Mid-Term Exam Flashcards
Explain the “Dark Figure Of Crime” fully
Sexual Assault is considered a “systemic issue” that is deep rooted within society. It is a reflection of larger problems of hegemonic masculinity. Regardless of it being known as a systemic, deep-rooted issue there is still many factors and barriers that cause it to be known as the “Dark Figure Of Crime.” - The dark figure of crime refers to the numerical total of unreported crime to authorities.
There will be 3 examples of the criminal justice system “adhering to sexual assault.” They are: Police, Defence council, and Judges.
In Ontario there are about 180,000 sexual assault a year. The Canadian sexual assault survey finds that the rape rate is about 100 times higher than official reports.
The studies being done to illuminate the dark figures of sexual assault include: Looking at hospital and physician records, and looking at the General social survey done by Stats Canada, every 5 years. Around 52,000 Victims of sexual assault often visit hospitals due to a fear of: )pregnancy, STD, Drugged).
Studies shown the majority of cases of sexual assault involved 90% young females aged 15-19y/o in Ontario, around 15-24 for Canada. The highest rate among male victims is children aged 4 and younger.
In rural areas, the cases intensify. According to geography studies done, in rural Ontario there is about 50-80 cases per 100,000 people. The reason for this is because there is a general lack of sexual assault support infrastructure for the victims to reach out and potentially report the incidents.
There is a gap in sexual assault statistics, particularly coming in the male and elderly areas. Men do not typically report sexual violence because, as previously mentioned the victim age pool being very young makes it difficult to notice, and for the victims themselves to report it. Additionally, Sexual assault among the elderly is a big problem, and it continues to increase (presumably from long-term care facilities)
Some other key areas that are affecting the statistics of sexual violence is issues surrounding: Black, Disabled, and indigenous women. Women of colour have systemic barriers engaging with the Criminal justice system - the police have a ‘hard time’ imagining them as the victims. Indigenous women are 16x more likely to be killed or disappear than white women. And women with disabilities are 4x more likely to be sexually assaulted - the more marginalized the more likely it is.
Self-report surveys are used to reveal the dark figure of crime. They cover 8 separate criminal offences. The respondents are asked to report any violations of the criminal law that they have committed or victimizations that they have experienced without fear of disclosure or arrest. The key advantage to using a GSS (General social survey) is that it helps to calculate victimization, which allows us to measure crimes not reported to the police. There is an estimated 9.75 million incidents not reported to police in Canada annually.
There has been a steady increase in sexual violence cases, but there is also a decline in reporting, as stats Canada found that the instance of sexual assault increased from 33-37 cases per 1000 between 1999 and 2014. The rate at which sexual assaults were reported to police between 1999-2019 dropped.
Case example for the dark figure of crime: Johnson reading: “why doesn’t she just report it” Basically, it was a study done with the Ottawa police service that results showed that disbelief, skepticism, and ineffective response to trauma result in many women receiving prejudicial treatment from police. Stereotypes of ‘‘ideal’’ victims shape police decisions around who is worthy of the protection of the law and function to blame and disqualify women who fail to conform to these narrow ideals.
There is also common rape myths that all stem from responsibility being displaced from the perpetrator to the victim via 2 justifications:
- Perpetrator surpassed the level of ‘controllable” sexual stimulation and could no longer be held accountable for their actions
- Victims are cast as the responsible party: women’s poor judgement, dressing, and demeanour
The first example of the CJS adhering to sexual assault myths is the Toronto Police in 2011. - Toronto police officer Michael sanguinetti visited Osgoode Hall Law School to advise the students on personal safety. He essentially said women must stop dressing like “sluts” to avoid being victimized, which essentially displaced the blame from the offender to the victim
The second example of the CJS adhering to sexual assault myths is: Defence council. - They have 3 baseless narratives about sexual violence that they continue to rely on which are:
- That sexually active women are more likely to consent and lie about rape
- That women who are raped will report it immediately (try to discredit them to drop the charges)
- That failing to fight back implies consent.
The third example of of the CJS adhering to sexual assault myths is with Judges. - In 2014 Justice Robin Camp of the Alberta provincial court was holding a sexual assault case and he acquitted a young man of SA. He kept referring to the victim as the ‘accused’ as if they did something wrong, displacing blame to the victim rather than the perpetrator adhering to the rape myths. He asked the victim “why didn’t she just keep her knees together.” The court of appeal overturned this decision of acquittal and ordered a new trial because biased stereotypes made their way into court. The man ended up getting acquitted anyway again because the victims testimonies were not consistent.
In the end, the main question of why women do not report sexual violence which contributes to the “dark figure” of crime is because:
- They fear being blamed or judged
- They have a fear of retaliation
- A belief that police could not/would not do anything
- They have fears about how they would be treated by the police, and about the criminal trial process.
Explain the social construction of crime fully
First think about what is the actual definition of a crime:
What is a “crime” depends on several factors including: historical context, prevailing cultural norms, how a society perceives crime (it is always debated and shifting), and as a result of crime being “contextual and shifting” we can conclude that crime is ‘socially constructed”
Social construction of crime is:
We can describe the social construction of crime as the notion that the legal status of behaviour is NOT determined by the behaviour itself, but is the result of the social response to the behaviour.
Focuses on the process through which social problems such as crime, are defined and responded to. Crime is also a function of the claims made by individuals or groups who seek to turn a set of conditions into a social problem.
An example of social construction of crime and the shifting ideas of crime and justice is is the high-park tobogganing ban. - In Toronto on Sunday’s from 1912 to 1961, it was illegal to toboggan at High Park, and police were posted at the hills to enforce the ban. (Historical Context + Prevailing cultural norms + lords day act + shifting norms)
^^ This example highlights how crime is “socially constructed” by showing how laws and norms reflect the values of the time. In Toronto, from 1912 to 1961, it was illegal to toboggan in High Park on Sundays due to the Lord’s Day Act, which enforced Sunday as a day of rest based on Christian beliefs. The act reflects the prevailing cultural norms of the time, where Christianity had a significant influence on laws and public behavior.
During that period, it was seen as reasonable and normal to prohibit certain activities on Sundays because of religious observance. Police were even posted at hills to enforce this tobogganing ban, demonstrating how the law was actively maintained. However, as society’s values changed and the influence of religion on public policy diminished, such restrictions would eventually seem outdated, and laws like the Lord’s Day Act lost their relevance.
This shift shows how crime is not fixed or universal but shaped by the dominant cultural values and power structures at a given time. What was once considered a crime (tobogganing on a Sunday) became acceptable as norms changed, reinforcing the idea that crime is socially constructed.
^^ Because of crime and justice shifting with the example, we can see how crime is “socially constructed”
ANOTHER example:
Opium Act
Before 1908: Drugs were being used
1908-1929: Parliament passes many anti drug laws
This law is tied to racial hostility towards Asian immigrants led by moral entrepreneurs
opiates was not illegal and and it was regulated, that was until the Chinese community starts to make big profits from the selling of opiates, and white people were the biggest consumers of opiates. - The white entrepreneurs saw that as a threat
In short, Chinese community were profiting off the downfall of the white community, so a law was passed banning the sales of opiates. It was the result of moral panic linked to politcal, economic, and racial motivations
The 1908 Opium Act: prime example of a crime being a ‘social construction.’
Explain the ‘Culture of Skepticism’ in sexual assault cases (Johnson) Fully
Stereotypes of ‘‘ideal’’ victims shape police decisions around who is worthy of the protection of the law and function to blame and disqualify women who fail to conform to these narrow ideals.
It was seen that: Black women, Indigenous women, and women with disabilities were seen as less than ideal, and thus have ben treated differently by police and cause skepticism
There was a study with the Ottawa police service where - the results showed that disbelief, skepticism and ineffective response to trauma result in many women receiving prejudicial treatment from police
Black Women: Systemic Barriers Engaging w/CJS as Victims of Crime
Indigenous women & girls: 16 times more likely to be slain or to disappear than white women
Women with disabilities: 4x higher rate of sexual assault, men about 2x higher
One of the key examples regarding the “culture of skepticism” in sexual assault cases is some of the rape myths (Responsibility is displaced from the perpetrator to the victim via; justifications) - The myths are:
- Perpetrator surpassed the level of ‘controllable’ sexual stimulation and could no longer be held accountable for their actions
- Victims are cast as the responsible party: women’s poor judgement, dress, and demeanour
The first example of the CJS adhering to sexual assault myths is the Toronto Police in 2011. - Toronto police officer Michael sanguinetti visited Osgoode Hall Law School to advise the students on personal safety. He essentially said women must stop dressing like “sluts” to avoid being victimized, which essentially displaced the blame from the offender to the victim
The second example of the CJS adhering to sexual assault myths is: Defence council. - They have 3 baseless narratives about sexual violence that they continue to rely on which are:
- That sexually active women are more likely to consent and lie about rape
- That women who are raped will report it immediately (try to discredit them to drop the charges)
- That failing to fight back implies consent.
There are several factors that make sexual assault complaints more “credible”
- ‘Ideal white, middle-class woman victims
- Ethnic minority and low-status perpetrators
- Vigorous resistance
- No prior sexual relationship with the suspect
- No history of psychiatric or intellectual impairment
The third example of of the CJS adhering to sexual assault myths is with Judges. - In 2014 Justice Robin Camp of the Alberta provincial court was holding a sexual assault case and he acquitted a young man of SA. He kept referring to the victim as the ‘accused’ as if they did something wrong, displacing blame to the victim rather than the perpetrator adhering to the rape myths. He asked the victim “why didn’t she just keep her knees together.” The court of appeal overturned this decision of acquittal and ordered a new trial because biased stereotypes made their way into court. The man ended up getting acquitted anyway again because the victims testimonies were not consistent.
In the end, the main question of why women do not report sexual violence which contributes to the “dark figure” of crime is because:
- They fear being blamed or judged
- They have a fear of retaliation
- A belief that police could not/would not do anything
- They have fears about how they would be treated by the police, and about the criminal trial process.
There are several factors that make sexual assault complaints more “credible”
- ‘Ideal white, middle-class woman victims
- Ethnic minority and low-status perpetrators
- Vigorous resistance
- No prior sexual relationship with the suspect
- No history of psychiatric or intellectual impairment
Explain Cesare Lombroso’s Construction of the “Female Offender” (Glasbeek)
Even though Cesare Lombroso ideas had been debunked, they still shaped how female criminality is understood. Cesare Lombroso claimed that:
“Women are less evolved stages of human development, thus being intellectually inferior to men”
Additionally, he claimed that women are: “Naturally immoral, cunning, spiteful, and deceitful.
If women are less evolved than men, it should have more physical degeneracy, and that women should be more involved in crime but (they’re not.) If women are not involved with crime they lack “initiative”
He explain how female criminality is harder to detect as they generally lack visible signs of degeneracy. Female ‘criminals’ are closer to men because they lack material qualities.
**Lombroso* also claimed a ‘blurry’ line between normalcy, and criminality - if a woman is not committing more crimes that means they are super cunning and deceiving, and for him women are the least evolved as he blamed lack of evolvement as a baseline for committing crimes.
Lombroso claimed women; particularly poor women of colour to be seen as suspicious, and require constant surveillance.
“Rarely is a woman wicked but when she is she surpasses the man. As a double exception, the criminal woman is consequently a monster”
Physiological attributes:
Diseased
Racialized
Sunken Cheekbones
Scars
Wrinkles
General ‘loss of beauty’
Slack jaws
Women lack of involvement in crime due to biologically rooted passivity.
Explain Glasbeeks ideas for the construction of female crimes (pg 181) from #4 (Explain Cesare Lombroso’s Construction of the “Female Offender” (Glasbeek)
Glasbeek claimed that when women use violence, including lethal violence the general reaction is one of shock. - This results in a desperate search for explanations to maintain the normative/ideal version of femininity and to understand why women are failing to live by it’s normative/ideal standards.
The 3 Sexist explanations that Glasbeek identified were:
- Masculinization Thesis
- Chivalry Thesis
- Medicalization Thesis
- Masculinization Thesis (Shifting gender roles):
- The idea here is that due to changing gender roles, women are acting more like men, including with criminal activity
- To prevent ‘masculinization’ we need to restrain and control women so they do not deviate from ideal notions of femininity
- Chivalry Thesis (Deceit & Manipulation)
- The idea here is that Women do not commit less crime, they just mask it with deceit and manipulation.
- Criminal justice officials express their masculinity by being gentler towards women who are seen as weak and vulnerable
- Medicalization of women’s deviance (deviance as pathology)
- Women who break the law or act deviant tend to be viewed as suffering from some form of physical or psychological pathology as if ‘normal’ or ‘healthy’ women are incapable of deviance
- Battered women’s syndrome: The battered women’s syndrome defence helped to safeguard normative femininity as Karla Homolka was constructed as a victim - she went as far to say ‘she was as much as a victim as the murdered girls’
Explain the Value Consensus Model of Law
views crime and punishment as reflecting society’s commonly held values as well as its limits of tolerance. This view assumes that there is a consensus on what should be against the law.
Through applying laws, society learns the boundaries of behaviour and maintains social cohesion. There is a consensus that murder should be against the law. Incest is another act that is widely condemned. Offences like that are called “mala in se” (wrong in themselves), and are perceived as so inherently evil as to constitute a violation of Natural Law.
In a city, everyone agrees that assault—physically hurting another person—is wrong because it causes harm and creates fear in the community. This belief is part of the society’s commonly held values that people should feel safe and be treated with respect.
If someone commits assault, the law steps in to punish the offender. This shows the limits of tolerance—the community won’t tolerate violence because it threatens the peace and safety everyone values. By enforcing the law, society reminds its members of the boundaries of acceptable behavior.
Most people agree that acts like assault or theft are wrong, just as they agree that murder and incest are unacceptable. These actions are considered “mala in se”, meaning they are inherently wrong according to natural human morals, not just because they are against the law. Society uses these laws to maintain social order, ensuring that everyone understands the behaviors that will and won’t be accepted, helping to keep peace and unity among its members.
Explain the conflict model of law
states the fact that some groups are better able than others to influence which behaviours and persons are criminalized. Conflict theorists see the rich and privileged as having an advantage in influencing law reform and what happens to someone who becomes involved in the criminal justice system.
Conflict theorists highlight some of the inequities and paradoxes in the system. If someone takes money from a bank at gunpoint it is called robbery. A business decision that causes a bank collapse, causing thousands of people to lose money is called a “bad day” on the stock market.
Conflict theorists believe that our attention is wrongly focused on street crime when the greater risk to most people lies in the hands of the elites, such as corporations that dump toxic waste, fix prices, condone unsafe workplaces, and evade taxes.
The Opium Act, which regulated the sale and use of opium and other drugs, can be linked to the conflict model of law in a straightforward way. The conflict model of law suggests that laws are created by powerful groups in society to control or suppress less powerful groups, often for their own benefit.
In the case of the Opium Act, laws restricting opium use were often seen as targeting specific marginalized communities, like Chinese immigrants in Canada and the U.S., who were associated with opium use. These laws served the interests of the dominant social and political groups who wanted to control these minority groups, rather than being enacted purely for public health or safety reasons.
In essence, from the conflict model perspective, the Opium Act wasn’t just about stopping drug use—it was about power and control, where those in power used the law to maintain their dominance over less powerful groups.
Explain the police sub-culture
A survey of 891 officers in the southeastern U.S. found that officers with higher education levels and more experience in rape investigations were less likely to accept misogynistic rape myths. The research also discusses how police culture, influenced by hegemonic masculinity, shapes officers’ behaviors and attitudes, reinforcing traditional gender roles and limiting diversity within police departments.
“normative order” refers to the set of informal rules and practices that govern behavior within the police culture. These norms are centered on core values like aggression, strength, and competition, often aligning with traditional masculine ideals. This order shapes how police officers think and act, promoting behaviors that conform to these values, while limiting diversity and reinforcing rigid gender roles within the force.
“hegemonic masculinity” refers to the dominant, socially accepted form of masculinity that emphasizes traits like aggression, dominance, emotional toughness, and heterosexuality. This idealized version of masculinity shapes how men, including police officers, are expected to behave, influencing their attitudes and actions in different situations. It supports traditional gender roles and reinforces a culture where men are expected to be physically strong and emotionally stoic, especially in male-dominated environments like police work.
hegemonic masculinity affects diversity in police departments by promoting a culture that values traits like aggression, dominance, and toughness, which are traditionally seen as masculine. This focus on masculine ideals makes it harder for people who don’t fit these stereotypes, such as women or men who don’t display these traits, to be accepted or to thrive within the police force. As a result, diversity is limited, and gender roles remain rigid within the police culture.
public expectations of police officers include showing physical and emotional strength, being able to handle dangerous situations, and protecting the community from crime and disasters. Police officers are also expected to look and act in a way that fits traditional masculine roles, which influences their behavior and appearance. These expectations create pressure for officers to conform to a certain image, reinforcing gender stereotypes and limiting diversity within the police force.
Explain the Girls gone bad thesis (glasbeek)
Despite significant feminist changes over the past 40 years, it remains the case that our Western ideas of normative femininity are incompatible with our ideas about crime, and especially violent crime.
In other words: (white, middle-class, heterosexual) femininity and violence are seen as opposite ideals, so when women commit crimes of aggression, they not only violate the law but also appear to betray their gender.
Main argument this chapter makes is that representations of women and crime—in the media, in law, and in criminology—often teach us more about gender than they do
about crime
Race, Sexuality, and Gender is socially constructed
idealized forms of gender performance are referred to as hegemonic masculinity and emphasized femininity (or what we call here normative femininity)
Ex. “strong,” “powerful,” and “assertive,” for masculinity and “delicate,” “vulnerable,” and “passive” or “emotional” for femininity
Feminist scholars argue that gender is not something that we are so much as it is something that we do. Scholars refer to this as embodied structured action: “The key to understanding the maintenance of existing gendered social structures is the accomplishment of gender through embodied social interaction—the doing or practicing of gender.”
The “Girls Gone Bad” thesis by Glasbeek explores the concept of female empowerment and rebellion against traditional gender norms. It examines how portrayals of “bad girls” in media and culture reflect societal anxieties about women’s liberation. Key points often include:
Subversion of Gender Roles: “Bad girls” challenge conventional expectations of femininity, displaying traits typically associated with masculinity, such as aggression and independence.
Cultural Reflection: These portrayals often reveal underlying societal tensions regarding women’s rights and roles, highlighting both fears and desires for female autonomy.
Empowerment vs. Stereotyping: While some representations can empower women, they may also reinforce negative stereotypes, depicting rebellious behavior as inherently destructive.
Intersectionality: The thesis often considers how race, class, and sexuality intersect with gender in shaping the experiences and representations of “bad girls.”
Media Influence: Glasbeek analyzes how media narratives can both reflect and shape public perceptions of women’s behavior, contributing to broader cultural conversations about femininity.
Extensive media coverage referred to the case as the one that shattered Canada’s innocence (Canada is known for being more loving and caring compared to the USA)
Portrayed as the Canadian “Ken & Barbie” this blonde hair and blue-eyed couple appeared to be in a healthy loving relationship, heteronormative & monogamous. Karla Homolka
Love story narrative functions to establish traditional gender roles: Homolka is depicted as the pleasing and obedient wife.
Homolka went against Normative femininity - which is a key example of a ‘girl gone bad’
Explain how predictive, algorithm-based policing strategies work and relate to racial
profiling. Also, drawing on the Tulloch report and lecture explain how racial profiling
contributes to systemic inequalities within the Canadian criminal justice system.
Explain two ways in which normative femininity shaped the societal responses to the
‘Ken and Barbie’ killers. Also drawing on the voice clip from Thunder Bay, explain how non-normative femininity shapes social and criminal justice responses to non-ideal
victims.
For some context the ‘Ken and Barbie’ killers are: Paul Bernardo and Karla Homolka. They were portrayed as the ken and barbie because they were this blonde hair, and blue-eyed couple that appeared to be in a healthy loving relationship, heteronormative, and monogamous. There was a ‘love story’ narrative that functioned to establish gender roles: Homolka was depicted as the pleasing and obedient wife.
Karla Homolka was convicted of manslaughter: 2 teenagers (kristen french & Leslie mahffy) in 1993. She got sentenced to a concurrent 12-year term, 12 years being served at the same time. Her sentence was determined by a plea bargain, she was the principal witness against her ex; Paul Bernardo who was convicted on 9 charges relating to the abduction, assault, and murder of the two girls. She was the mastermind behind the crimes and planned it for the most part. Conventionally attractive people are usually are usually subjected to less harsh sentences.
This ties into normative femininity as it can be described as the traditional, socially accepted ideas of how women are expected to behave. These expectations often include being gentle, nurturing, passive, and caring. Women who fit these norms are typically seen as “good” or “ideal,” while those who don’t may be judged more harshly. It’s like an unwritten rulebook for how society thinks women should act. Or in other wordsWhite middle-class heterosexual relationship structure, Judeo Christian values
Normative femininity and violence are seen as opposite ideals - assumed incompatible with violent crimes in particular.
Karla Homolka as the ‘helpless woman’: Initially, Karla’s involvement in the crimes was downplayed because she fit the mold of normative femininity—blonde, attractive, and seemingly submissive. Many people, including law enforcement, believed she was a victim of Paul Bernardo’s control rather than a willing participant. This led to a more lenient plea deal, as she was viewed through the lens of being the passive and coerced partner.
Shocking departure from feminine norms: When it was revealed that Karla played an active role in the crimes, society’s response was one of shock and betrayal. Women who commit violent crimes disrupt societal expectations of femininity. Because Karla did not conform to the nurturing, innocent female archetype, she was met with harsher public outrage than Paul, who fit the stereotype of a violent male predator.
An indigenous woman was spotted yelling for help with no clothes on. She was assaulted and was almost murdered. Two men saw her and helped her. One of them gave his jacket to cover her up.
Called her a prostitute (police)
Told to burn his jacket because it’s gross (called her contagious)
Had a laugh about it when the jacket man was speaking to the news reporter (he stuck around for his jacket)
Not much was talked about the victim
Indigenous women not viewed as ideal women and this not as innocent
Reviewed 37 individual cases handled by the Thunder Bay Service
Cases involving Indigenous women relating to assault, sexual assault and murder simply were not investigated
Autopsies never completed
Cause of death determined without autopsies or investigation
people who arent
Using three examples to support your answer, what are the main reasons why women
do not report sexual assault?
Define the objectivist-legalistic approach to crime and explain at least two criticisms of
it.
The objectivist-legalistic approach to crime views crime as an objective, legally defined act. It focuses on behaviors that clearly break the law, regardless of social context or personal factors. In this approach, crime is seen as straightforward and measurable—if someone violates a law, they’ve committed a crime, and the justice system must respond accordingly.
An act or omission that is prohibited by criminal law (Omission means you could held liable for a crime if you didn’t do something ex: someone drowning and you do not help.
This is also known as the objective-legalistic standpoint of crime (O’Grady)
Crime: only defined by legal statutes
Focus: why an individual commits a crime so policymakers can create regulations to prevent it.
Theories of why an individual commits a crime based on the O-L approach
Biological causes of criminality:
Biological inferior types (Lombroso)
Criminal Activist - has not fully evolved
Psychological:
Pathology and personal defects: inability to feel shame or guilt
Sociological
Break social norms due to lack of self-control.
Video in class (beyond scared straight)
Kids never faced that level of discipline so they were scared.
Summary thus far:
O-L approach to crime: “An act of oppression that is prohibited by criminal law”
Emphasis largely on actus reus and men’s rea and if the offence is summary if indictable
O-L Approach
Two criticisms of the objectivist-legalistic approach:
- Ignores social context: One major criticism is that this approach overlooks the social, economic, and cultural factors that influence crime. For example, poverty, discrimination, and inequality can lead to criminal behavior, but the objectivist-legalistic approach doesn’t consider these underlying causes. It treats all crimes the same, whether they result from desperation or premeditation.
- Who decides what is legal/illegal (ex; tobogganing)
Fails to address power dynamics: Another criticism is that it neglects how power and privilege affect who gets labeled as a criminal. Certain groups, like marginalized communities, are more heavily policed and punished, while people in positions of power may avoid legal consequences for similar or worse actions. This approach doesn’t account for the unequal application of the law.
