their lifetimes. In a study of women in a
New York maximum-security facility, Browne, Miller, and Maguin
(1999) found that 70% had experienced “severe physical violence”
from a caretaker during adolescence and 75% reported experiences
This content downloaded from 160.39.86.104 on Mon, 06 Jul 2015 16:15:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
104 Women ‘s Studies Quarterly 2004: 3 & 4
of physical abuse from an intimate partner in adulthood. Nearly 60%
of these women reported sexual abuse during childhood or adolescence
and 77% reported some form of victimization, including
threats of assault involving weapons to physical and sexual attacks by
“nonintimates,” over their lifetimes. Lake (1993) found that 85% of
the 83 women in her sample had experienced at least one form of
violent victimization including physical and sexual abuse and assault
by parents, siblings, relatives, partners, or strangers. Similar to the
rate reported by Browne, Miller, and Maguin, nearly three-quarters
of the women in this sample had also been physically or sexually
assaulted or robbed by strangers. When including “emotional abuse,”
Girshick (1999) found that 90% of the women in her prison sample
had been abused physically, sexually, or emotionally as adults. Over
forty percent (43%) of the women in this sample reported being sexually
assaulted.
Singer, Bussey, Song, and Lunghofer (1995) found that 81% of
their sample had experienced sexual victimization when combining
experiences of child and adult sexual abuse. In this sample, roughly
half of the women were serving time for prostitution. Over two-thirds
(68%) of the sample experienced one act of forced sexual activity;
nearly half (48%) reported experiencing sexual violence before the
age of 18. Bloom, Chesney, and Owen (1994) found that 31% of their
sample of California women in prison reported childhood sexual
abuse and 23% had experienced sexual abuse as adults.
Although women of color are disproportionately overrepresented
in the penal system (Johnson, 2002) , very little research has
focused on how varying intersections of race, class, and sexuality create
diverse victimization experiences for women in prison prior to
their incarceration. A recent literature review by West (2002)
revealed that black women are commonly victims of childhood sexual
abuse, intimate partner violence, sexual assault, and sexual
harassment and are overrepresented in “severe” categories of childhood
sexual abuse. Black women’s experiences are often shaped by
class distinctions as low-income black women experience elevated
rates of sexual assault (Kalichman et al., 1998). Black American
women are also significantly less likely to disclose sexual assault and
more likely to have repeated assaults than white American women,
both of which can have serious effects on recovery from rape trauma
(Wyatt, Guthrie, & Notgrass, 1992).
Lesbians may also face elevated rates of physical and verbal abuse
in comparison to heterosexual women (Balsam, 2003) and these victimization
experiences are sometimes directly related to their sexual
This content downloaded from 160.39.86.104 on Mon, 06 Jul 2015 16:15:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Women sStudies Quarterly 2004: 3& 4 105
orientation (Balsam, 2003; Pilkington & D’Augelli, 1995). For example,
women who identify as lesbian may be at increased risk for verbal
and physical abuse in childhood and adolescence, both from their
families and their communities as a number of researchers are beginning
to find (Pilkington 8c D’Augelli, 1995; Tjaden, Thoeness, & Allison,
1999). Lesbians may also experience a form of “cultural
victimization” characterized by the shame, negative sense of self, and
“victim mentality” resulting from living in a heterosexist society
(Neisen, 1993, as cited in Balsam, 2003). Undoubtedly, interlocking
and intersecting experiences of oppression have impacted the lives
of women entering and living in prison as well. Overall, the pervasive
existence of victimization has had a significant influence on the lives
of all women as both victims and witnesses to this violence (Bloom,
Owen, Covington, 8c Raede., 2003). Prison dynamics may create
uniquely harmful experiences for women who already experience
cultural victimization in the forms of racism, classism, and heterosexism
– among other forms of oppression in their everyday lives.
Vulnerable Women in Vulnerable Positions
Victimization is a “lifelong possibility” for women as childhood abuse
experiences often follow women into their adult lives (Girshick,
1999). According to Finkelhor and Browne (1985), four processes
shape early traumatization experiences: traumatic sexualization,
powerlessness, stigmatization, and betrayal. These early childhood
boundary violations can often shape women’s later experiences in
life in creating a weak sense of self, feelings of guilt or shame, and
deprivation, thus shaping women’s further alienation and vulnerability
(Girshick, 1999; Heney 8c Kristiansen, 1998). Many women who
have been battered, or women who suffer from Battered Woman’s
Syndrome, 1 often experience low self-esteem, a sense of powerlessness
or worthlessness, and self-blame (Walker, 1992, 1994). Research
has documented the links between previous victimization and subsequent
incidents of revictimization; these links represent a constellation
of issues regarding women’s mental health and well-being
(Wyattetal., 1992).
Given the prevalence and severity of the experiences of previous
sexual victimization and traumatization among incarcerated women,
many women in prison suffer from the effects of childhood and adult
sexual abuse. If fact, a study by O’Keefe (1998) found that many
women in prison score high on measures of Post-Traumatic Stress
Disorder (PTSD), a disorder characterized by excessive fear, flashThis
content downloaded from 160.39.86.104 on Mon, 06 Jul 2015 16:15:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
106 Women ‘s Studies Quarterly 2004: 3 &f 4
backs of trauma, and diminished sense of well-being that affects
more women than men. As Girshick (1999) writes, these women are
already vulnerable and then placed in further vulnerable positions
detrimental to their emotional and physical well-being.
Revictimization and Retraumatization
As Louise (1998) reports, “Unfortunately, the prison system often
contributes to the revictimization of these women by perpetuating
feelings of powerlessness and vulnerability” (p. 107). Heney and Kristiansen
(1998) posit that women in prison are likely to be reexposed
to the four “powerful traumatizing processes” of childhood sexual
abuse outlined by Finkelhor and Browne (1985) during their incarceration.
A legal review by Kupers (2001) outlines the major issues
pertaining to women’s experiences of revictimization and retraumatization.
He acknowledges that women’s experiences of sexual
harassment and abuse, lack of privacy, and retaliation during incarceration
may further increase women’s risk for depression, anxiety,
PTSD, and decreased overall well being before release from prison.
Prison procedures that control every aspect of an imprisoned
woman’s life may indeed trigger experiences of previous abuses
(Heney & Kristiansen, 1998; Lord, 1995; Louise, 1998).
In the Name of Security
Women’s traumatic sexualization and powerlessness are recreated by
“institutionalized assaults by line staff on prisoner’s bodies which are
conducted in the name of security” (Faith, 1993, p. 229). These
assaults reside in the realm of staff sexual misconduct outlined by
Moss (1998) as “sexual behavior directed toward inmates, including
sexual abuse, sexual assault, sexual harassment, physical conduct of a
sexual nature, sexual obscenity, invasion of privacy and conversations
or correspondence of a romantic or intimate nature” and can have
devastating effects on women’s well-being during incarceration
(189). Incarceration also re triggers abuses with grossly unequal
power dynamics, invasive searches, restraints, reading of mail, and a
lack of privacy (Girshick, 1999).
Prison power dynamics are shaped by the structural distinction
between those in power – prison staff and prison administration –
and those without power, the prison inmates. As a result, this structural
distinction serves as a constant reminder to women in prison
that they do not have autonomy over their own bodies or well-being
This content downloaded from 160.39.86.104 on Mon, 06 Jul 2015 16:15:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Women’s Studies Quarterly 2004: 3& 4 107
in prison; this message serves to reinforce women’s sense of powerlessness.
Because imprisonment necessitates that these women have
no choice but to comply, these acts also serve to further women’s
sense of powerlessness, thus retriggering abuse dynamics found in
childhood and adulthood. Kupers (2001) adds that the absence of a
“safe place” for women in prison occludes women from retreating to
a place of healing, for women in prison, there may be “no safe haven”
from ongoing abuse (Girshick, 1999).
The existence of male correctional officers in women’s facilities
may exacerbate power imbalances as women must rely on men for
basic necessities, phone privileges, and visiting privileges (Human
Rights Watch, 1996). Correctional officers’ absolute power over giving
warnings, infractions, and punitive measures may provide opportunities
for the development of exploitative relationships that hinge
on “favor-giving” and avoiding punishment (Amnesty International,
1999; Human Rights Watch, 1996). It is important to note that these
patterns of misconduct have also been found among female officers
as well, and that sexually exploitative relationships do not always have
to involve abuse or violence- power often works just as well (Estrich,
1987). The exploited positions of women in prison places them in
the role of “bad girls,” thus denying them legitimate victim status
because they are viewed as sexually accessible and likely to consent to
further exploitation and abuse (Baro, 1997; MacKinnon, 1993).
The Reality of Threat
As Zupan (1992) suggests, women in prison are constantly aware of
the threat and possibility for sexual assault in prison. The research literature
focusing on women’s imprisonment experiences indicates
that the risk of sexual assault resembles more of a reality for many
women in prison. A report by the Human Rights Watch (1996) organization
revealed that many women in prison suffered from wellestablished
patterns of sexual degradation, abuse, and assault at the
hands of prison staff and inmates. An investigative report by Amnesty
International (1999) also cited that many of the incarcerated women
they interviewed in the United States reported on a range of abuses
by prison staff including the use of sexually or racially offensive language,
inappropriate touching of women’s breasts or genitals during
searches, inappropriate surveillance while women were unclothed,
and rape.
An anonymous mail survey of men and women incarcerated in
the Midwest indicated that 7.7% of the women reported being presThis
content downloaded from 160.39.86.104 on Mon, 06 Jul 2015 16:15:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
108 Women ‘s Studies Quarterly 2004: 3 & 4
sured or forced to have sexual contact against their will while incarcerated
(S truckman Johnson, Struckman-Johnson, Rucker, Bumby,
8c Donaldson, 1996). The majority of incidents reported in a followup
study by the same authors (Alarid, 2000) were perpetrated by
other women inmates, contrary to the findings of the Human Rights
Watch (1996), Amnesty International (1999), and Baro (1997), who
indicate that male staff often use “terror, retaliation, and repeated
victimization to coerce and intimidate confined women” (Dumond,
2000, p. 409) . In fact, women are more likely than men to be sexually
abused by correctional officers (Zupan, 1992). When women are
housed at men’s facilities, they risk being sexually assaulted by both
male officers and male inmates (Amnesty International, 1999;
Human Rights Watch, 1996; Stein, 1996). Eigenberg (1994) cautions
that the rates of reported sexual assaults in prison may be low estimates,
as inmates may feel stigmatized as a result of their experiences
and also may fear revealing abuse to researchers or prison authorities
for a number of reasons, some including fear of retaliation or fear of
further abuse. Research examining women’s experiences and rates
of sexual abuse and assault in prison are needed, as the majority of
the relevant literature focuses on male inmates (Dumond, 1992;
Struckman-Johnson etal., 1996).
A Feminist Perspective for Change
As incarceration rates of women continue to surpass those of men,
examining the extensive abuse histories of women is an increasingly
important topic of research for prison programming and policy. As
Lord (1995) suggests, “our questions need to be about women, not
about crime or prisons, but about who the women are and how they
become who they are” (p. 259). A feminist framework encompasses
the context with which women are both victimized and criminalized.
Baro (1997) suggests that women’s experiences in the criminal justice
system have been thematically linked by abandonment. She
argues that prison administrations, the legal system, and scholars
have abandoned the plight of women’s continuing sexual abuse and
exploitation within the prison system.
The extant literature does appear to support this notion; there is
a notable dearth of prison policy and programming directed toward
aiding in women’s recovery from traumatization and victimization
(Chesney-Lind, 1998; Coll, Miller, Fields, & Mathews, 1998; Covington,
1998; Gray, Mays & Stohr, 1995; McQuaid 8c Ehrenreich, 1998;
Morris 8c Wilkinson, 1995; Pomeroy 8c Kiam, 1998). Change needs to
This content downloaded from 160.39.86.104 on Mon, 06 Jul 2015 16:15:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Women ‘s Studies Quarterly 2004: 3& 4 109
be directed toward creating prison policy and programming that
attend to the omnipresent experiences of abuse and intersecting
oppressions in the lives of these women. A feminist framework for
change and healing has suggested that “empowerment” should be a
goal of counseling and programming within the prison. As suggested
by Remer (2003), empowerment strategies should encourage people
to identify and challenge the conditions of their lives that may serve to
devalue and subordinate them – those conditions that effectively deny
them equality of opportunity and access to valued life resources.
Feminist therapists examine the broader context of women’s
experiences and aid people to connect their own experiences and
actions to foster, “resistance and personal integrity rather than infantilization,
self-directedness rather than conformity, and self-esteem
rather than self-doubt” (Marcus-Mendoza, Klein-Saffran, 8c Lutze,
1998, p. 181). These goals present unique paradoxes in the context
of a prison (Hannah-Moffat, 1995, 2000; Heney 8c Kristiansen, 1998),
and many authors have enumerated the dilemmas with feminist
ideals “behind bars” and these critiques should be taken into consideration
when developing prison programming and policy (HannahMoffat,
1995, 2000; Heney 8c Kristiansen, 1998; Kendall, 1993, 1994).
However, the ideals of feminist therapy and a feminist approach to
empowerment (as compared to a criminal-justice approach to
empowerment) have been endorsed as the most appropriate
approach for women’s healing from traumatization and victimization
while in prison (Kendall, 1993; Scarth 8c McLean, 1994).
One promising study (Kendall, 1993) indicated that 92% of
women interviewed at the Canadian Prison for Women reported that
they were ready to deal with the issues they were working on in counseling.
The women in this study were also overwhelmingly supportive
of the feminist therapy techniques employed by the counselors.
Indeed, programming aimed at repairing and recovering from
trauma has been cited by women in prison as one of their most important
programming needs (Gray et al., 1995). Counseling in prison
should be informed by the most up-to-date literature on trauma and
recovery and should be accessible to all women who would like to participate.
Feminist therapy, as well as other forms of therapy, should
not, however, be pushed upon women who may not be ready to deal
with painful issues in their lives. Forms of therapy and counseling
should not serve to further revictimize or victim-blame.
Other researchers have additionally warned against counselors
and prison staff fulfilling confusing and conflicting roles of both
“therapist and disciplinarian” (Marcus-Mendoza et al., 1998).
This content downloaded from 160.39.86.104 on Mon, 06 Jul 2015 16:15:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
110 Women ‘s Studies Quarterly 2004: 3 & 4
Although training correctional officers to treat women in prison with
esteem, empathy, and compassion could result positively, HannahMoffat
(1995) writes that, “it is difficult to envision the development
of meaningful, respectful, and supportive relationships when guards
continue to perform strip searches, open women’s mail, monitor
their relations with others within and outside of the institution, and
at times punish the prisoners” (p. 144). By exploring and creating
separate roles for therapists and correctional officers, women can
learn that “intimidation and intimacy do not have to coexist in all
relationships” (Marcus-Mendoza et al., 1998, p. 182).
A feminist framework suggests that all those who work in the
prison should value women’s diverse experiences and that women
should not be treated in a manner that retraumatizes them. Women
who have had previous experiences of victimization in their lifetimes
are more likely to have repeated experiences of trauma in their lives.
Placing vulnerable women in prison among insensitive or predatory
officers may have serious implications for the healing process, as one
prisoner counselor shared that correctional officers often target
women “like a radar” who have histories of sexual abuse (Human
Rights Watch, 1996). It may then not be surprising to learn that the
legal system has turned a blind eye to both consensual and nonconsensual
sexual contact between inmates and prison staff.
Arguing that cases of sexual misconduct that involve “romance”
or some level of consensual contact are too difficult to prosecute,
those in the legal arena choose to do nothing to aid women who have
been exploited or abused by male prison staff (Baro, 1997; Human
Rights Watch, 1996). These legal standards also attempt to jeopardize
women’s victim status by stigmatizing them as “inmates” or “bad
girls,” thus occluding any opportunity for their experiences to fall
under the purview of “real rape” (Estrich, 1987; MacKinnon, 1993).
Valuing the lives of all women without dichotomizing “good girls”
and “bad girls” (even along racial, class, and sexuality lines) should
be one goal of creating change within the prison and legal milieu.
The daunting reporting procedures and threat of retaliation
serve to further revictimize women. Those who choose to report
abuses should be afforded greater protection in reporting abuses.
Women’s disclosure should be made confidentially, and retaliation
should be taken seriously (Amnesty International, 1999; Human
Rights Watch, 1996; Smith, 2001). More-explicit policies and laws
that directly prohibit any sexual contact between inmates and staff
may also aid in investigations and prosecutions by clearly stating that
consensual contact is not possible in the context of a prison (Moss,
This content downloaded from 160.39.86.104 on Mon, 06 Jul 2015 16:15:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Women ‘s Studies Quarterly 2004: 3& 4 111
1999). Prison administration should also implement extensive training
for employees and inmates on new procedures that ensure the
dignity of women’s bodies and rights; invasive and unnecessary
searches should be prohibited to reduce the likelihood of revictimization
and retraumatization (Bloom et al., 2003).
As Baro (1997) has suggested, until recently little scholarly
research has been dedicated to exploring the lives of sexually abused
and exploited women within the criminal justice and penal system.
The links between childhood and adult sexual abuse, substance
abuse, mental health issues, and criminality has paved the way for a
number of empirical questions. Research might usefully examine the
efficacy of various prison dynamics and programming. In the slippery
politics of “empowerment” and “women-centered” and feminist
prisons, how women have fared as a result of various empowerment
strategies needs also to be explored. Qualitatively examining the life
histories of women is one research methodology that may provide a
richer, more-detailed illustration of the intricate links between victimization
and criminalization in women’s lives. A thorough examination
of women’s intersecting identities and experiences of
oppression also desperately needs to be explored as certain groups of
women – namely, women of color, poor women, and women with
children – are disproportionately incarcerated and victimized.
Finally, outcomes for women as a result of policy or programming
changes also need to be explored in relation to recidivism rates.
Conclusion: From Victims to Survivors
One critique of a feminist perspective on women’s imprisonment is
that it still exists within the realm of incarceration and punitive ideology.
Hannah-Moffat (1995) calls on feminists to “challenge this
institutional base and consider alternative systems and meanings of
sanctioning” (p. 147). Instead of questioning how we can change the
prison system, she suggests, “we could instead proceed with a question
about how current structures and relations of power facilitate
the incarceration of an increasingly high number of nonviolent
women” (p. 149). If we understand that women’s criminality is inextricably
linked to their victimization and traumatization, we also need
to then examine the structural changes that must occur to disrupt
the current cycles of victimization in the lives of girls and women.
Some individuals may question how as a society we could afford such
a structural disruption, but the question still remains, how can we
afford not to make these critical changes?
This content downloaded from 160.39.86.104 on Mon, 06 Jul 2015 16:15:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
112 Women’s Studies Quarterly 2004: 3 & 4
NOTES
1 . Battered Woman’s Syndrome is generally recognized as a subcategory of
Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder that is characterized by the social, emotional,
physical, and psychological symptoms of depression, low selfesteem,
and isolation that may often follow the personal experience of a
series of violent or harmful acts by an intimate partner. For victims of
interpersonal violence such as this, symptoms can resemble those exhibited
by persons who have experienced traumatic events, such as sexual
assault survivors or prisoners of war.
REFERENCES:
Alarid, L. F. (2000). “Sexual Assault and Coercions Among Incarcerated
Women Prisoners: Excerpts from Prison Letters.” The Prison Journal, 80,
391-406.
American Correctional Association. (1990). The Female Offender: What
Does the Future Hold? Washington, DC: St. Mary’s Press.
Amnesty International USA. (1999). Not Part of My Sentence: Violations of
the Human Rights of Women in Custody. New York: Amnesty International
USA.
Arnold, R. (1995). Processes of Victimization and Criminalization of Black
Women.” In B. R. Price 8c N. L. Sokoloff (Eds.), The Criminal Justice System
and Women: Offenders, Victims and Workers (pp. 136-146). New
York: McGraw-Hill.
Balsam, K. F. (2003). “Traumatic Victimization in the Lives of Lesbian and
Bisexual Women: A Contextual Approach. “Journal of Lesbian Studies, 7,
1-14.
Baro, A. (1997). “Spheres of Consent: An Analysis of the Sexual Abuse and
Sexual Exploitation of Women Incarcerated in the State of Hawaii.”
Women and Criminal Justice, 8, 61-84.
Bloom, B., Chesney, L. M., 8c Owen, B. (1994). Women in California Prisons:
Hidden Victims of the War on Drugs. San Francisco, CA: Center on Juvenile
and Criminal Justice.
Bloom, B., Owen, B., Covmgton, S. S., 8c Raeder, M. (2003). Gender Responsive
Strategies: Research, Practice, and Guiding Principles for Women
Offenders. Retrieved August 11, 2003 from http://www.nicic.org.
Brown, L. (1996). Subversive Dialogues: Theory in Feminist Therapy. New
York: Basic Books.
Browne, A., Miller, B., 8c Maguin, E. (1999). “Prevalence and Severity of Lifetime
Physical and Sexual Victimization Among Incarcerated Women.”
International Journal of Law and Psychology, 2, 301-322.
Chesney-Lind, M. (1998). “The Forgotten Offender.” Corrections Today, 60,
66-71.
Coll, C. G., Miller, J. B., Fields, J. P., 8c Mathews, B. (1998). “The Experiences
of Women in Prison: Implications for Services and Prevention.” Women 8c
Therapy, 20, 11-28.
This content downloaded from 160.39.86.104 on Mon, 06 Jul 2015 16:15:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Women ‘s Studies Quarterly 2004: 3& 4 113
Covington, S. S. (1998). “Women in Prison: Approaches in the Treatment of
our Most Invisible Population.” Women & Therapy, 21, 141-155.
Dumond, R. W. (1992) . “The Sexual Assault of Male Inmates in Incarcerated
Settings.” International Journal of the Sociology of Law, 20, 135-157.
Dumond, R. W. (2000). Inmate Sexual Assault: The Plague that Still Persists.”
The Prison Journal, 8, 407-414.
Eigenberg, H. M. (1994). “Male Rape in Prisons: Examining the Relationship
Between Correctional Officers’ Attitudes Toward Male Rape and
their Willingness to Respond to Acts of Rape.” In M. C. Braswell, R. H.
Montgomery, Jr., & L.X. Lombardo (Eds.), Prison Violence in America
(2nd Ed.) (pp. 145-165). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.
Estrich, S. (1987). Real Rape: How the Legal System Victimizes Women.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Faith, K. (1993). Unruly Women: The Politics of Confinement and Resistance.
Vancouver: Press Gang Publishers.
Finkelhor, D., and Browne, A. (1985). “The Traumatic Impact of Child Sexual
Abuse: A Conceptualization.” The American Journal of Orthopsychiatry,
5, 530-541.
Fitzgerald, D. (1992, July 31) . “The Secret Torture.” New Statesman 8c Society,
5,5.
Girshick, L. (1999). No Safe Haven: Stories From Women in Prison. New
York: Northeastern University Press.
Gray, T, Mays, L. G., 8c Stohr, M. K. (1995). “Inmate Needs and Programming
in Exclusively Women’s Jails.” The Prison Journal, 7, 186-202.
Hannah-Moffat, K. (1995). “Feminine Fortresses: Women Centered Prisons?”
The Prison Journal, 75, 135-165.
Hannah-Moffat, K. (2000). “Prisons that Empower: Neo-liberal Governance
in Canadian Women’s Prisons.” British Journal of Criminology, 4, 510-531.
Heney, J. (1990) . Report on Self-injurious Behavior in the Kingston Prison for
Women. Ottawa: Ministry of the Solicitor General, Corrections Branch.
Heney, J., 8c Kristiansen, C. M. (1998). “An Analysis of the Impact of Prison
on Women Survivors of Childhood Sexual Abuse.” Women 8c Therapy, 20,
29-44.
Human Rights Watch Women’s Rights Project. (1996). All Too Familiar: Sexual
Abuse of Women in U.S. State Prisons. New York: Human Rights Watch.
Johnson, H. D. (2002). Evie Evan’s Life History: Her Sociological Sojourn
from a Lifetime of Crime to a Life of Dignity. Retrieved June 22, 2003,
fromwww.rcgd.isr.umich.edu/prba/perspectives/springsummer2002/joh
nson.pdf.
Kalichman, S. C, Williams, E. A., Cherry, C, Belcher, L., 8c Nachimson, D.
(1998). “Sexual Coercion, Domestic Violence, and Condom Use among
Low-income African American Women.” Journal of Women’s Health, 7,
371-378.
Kendall, K. (1993). Program Evaluation of Therapeutic Services at the
Prison for Women. Ottawa: Correctional Service of Canada.
Kendall, K. (1994). Creating Real Choices: A Program Evaluation of TheraThis
content downloaded from 160.39.86.104 on Mon, 06 Jul 2015 16:15:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
114 Women ‘s Studies Quarterly 2004: 3 &4
peutic Services at the Prison for Women. Forum on Women in Prison, 6,
1. Retrieved June 22, 2003 from http://www.csc.scc.gc.ca/text/
pblct/forum/e06/e061ine_e.shtml.
Kupers, T. (2001). Written Testimony Re: Everson v. Michigan Department
of Corrections. Case No. 00-73133, Feb. 16, 2001, U.S. District Court, E.
Dist. of Michigan, Honorable Avern Cohn, Judge.
Lake, E. S. (1993). “An Exploration of the Violent Victim Experiences of
Female Offenders.” Violence and Victims, 8, 41-51.
Lord, E. (1995). “A Prison Superintendent’s Perspective on Women in
Prison.” The Prison Journal, 75, 257-269.
Louise, B. (1998). “The Victimization… and… Revictimization of Female
Offenders.” Corrections Today, 6, 106-110.
MacKinnon, C. (1993). “Feminism, Marxism, Method and the State: Toward
a Feminist Jurisprudence.” In P. B. Bart 8c E. G. Moran (Eds.), Violence
Against Women: The Bloody Footprints. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Marcus-Mendoza, S. T., Klein-Saffran, J., & Lutze, F. (1998). “A Feminist
Examination of Boot Camp Prison Programs for Women.” Women 8c
Therapy, 21, 173-185.
McClellan, D. S., Farabee, D., 8c Crouch, B. M. (1997). “Early Victimization,
Drug Use, and Criminality: A Comparison of Male and Female Prisoners.”
Criminal Justice and Behavior, 24, 455-476.
McQuaid, S., & Ehrenreich, J. H. (1998). “Women in Prison: Approaches to
Understanding the Lives of a Forgotten Population.” Af filia Journal of
Women and Social Work, 13, 233-246.
Meyer, M. (1992, November 9). “Coercing Sex Behind Bars: Hawaii’s Prison
Scandal.” Newsweek, pp. 23-25.
Morris, A., 8c Wilkinson, C. (1995). “Responding to Female Prisoners’
Needs.” The Prison Journal, 75, 295-305.
Moss, A. (1999). “Sexual Misconduct among Staff and Inmates.” In P. Carlson
& J. Garrett (Eds.), Prison and Jail Administration: Practice and Theory.
New York, NY: Aspen Publishers.
Neisen, J. H. (1993). “Healing from Cultural Victimization: Recovery from
Shame Due to Heterosexism. “Journal of Gay 8c Lesbian Psychotherapy, 2,
49-63.
O’Keefe, M. (1998). “Posttraumatic Stress Disorder among Incarcerated Battered
Women who Killed their Abusers and those Incarcerated for Other
Offenses. “Journal of Traumatic Stress, 11, 71-78.
Owen, B., & Bloom, B.(1995). Profiling the Needs of California’s Women
Prisoners: A Need’s Assessment. Retrieved June 22, 2003 from
http://www.nicic.org/pubs/1995/012451.pdf.
Pilkington, N. W., 8c D’Augelli, A. R. (1995). ‘Victimization of Lesbian, Gay,
and Bisexual Youth in Community Settings.” Journal of Community Psychology,
23, 33-56.
Pollock, J. (2002). Women, Prison, and Crime (2nd Ed.). Pacific Grove, CA:
Brooks/Cole.
Pomeroy, E. C, 8c Kiam, R. (1998). “Meeting the Mental Health Needs of
This content downloaded from 160.39.86.104 on Mon, 06 Jul 2015 16:15:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Women sStudies Quarterly 2004: 3& 4 115
Incarcerated Women.” Health & Social Work, 23, 71-75.
Remer, P. (2003) . “Empowerment Feminist Therapy.” Paper presented at the
American Psychological Association Conference, August 7-10, 2003.
Scarth, K., 8c McLean. (1994). The Psychological Assessment of Women in
Prison. Forum on Women in Prison, 6, 1. Retrieved June 22, 2003 from
http://www.csc. sec. gc.ca/ text/ pblct/forum/e06/e061h_e.shtml.
Singer, M. I., Bussey, J., Song, L. Y, 8c Lunghofer, L. (1995). “The Psychosocial
Issues of Women Serving Time in Jail.” Social Work, 40, 103-113.
Smith, C, 8c Thornberry, T. P. (1995). “The Relationship Between Childhood
Maltreatment and Adolescent Involvement in Delinquency.” Criminology,
33, 451-481.
Smith, C. (2001). “Sexual Abuse Against Women in Prison.” Criminal Justice,
16, 30-38.
Snell, T. L., 8c Morton, D. C. (1994). Women in Prison: Survey of State Prison
Inmates, 1991. Washington DC: U. S. Department of Justice.
Stein, B. (1996) . “Sexual Abuse: Guards Let Rapists into Women’s Cell.” The
Progressive, 60, 23-24.
Struckman-Johnson, C, Struckman-Johnson, D. L., Rucker, L., Bumby, K., 8c
Donaldson, S. (1996). “Sexual Coercion Reported by Men and Women in
Prison. “Journal of Sex Research, 33, 67-76.
Tjaden, P., Thoeness, N., & Allison, C.J. (1999). “Comparing Violence over
the Life Span in Samples of Same-sex and Opposite-sex Cohabitants.” Violence
and Victims, 14, 413-425.
Walker, L. (1992). “Battered Women Syndrome and Self-defense.” Notre
Dame Journal of Law, Ethics, and Public Policy, 6, 321-334.
Walker, L. (1994) . “Are Personality Disorders Gender Biased?” In S. A. Kirk 8c
S. D. Einbinder (Eds.), Controversial Issues in Mental Health (pp. 21-29).
New York: Allyn 8c Bacon.
West, C. M. (2002). “Battered, Black, and Blue: An Overview of Violence in
the Lives of Black Women.” Women & Therapy, 25, 5-27.
Widom, C. S. (1989). “Does Violence Beget Violence? A Critical Examination
of the Literature.” Psychological Bulletin, 106, 3-28.
Widom, C. S., 8c Ames, A. (1994). “Criminal Consequences of Childhood
Sexual Victimization.” Child Abuse 8c Neglect, 1, 303-318.
Wyatt, G. E., Guthrie, D., 8c Notgrass, C. M. (1992). “Differential Effects of
Women’s Child Sexual Abuse and Subsequent Sexual Revictimization.”
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 60, 167-173.
Zupan, L. L. (1992). “Men Guarding Women: An Analysis of the Employment
of Male Correctional Officers in Prisons for Women.” Journal of
Criminal Justice, 20, 297-309.
Danielle Dirks (ddirks@soc.ufl.edu) is a graduate student researcher at the
University of Florida in the Department of Sociology. Her research interests
include racial and ethnic relations, gender, and beauty.
This content downloaded from 160.39.86.104 on Mon, 06 Jul 2015 16:15:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

*Women’s criminality often linked to their victimization and traumatization, according to Dirks. Dirks suggests we approach the issue of women in prisons by asking “how current structures and relations of power facilitate the incarceration of an increasingly high number of nonviolent women.” Do you agree? Do you disagree? Discuss by reflecting on Woman at Point Zero, after writing a short review on what the novel is about, and the key questions it addresses.

Your review should not be a mere summary of the book. You should identify and discuss the key argument(s) the author is making, and what you think about these arguments.

* Have you watched “Orange is the new Black”? If you have watched the series, reflect on one incident or character in light of the readings for this session.

*Try to link your analysis to what we have discussed in the previous sessions on intersectionality and on the politics of representation.

Use the questions above to guide your writing.

Please submit a maximum of 3 pages (700 words). Use Times New Roman 12pt font.

-Your writing should be clear, concise and free of grammatical and other mistakes
The Feminist Press at the City University of New York is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access
to Women’s Studies Quarterly.
http://www.jstor.org
Sexual Revictimization and Retraumatization of Women in Prison
Author(s): Danielle Dirks
Source: Women’s Studies Quarterly, Vol. 32, No. 3/4, Women, Crime, and the Criminal Justice
System (Fall – Winter, 2004), pp. 102-115
Published by: The Feminist Press at the City University of New York
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40004582
Accessed: 06-07-2015 16:15 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
This content downloaded from 160.39.86.104 on Mon, 06 Jul 2015 16:15:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Sexual Revictimization and
Retraumatization of Women in Prison
Danielle Dirks
When women in foreign countries are sexually abused or sexually exploited by
government employees, it is a human rights violation (e.g., Fitzgerald, 1992),
but when the same thing happens in the United States, it is a “prison sex
scandal” (e.g., Meyer, 1992) (excerpt from Baro, 1997).
Understanding of the role of victimization and traumatization in
women’s lives has recently begun to inform the growing body of
knowledge on women’s offending (Arnold, 1995; Faith, 1993).
Examining the life histories of incarcerated women reveals an extensive
and pervasive array of physical, emotional, and sexual abuses
(Browne, Miller, & Maguin, 1999; Girshick, 1999; Lake, 1993; Owen
8c Bloom, 1995; Singer, Bussey, Song, 8c Lunghofer, 1995). Many of
these women have experienced at least one form of sexual victimization
in their lifetimes, many of them before the age of 18 (Bloom,
Chesney, 8c Owen, 1994; Heney, 1990). For women with previous histories
of abuse, prison life is apt to simulate the abuse dynamics
already established in these women’s lives, thus perpetuating
women’s further revictimization and retraumatization while serving
time. Women’s experiences of revictimization and retraumatization
need to be addressed by prison staff, policy, procedure, and programming.
A feminist framework may offer a lens by which to view
these experiences and offer insight for change.
Arnold (1995) suggests that the interrelated processes that govern
women’s victimization and criminalization begin with abuse –
including physical, sexual, economic, and racial. Through a process
of “structural dislocation,” institutional forms of oppression such as
sexism, racism, and classism aid in the removal of girls and women
from primary socializing agents such as families and schools. Facing
lives filled with “poverty, illiteracy, substance abuse, mental illness,
childhood sexual abuse, and an intricate web of life-threatening
physical, psychological, racial, and social problems,” many of these
women’s experiences mark their advent into the criminal justice system
(Johnson, 2002, p. 103).
102
This content downloaded from 160.39.86.104 on Mon, 06 Jul 2015 16:15:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Women ‘s Studies Quarterly 2004: 3& 4 103
Feminist criminology has moved beyond examining the crimes
of women, and has begun to examine the broader links that may
explain women’s offending. For example, a study by Widom (1989)
found that abused girls were more likely than girls without histories
of abuse to become criminals or delinquents. Girls who had been sexually
abused as children also have an increased risk for adult arrest
for prostitution (Widom 8c Ames, 1994). Other studies have also
linked early childhood abuse with later criminal activity (American
Correctional Association, 1990; Lake, 1993). Much of the research in
this area has focused on the links between childhood abuse, depression,
substance abuse, and subsequent criminality (McClellan,
Farabee, & Crouch, 1997; Singer et al., 1995; Smith & Thornberry,
1995).
Prevalence and Severity of Women’s Histories of Abuse
Given the link between victimization and criminalization, the extant
research literature suggests that women in prison have extensive histories
of emotional, physical, and sexual abuse. Incarcerated women
are estimated to have rates of abuse six to ten times that of women in
the general population (Pollock, 2002). Although victimization and
traumatization rates vary among samples and research methods, the
lives of women in prison have often been characterized by the “prevalence
and severity” of physical and sexual abuse throughout their
childhoods and adult lives (Browne, Miller, 8c Maguin, 1999).
Women in both state and federal prisons are more likely to have
histories of abuse than men in prison (McClellan et al., 1997; Snell 8c
Morton, 1994). A 1991 study by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS)
revealed that nearly half (48%) of women they interviewed had been
physically or sexually assaulted prior to their incarceration (Snell 8c
Morton, 1994). Citing that the BJS study (1991) methodology may
have suppressed reporting, more recent research has tackled the
goal of filling in the gaps of previous literature to elucidate a more
comprehensive understanding of the victimization and traumatization
experiences of incarcerated women (Browne et al., 1999; Owen
& Bloom, 1995).
Owen and Bloom (1995) found that 80% of their sample of
women in the California penal system had experienced some form of
physical or sexual abuse in their lifetimes. In a study of women in a
New York maximum-security facility, Browne, Miller, and Maguin
(1999) found that 70% had experienced “severe physical violence”
from a caretaker during adolescence and 75% reported experiences
This content downloaded from 160.39.86.104 on Mon, 06 Jul 2015 16:15:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
104 Women ‘s Studies Quarterly 2004: 3 & 4
of physical abuse from an intimate partner in adulthood. Nearly 60%
of these women reported sexual abuse during childhood or adolescence
and 77% reported some form of victimization, including
threats of assault involving weapons to physical and sexual attacks by
“nonintimates,” over their lifetimes. Lake (1993) found that 85% of
the 83 women in her sample had experienced at least one form of
violent victimization including physical and sexual abuse and assault
by parents, siblings, relatives, partners, or strangers. Similar to the
rate reported by Browne, Miller, and Maguin, nearly three-quarters
of the women in this sample had also been physically or sexually
assaulted or robbed by strangers. When including “emotional abuse,”
Girshick (1999) found that 90% of the women in her prison sample
had been abused physically, sexually, or emotionally as adults. Over
forty percent (43%) of the women in this sample reported being sexually
assaulted.
Singer, Bussey, Song, and Lunghofer (1995) found that 81% of
their sample had experienced sexual victimization when combining
experiences of child and adult sexual abuse. In this sample, roughly
half of the women were serving time for prostitution. Over two-thirds
(68%) of the sample experienced one act of forced sexual activity;
nearly half (48%) reported experiencing sexual violence before the
age of 18. Bloom, Chesney, and Owen (1994) found that 31% of their
sample of California women in prison reported childhood sexual
abuse and 23% had experienced sexual abuse as adults.
Although women of color are disproportionately overrepresented
in the penal system (Johnson, 2002) , very little research has
focused on how varying intersections of race, class, and sexuality create
diverse victimization experiences for women in prison prior to
their incarceration. A recent literature review by West (2002)
revealed that black women are commonly victims of childhood sexual
abuse, intimate partner violence, sexual assault, and sexual
harassment and are overrepresented in “severe” categories of childhood
sexual abuse. Black women’s experiences are often shaped by
class distinctions as low-income black women experience elevated
rates of sexual assault (Kalichman et al., 1998). Black American
women are also significantly less likely to disclose sexual assault and
more likely to have repeated assaults than white American women,
both of which can have serious effects on recovery from rape trauma
(Wyatt, Guthrie, & Notgrass, 1992).
Lesbians may also face elevated rates of physical and verbal abuse
in comparison to heterosexual women (Balsam, 2003) and these victimization
experiences are sometimes directly related to their sexual
This content downloaded from 160.39.86.104 on Mon, 06 Jul 2015 16:15:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Women sStudies Quarterly 2004: 3& 4 105
orientation (Balsam, 2003; Pilkington & D’Augelli, 1995). For example,
women who identify as lesbian may be at increased risk for verbal
and physical abuse in childhood and adolescence, both from their
families and their communities as a number of researchers are beginning
to find (Pilkington 8c D’Augelli, 1995; Tjaden, Thoeness, & Allison,
1999). Lesbians may also experience a form of “cultural
victimization” characterized by the shame, negative sense of self, and
“victim mentality” resulting from living in a heterosexist society
(Neisen, 1993, as cited in Balsam, 2003). Undoubtedly, interlocking
and intersecting experiences of oppression have impacted the lives
of women entering and living in prison as well. Overall, the pervasive
existence of victimization has had a significant influence on the lives
of all women as both victims and witnesses to this violence (Bloom,
Owen, Covington, 8c Raede., 2003). Prison dynamics may create
uniquely harmful experiences for women who already experience
cultural victimization in the forms of racism, classism, and heterosexism
– among other forms of oppression in their everyday lives.
Vulnerable Women in Vulnerable Positions
Victimization is a “lifelong possibility” for women as childhood abuse
experiences often follow women into their adult lives (Girshick,
1999). According to Finkelhor and Browne (1985), four processes
shape early traumatization experiences: traumatic sexualization,
powerlessness, stigmatization, and betrayal. These early childhood
boundary violations can often shape women’s later experiences in
life in creating a weak sense of self, feelings of guilt or shame, and
deprivation, thus shaping women’s further alienation and vulnerability
(Girshick, 1999; Heney 8c Kristiansen, 1998). Many women who
have been battered, or women who suffer from Battered Woman’s
Syndrome, 1 often experience low self-esteem, a sense of powerlessness
or worthlessness, and self-blame (Walker, 1992, 1994). Research
has documented the links between previous victimization and subsequent
incidents of revictimization; these links represent a constellation
of issues regarding women’s mental health and well-being
(Wyattetal., 1992).
Given the prevalence and severity of the experiences of previous
sexual victimization and traumatization among incarcerated women,
many women in prison suffer from the effects of childhood and adult
sexual abuse. If fact, a study by O’Keefe (1998) found that many
women in prison score high on measures of Post-Traumatic Stress
Disorder (PTSD), a disorder characterized by excessive fear, flashThis
content downloaded from 160.39.86.104 on Mon, 06 Jul 2015 16:15:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
106 Women ‘s Studies Quarterly 2004: 3 &f 4
backs of trauma, and diminished sense of well-being that affects
more women than men. As Girshick (1999) writes, these women are
already vulnerable and then placed in further vulnerable positions
detrimental to their emotional and physical well-being.
Revictimization and Retraumatization
As Louise (1998) reports, “Unfortunately, the prison system often
contributes to the revictimization of these women by perpetuating
feelings of powerlessness and vulnerability” (p. 107). Heney and Kristiansen
(1998) posit that women in prison are likely to be reexposed
to the four “powerful traumatizing processes” of childhood sexual
abuse outlined by Finkelhor and Browne (1985) during their incarceration.
A legal review by Kupers (2001) outlines the major issues
pertaining to women’s experiences of revictimization and retraumatization.
He acknowledges that women’s experiences of sexual
harassment and abuse, lack of privacy, and retaliation during incarceration
may further increase women’s risk for depression, anxiety,
PTSD, and decreased overall well being before release from prison.
Prison procedures that control every aspect of an imprisoned
woman’s life may indeed trigger experiences of previous abuses
(Heney & Kristiansen, 1998; Lord, 1995; Louise, 1998).
In the Name of Security
Women’s traumatic sexualization and powerlessness are recreated by
“institutionalized assaults by line staff on prisoner’s bodies which are
conducted in the name of security” (Faith, 1993, p. 229). These
assaults reside in the realm of staff sexual misconduct outlined by
Moss (1998) as “sexual behavior directed toward inmates, including
sexual abuse, sexual assault, sexual harassment, physical conduct of a
sexual nature, sexual obscenity, invasion of privacy and conversations
or correspondence of a romantic or intimate nature” and can have
devastating effects on women’s well-being during incarceration
(189). Incarceration also re triggers abuses with grossly unequal
power dynamics, invasive searches, restraints, reading of mail, and a
lack of privacy (Girshick, 1999).
Prison power dynamics are shaped by the structural distinction
between those in power – prison staff and prison administration –
and those without power, the prison inmates. As a result, this structural
distinction serves as a constant reminder to women in prison
that they do not have autonomy over their own bodies or well-being
This content downloaded from 160.39.86.104 on Mon, 06 Jul 2015 16:15:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Women’s Studies Quarterly 2004: 3& 4 107
in prison; this message serves to reinforce women’s sense of powerlessness.
Because imprisonment necessitates that these women have
no choice but to comply, these acts also serve to further women’s
sense of powerlessness, thus retriggering abuse dynamics found in
childhood and adulthood. Kupers (2001) adds that the absence of a
“safe place” for women in prison occludes women from retreating to
a place of healing, for women in prison, there may be “no safe haven”
from ongoing abuse (Girshick, 1999).
The existence of male correctional officers in women’s facilities
may exacerbate power imbalances as women must rely on men for
basic necessities, phone privileges, and visiting privileges (Human
Rights Watch, 1996). Correctional officers’ absolute power over giving
warnings, infractions, and punitive measures may provide opportunities
for the development of exploitative relationships that hinge
on “favor-giving” and avoiding punishment (Amnesty International,
1999; Human Rights Watch, 1996). It is important to note that these
patterns of misconduct have also been found among female officers
as well, and that sexually exploitative relationships do not always have
to involve abuse or violence- power often works just as well (Estrich,
1987). The exploited positions of women in prison places them in
the role of “bad girls,” thus denying them legitimate victim status
because they are viewed as sexually accessible and likely to consent to
further exploitation and abuse (Baro, 1997; MacKinnon, 1993).
The Reality of Threat
As Zupan (1992) suggests, women in prison are constantly aware of
the threat and possibility for sexual assault in prison. The research literature
focusing on women’s imprisonment experiences indicates
that the risk of sexual assault resembles more of a reality for many
women in prison. A report by the Human Rights Watch (1996) organization
revealed that many women in prison suffered from wellestablished
patterns of sexual degradation, abuse, and assault at the
hands of prison staff and inmates. An investigative report by Amnesty
International (1999) also cited that many of the incarcerated women
they interviewed in the United States reported on a range of abuses
by prison staff including the use of sexually or racially offensive language,
inappropriate touching of women’s breasts or genitals during
searches, inappropriate surveillance while women were unclothed,
and rape.
An anonymous mail survey of men and women incarcerated in
the Midwest indicated that 7.7% of the women reported being presThis
content downloaded from 160.39.86.104 on Mon, 06 Jul 2015 16:15:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
108 Women ‘s Studies Quarterly 2004: 3 & 4
sured or forced to have sexual contact against their will while incarcerated
(S truckman Johnson, Struckman-Johnson, Rucker, Bumby,
8c Donaldson, 1996). The majority of incidents reported in a followup
study by the same authors (Alarid, 2000) were perpetrated by
other women inmates, contrary to the findings of the Human Rights
Watch (1996), Amnesty International (1999), and Baro (1997), who
indicate that male staff often use “terror, retaliation, and repeated
victimization to coerce and intimidate confined women” (Dumond,
2000, p. 409) . In fact, women are more likely than men to be sexually
abused by correctional officers (Zupan, 1992). When women are
housed at men’s facilities, they risk being sexually assaulted by both
male officers and male inmates (Amnesty International, 1999;
Human Rights Watch, 1996; Stein, 1996). Eigenberg (1994) cautions
that the rates of reported sexual assaults in prison may be low estimates,
as inmates may feel stigmatized as a result of their experiences
and also may fear revealing abuse to researchers or prison authorities
for a number of reasons, some including fear of retaliation or fear of
further abuse. Research examining women’s experiences and rates
of sexual abuse and assault in prison are needed, as the majority of
the relevant literature focuses on male inmates (Dumond, 1992;
Struckman-Johnson etal., 1996).
A Feminist Perspective for Change
As incarceration rates of women continue to surpass those of men,
examining the extensive abuse histories of women is an increasingly
important topic of research for prison programming and policy. As
Lord (1995) suggests, “our questions need to be about women, not
about crime or prisons, but about who the women are and how they
become who they are” (p. 259). A feminist framework encompasses
the context with which women are both victimized and criminalized.
Baro (1997) suggests that women’s experiences in the criminal justice
system have been thematically linked by abandonment. She
argues that prison administrations, the legal system, and scholars
have abandoned the plight of women’s continuing sexual abuse and
exploitation within the prison system.
The extant literature does appear to support this notion; there is
a notable dearth of prison policy and programming directed toward
aiding in women’s recovery from traumatization and victimization
(Chesney-Lind, 1998; Coll, Miller, Fields, & Mathews, 1998; Covington,
1998; Gray, Mays & Stohr, 1995; McQuaid 8c Ehrenreich, 1998;
Morris 8c Wilkinson, 1995; Pomeroy 8c Kiam, 1998). Change needs to
This content downloaded from 160.39.86.104 on Mon, 06 Jul 2015 16:15:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Women ‘s Studies Quarterly 2004: 3& 4 109
be directed toward creating prison policy and programming that
attend to the omnipresent experiences of abuse and intersecting
oppressions in the lives of these women. A feminist framework for
change and healing has suggested that “empowerment” should be a
goal of counseling and programming within the prison. As suggested
by Remer (2003), empowerment strategies should encourage people
to identify and challenge the conditions of their lives that may serve to
devalue and subordinate them – those conditions that effectively deny
them equality of opportunity and access to valued life resources.
Feminist therapists examine the broader context of women’s
experiences and aid people to connect their own experiences and
actions to foster, “resistance and personal integrity rather than infantilization,
self-directedness rather than conformity, and self-esteem
rather than self-doubt” (Marcus-Mendoza, Klein-Saffran, 8c Lutze,
1998, p. 181). These goals present unique paradoxes in the context
of a prison (Hannah-Moffat, 1995, 2000; Heney 8c Kristiansen, 1998),
and many authors have enumerated the dilemmas with feminist
ideals “behind bars” and these critiques should be taken into consideration
when developing prison programming and policy (HannahMoffat,
1995, 2000; Heney 8c Kristiansen, 1998; Kendall, 1993, 1994).
However, the ideals of feminist therapy and a feminist approach to
empowerment (as compared to a criminal-justice approach to
empowerment) have been endorsed as the most appropriate
approach for women’s healing from traumatization and victimization
while in prison (Kendall, 1993; Scarth 8c McLean, 1994).
One promising study (Kendall, 1993) indicated that 92% of
women interviewed at the Canadian Prison for Women reported that
they were ready to deal with the issues they were working on in counseling.
The women in this study were also overwhelmingly supportive
of the feminist therapy techniques employed by the counselors.
Indeed, programming aimed at repairing and recovering from
trauma has been cited by women in prison as one of their most important
programming needs (Gray et al., 1995). Counseling in prison
should be informed by the most up-to-date literature on trauma and
recovery and should be accessible to all women who would like to participate.
Feminist therapy, as well as other forms of therapy, should
not, however, be pushed upon women who may not be ready to deal
with painful issues in their lives. Forms of therapy and counseling
should not serve to further revictimize or victim-blame.
Other researchers have additionally warned against counselors
and prison staff fulfilling confusing and conflicting roles of both
“therapist and disciplinarian” (Marcus-Mendoza et al., 1998).
This content downloaded from 160.39.86.104 on Mon, 06 Jul 2015 16:15:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
110 Women ‘s Studies Quarterly 2004: 3 & 4
Although training correctional officers to treat women in prison with
esteem, empathy, and compassion could result positively, HannahMoffat
(1995) writes that, “it is difficult to envision the development
of meaningful, respectful, and supportive relationships when guards
continue to perform strip searches, open women’s mail, monitor
their relations with others within and outside of the institution, and
at times punish the prisoners” (p. 144). By exploring and creating
separate roles for therapists and correctional officers, women can
learn that “intimidation and intimacy do not have to coexist in all
relationships” (Marcus-Mendoza et al., 1998, p. 182).
A feminist framework suggests that all those who work in the
prison should value women’s diverse experiences and that women
should not be treated in a manner that retraumatizes them. Women
who have had previous experiences of victimization in their lifetimes
are more likely to have repeated experiences of trauma in their lives.
Placing vulnerable women in prison among insensitive or predatory
officers may have serious implications for the healing process, as one
prisoner counselor shared that correctional officers often target
women “like a radar” who have histories of sexual abuse (Human
Rights Watch, 1996). It may then not be surprising to learn that the
legal system has turned a blind eye to both consensual and nonconsensual
sexual contact between inmates and prison staff.
Arguing that cases of sexual misconduct that involve “romance”
or some level of consensual contact are too difficult to prosecute,
those in the legal arena choose to do nothing to aid women who have
been exploited or abused by male prison staff (Baro, 1997; Human
Rights Watch, 1996). These legal standards also attempt to jeopardize
women’s victim status by stigmatizing them as “inmates” or “bad
girls,” thus occluding any opportunity for their experiences to fall
under the purview of “real rape” (Estrich, 1987; MacKinnon, 1993).
Valuing the lives of all women without dichotomizing “good girls”
and “bad girls” (even along racial, class, and sexuality lines) should
be one goal of creating change within the prison and legal milieu.
The daunting reporting procedures and threat of retaliation
serve to further revictimize women. Those who choose to report
abuses should be afforded greater protection in reporting abuses.
Women’s disclosure should be made confidentially, and retaliation
should be taken seriously (Amnesty International, 1999; Human
Rights Watch, 1996; Smith, 2001). More-explicit policies and laws
that directly prohibit any sexual contact between inmates and staff
may also aid in investigations and prosecutions by clearly stating that
consensual contact is not possible in the context of a prison (Moss,
This content downloaded from 160.39.86.104 on Mon, 06 Jul 2015 16:15:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Women ‘s Studies Quarterly 2004: 3& 4 111
1999). Prison administration should also implement extensive training
for employees and inmates on new procedures that ensure the
dignity of women’s bodies and rights; invasive and unnecessary
searches should be prohibited to reduce the likelihood of revictimization
and retraumatization (Bloom et al., 2003).
As Baro (1997) has suggested, until recently little scholarly
research has been dedicated to exploring the lives of sexually abused
and exploited women within the criminal justice and penal system.
The links between childhood and adult sexual abuse, substance
abuse, mental health issues, and criminality has paved the way for a
number of empirical questions. Research might usefully examine the
efficacy of various prison dynamics and programming. In the slippery
politics of “empowerment” and “women-centered” and feminist
prisons, how women have fared as a result of various empowerment
strategies needs also to be explored. Qualitatively examining the life
histories of women is one research methodology that may provide a
richer, more-detailed illustration of the intricate links between victimization
and criminalization in women’s lives. A thorough examination
of women’s intersecting identities and experiences of
oppression also desperately needs to be explored as certain groups of
women – namely, women of color, poor women, and women with
children – are disproportionately incarcerated and victimized.
Finally, outcomes for women as a result of policy or programming
changes also need to be explored in relation to recidivism rates.
Conclusion: From Victims to Survivors
One critique of a feminist perspective on women’s imprisonment is
that it still exists within the realm of incarceration and punitive ideology.
Hannah-Moffat (1995) calls on feminists to “challenge this
institutional base and consider alternative systems and meanings of
sanctioning” (p. 147). Instead of questioning how we can change the
prison system, she suggests, “we could instead proceed with a question
about how current structures and relations of power facilitate
the incarceration of an increasingly high number of nonviolent
women” (p. 149). If we understand that women’s criminality is inextricably
linked to their victimization and traumatization, we also need
to then examine the structural changes that must occur to disrupt
the current cycles of victimization in the lives of girls and women.
Some individuals may question how as a society we could afford such
a structural disruption, but the question still remains, how can we
afford not to make these critical changes?
This content downloaded from 160.39.86.104 on Mon, 06 Jul 2015 16:15:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
112 Women’s Studies Quarterly 2004: 3 & 4
NOTES
1 . Battered Woman’s Syndrome is generally recognized as a subcategory of
Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder that is characterized by the social, emotional,
physical, and psychological symptoms of depression, low selfesteem,
and isolation that may often follow the personal experience of a
series of violent or harmful acts by an intimate partner. For victims of
interpersonal violence such as this, symptoms can resemble those exhibited
by persons who have experienced traumatic events, such as sexual
assault survivors or prisoners of war.
REFERENCES:
Alarid, L. F. (2000). “Sexual Assault and Coercions Among Incarcerated
Women Prisoners: Excerpts from Prison Letters.” The Prison Journal, 80,
391-406.
American Correctional Association. (1990). The Female Offender: What
Does the Future Hold? Washington, DC: St. Mary’s Press.
Amnesty International USA. (1999). Not Part of My Sentence: Violations of
the Human Rights of Women in Custody. New York: Amnesty International
USA.
Arnold, R. (1995). Processes of Victimization and Criminalization of Black
Women.” In B. R. Price 8c N. L. Sokoloff (Eds.), The Criminal Justice System
and Women: Offenders, Victims and Workers (pp. 136-146). New
York: McGraw-Hill.
Balsam, K. F. (2003). “Traumatic Victimization in the Lives of Lesbian and
Bisexual Women: A Contextual Approach. “Journal of Lesbian Studies, 7,
1-14.
Baro, A. (1997). “Spheres of Consent: An Analysis of the Sexual Abuse and
Sexual Exploitation of Women Incarcerated in the State of Hawaii.”
Women and Criminal Justice, 8, 61-84.
Bloom, B., Chesney, L. M., 8c Owen, B. (1994). Women in California Prisons:
Hidden Victims of the War on Drugs. San Francisco, CA: Center on Juvenile
and Criminal Justice.
Bloom, B., Owen, B., Covmgton, S. S., 8c Raeder, M. (2003). Gender Responsive
Strategies: Research, Practice, and Guiding Principles for Women
Offenders. Retrieved August 11, 2003 from http://www.nicic.org.
Brown, L. (1996). Subversive Dialogues: Theory in Feminist Therapy. New
York: Basic Books.
Browne, A., Miller, B., 8c Maguin, E. (1999). “Prevalence and Severity of Lifetime
Physical and Sexual Victimization Among Incarcerated Women.”
International Journal of Law and Psychology, 2, 301-322.
Chesney-Lind, M. (1998). “The Forgotten Offender.” Corrections Today, 60,
66-71.
Coll, C. G., Miller, J. B., Fields, J. P., 8c Mathews, B. (1998). “The Experiences
of Women in Prison: Implications for Services and Prevention.” Women 8c
Therapy, 20, 11-28.
This content downloaded from 160.39.86.104 on Mon, 06 Jul 2015 16:15:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Women ‘s Studies Quarterly 2004: 3& 4 113
Covington, S. S. (1998). “Women in Prison: Approaches in the Treatment of
our Most Invisible Population.” Women & Therapy, 21, 141-155.
Dumond, R. W. (1992) . “The Sexual Assault of Male Inmates in Incarcerated
Settings.” International Journal of the Sociology of Law, 20, 135-157.
Dumond, R. W. (2000). Inmate Sexual Assault: The Plague that Still Persists.”
The Prison Journal, 8, 407-414.
Eigenberg, H. M. (1994). “Male Rape in Prisons: Examining the Relationship
Between Correctional Officers’ Attitudes Toward Male Rape and
their Willingness to Respond to Acts of Rape.” In M. C. Braswell, R. H.
Montgomery, Jr., & L.X. Lombardo (Eds.), Prison Violence in America
(2nd Ed.) (pp. 145-165). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.
Estrich, S. (1987). Real Rape: How the Legal System Victimizes Women.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Faith, K. (1993). Unruly Women: The Politics of Confinement and Resistance.
Vancouver: Press Gang Publishers.
Finkelhor, D., and Browne, A. (1985). “The Traumatic Impact of Child Sexual
Abuse: A Conceptualization.” The American Journal of Orthopsychiatry,
5, 530-541.
Fitzgerald, D. (1992, July 31) . “The Secret Torture.” New Statesman 8c Society,
5,5.
Girshick, L. (1999). No Safe Haven: Stories From Women in Prison. New
York: Northeastern University Press.
Gray, T, Mays, L. G., 8c Stohr, M. K. (1995). “Inmate Needs and Programming
in Exclusively Women’s Jails.” The Prison Journal, 7, 186-202.
Hannah-Moffat, K. (1995). “Feminine Fortresses: Women Centered Prisons?”
The Prison Journal, 75, 135-165.
Hannah-Moffat, K. (2000). “Prisons that Empower: Neo-liberal Governance
in Canadian Women’s Prisons.” British Journal of Criminology, 4, 510-531.
Heney, J. (1990) . Report on Self-injurious Behavior in the Kingston Prison for
Women. Ottawa: Ministry of the Solicitor General, Corrections Branch.
Heney, J., 8c Kristiansen, C. M. (1998). “An Analysis of the Impact of Prison
on Women Survivors of Childhood Sexual Abuse.” Women 8c Therapy, 20,
29-44.
Human Rights Watch Women’s Rights Project. (1996). All Too Familiar: Sexual
Abuse of Women in U.S. State Prisons. New York: Human Rights Watch.
Johnson, H. D. (2002). Evie Evan’s Life History: Her Sociological Sojourn
from a Lifetime of Crime to a Life of Dignity. Retrieved June 22, 2003,
fromwww.rcgd.isr.umich.edu/prba/perspectives/springsummer2002/joh
nson.pdf.
Kalichman, S. C, Williams, E. A., Cherry, C, Belcher, L., 8c Nachimson, D.
(1998). “Sexual Coercion, Domestic Violence, and Condom Use among
Low-income African American Women.” Journal of Women’s Health, 7,
371-378.
Kendall, K. (1993). Program Evaluation of Therapeutic Services at the
Prison for Women. Ottawa: Correctional Service of Canada.
Kendall, K. (1994). Creating Real Choices: A Program Evaluation of TheraThis
content downloaded from 160.39.86.104 on Mon, 06 Jul 2015 16:15:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
114 Women ‘s Studies Quarterly 2004: 3 &4
peutic Services at the Prison for Women. Forum on Women in Prison, 6,
1. Retrieved June 22, 2003 from http://www.csc.scc.gc.ca/text/
pblct/forum/e06/e061ine_e.shtml.
Kupers, T. (2001). Written Testimony Re: Everson v. Michigan Department
of Corrections. Case No. 00-73133, Feb. 16, 2001, U.S. District Court, E.
Dist. of Michigan, Honorable Avern Cohn, Judge.
Lake, E. S. (1993). “An Exploration of the Violent Victim Experiences of
Female Offenders.” Violence and Victims, 8, 41-51.
Lord, E. (1995). “A Prison Superintendent’s Perspective on Women in
Prison.” The Prison Journal, 75, 257-269.
Louise, B. (1998). “The Victimization… and… Revictimization of Female
Offenders.” Corrections Today, 6, 106-110.
MacKinnon, C. (1993). “Feminism, Marxism, Method and the State: Toward
a Feminist Jurisprudence.” In P. B. Bart 8c E. G. Moran (Eds.), Violence
Against Women: The Bloody Footprints. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Marcus-Mendoza, S. T., Klein-Saffran, J., & Lutze, F. (1998). “A Feminist
Examination of Boot Camp Prison Programs for Women.” Women 8c
Therapy, 21, 173-185.
McClellan, D. S., Farabee, D., 8c Crouch, B. M. (1997). “Early Victimization,
Drug Use, and Criminality: A Comparison of Male and Female Prisoners.”
Criminal Justice and Behavior, 24, 455-476.
McQuaid, S., & Ehrenreich, J. H. (1998). “Women in Prison: Approaches to
Understanding the Lives of a Forgotten Population.” Af filia Journal of
Women and Social Work, 13, 233-246.
Meyer, M. (1992, November 9). “Coercing Sex Behind Bars: Hawaii’s Prison
Scandal.” Newsweek, pp. 23-25.
Morris, A., 8c Wilkinson, C. (1995). “Responding to Female Prisoners’
Needs.” The Prison Journal, 75, 295-305.
Moss, A. (1999). “Sexual Misconduct among Staff and Inmates.” In P. Carlson
& J. Garrett (Eds.), Prison and Jail Administration: Practice and Theory.
New York, NY: Aspen Publishers.
Neisen, J. H. (1993). “Healing from Cultural Victimization: Recovery from
Shame Due to Heterosexism. “Journal of Gay 8c Lesbian Psychotherapy, 2,
49-63.
O’Keefe, M. (1998). “Posttraumatic Stress Disorder among Incarcerated Battered
Women who Killed their Abusers and those Incarcerated for Other
Offenses. “Journal of Traumatic Stress, 11, 71-78.
Owen, B., & Bloom, B.(1995). Profiling the Needs of California’s Women
Prisoners: A Need’s Assessment. Retrieved June 22, 2003 from
http://www.nicic.org/pubs/1995/012451.pdf.
Pilkington, N. W., 8c D’Augelli, A. R. (1995). ‘Victimization of Lesbian, Gay,
and Bisexual Youth in Community Settings.” Journal of Community Psychology,
23, 33-56.
Pollock, J. (2002). Women, Prison, and Crime (2nd Ed.). Pacific Grove, CA:
Brooks/Cole.
Pomeroy, E. C, 8c Kiam, R. (1998). “Meeting the Mental Health Needs of
This content downloaded from 160.39.86.104 on Mon, 06 Jul 2015 16:15:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Women sStudies Quarterly 2004: 3& 4 115
Incarcerated Women.” Health & Social Work, 23, 71-75.
Remer, P. (2003) . “Empowerment Feminist Therapy.” Paper presented at the
American Psychological Association Conference, August 7-10, 2003.
Scarth, K., 8c McLean. (1994). The Psychological Assessment of Women in
Prison. Forum on Women in Prison, 6, 1. Retrieved June 22, 2003 from
http://www.csc. sec. gc.ca/ text/ pblct/forum/e06/e061h_e.shtml.
Singer, M. I., Bussey, J., Song, L. Y, 8c Lunghofer, L. (1995). “The Psychosocial
Issues of Women Serving Time in Jail.” Social Work, 40, 103-113.
Smith, C, 8c Thornberry, T. P. (1995). “The Relationship Between Childhood
Maltreatment and Adolescent Involvement in Delinquency.” Criminology,
33, 451-481.
Smith, C. (2001). “Sexual Abuse Against Women in Prison.” Criminal Justice,
16, 30-38.
Snell, T. L., 8c Morton, D. C. (1994). Women in Prison: Survey of State Prison
Inmates, 1991. Washington DC: U. S. Department of Justice.
Stein, B. (1996) . “Sexual Abuse: Guards Let Rapists into Women’s Cell.” The
Progressive, 60, 23-24.
Struckman-Johnson, C, Struckman-Johnson, D. L., Rucker, L., Bumby, K., 8c
Donaldson, S. (1996). “Sexual Coercion Reported by Men and Women in
Prison. “Journal of Sex Research, 33, 67-76.
Tjaden, P., Thoeness, N., & Allison, C.J. (1999). “Comparing Violence over
the Life Span in Samples of Same-sex and Opposite-sex Cohabitants.” Violence
and Victims, 14, 413-425.
Walker, L. (1992). “Battered Women Syndrome and Self-defense.” Notre
Dame Journal of Law, Ethics, and Public Policy, 6, 321-334.
Walker, L. (1994) . “Are Personality Disorders Gender Biased?” In S. A. Kirk 8c
S. D. Einbinder (Eds.), Controversial Issues in Mental Health (pp. 21-29).
New York: Allyn 8c Bacon.
West, C. M. (2002). “Battered, Black, and Blue: An Overview of Violence in
the Lives of Black Women.” Women & Therapy, 25, 5-27.
Widom, C. S. (1989). “Does Violence Beget Violence? A Critical Examination
of the Literature.” Psychological Bulletin, 106, 3-28.
Widom, C. S., 8c Ames, A. (1994). “Criminal Consequences of Childhood
Sexual Victimization.” Child Abuse 8c Neglect, 1, 303-318.
Wyatt, G. E., Guthrie, D., 8c Notgrass, C. M. (1992). “Differential Effects of
Women’s Child Sexual Abuse and Subsequent Sexual Revictimization.”
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 60, 167-173.
Zupan, L. L. (1992). “Men Guarding Women: An Analysis of the Employment
of Male Correctional Officers in Prisons for Women.” Journal of
Criminal Justice, 20, 297-309.
Danielle Dirks (ddirks@soc.ufl.edu) is a graduate student researcher at the
University of Florida in the Department of Sociology. Her research interests
include racial and ethnic relations, gender, and beauty.
This content downloaded from 160.39.86.104 on Mon, 06 Jul 2015 16:15:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions