Thoughts from the criminology team

Home » Male violence

Category Archives: Male violence

Same shit, different day

I’ve thought long and hard about whether or not to write this blog, it contains nothing new, it adds nothing to the discussion and it is borne of frustration, not just mine. Nevertheless, if the same thing keeps happening, then why not keep shouting about it, even if no-one appears to be listening.

Recently I attended an event supposedly focused on Violence Against Women & Girls [VAWG], the organisers, the venue, the speakers remain anonymous, because this is not about specific individuals or organisations. Instead, as the title indicates, the issues raised below are repeated again and again, across different times and place, involving different people, with different claims to knowledge. Nevertheless, they have far more in common than they would care to acknowledge.

In September 2024, the government announced a commitment to halving VAWG over the next decade. The announcement itself was rather confused, seemingly conflating the term VAWG with Domestic Abuse [DA] whilst simultaneously promising to ‘take back our streets’. The latter horribly reminiscent of the far right’s racists diatribe around taking back our country. But I digress, in the government statement there is no mention of sexual violence, despite Rape Crisis England and Wales’ assertion that 1 in 4 women and girls over 16 have been subjected to sexual assault or rape. Similarly, Refuge suggest that 1 in 4 women will be subjected to forms of domestic abuse across their lifetimes. The statistical data is shaky, the problems with reporting are well documented, but ask any woman, and they will tell you about their own experiences and those of friends and families. A brief glance at the Everyday Sexism Project or Everyone’s Invited will give you some idea of the scale of the violences facing women and girls.

But to return to the latest VAWG event, there have been very many of these, all following the same pattern. Crowds of women in the audience, all experts, some professional, some academic, some through victimisation, some through vicarious victimisation and of course, some of those women encapsulate more than one of those categories, they are not mutually exclusive. So how do we harness and utilise this great body of knowledge, experience and expertise? The sad answer for events like this, is 99% of the time, we don’t. They’re there to sit quietly and listen to the same old narrative from police leaders and officers, saying that the institution has got it wrong in the past, but has learnt lessons and is now doing much better. Noticeably, there are few men in the audience, only those compelled to attend by their employment, after all VAWG explicitly mentions women and girls so it must be a female problem, despite the fact that the violences are predominately carried out by men.

To really drive the message home, we have speakers who can’t be bothered to prepare an accessible presentation for their audience. Relying instead on their white privilege, their charisma and charm (think a poor parody of a 1990’s Hugh Grant in a Richard Curtis film), with their funny little anecdotes of how they met a woman who changed their view on VAWG. Or how primary school teachers are usually women, and that’s where the problems begin, they just don’t do enough to support our little boys and young men on their journeys. Similarly, mothers who don’t pay enough attention which mean their sons go onto to become these violent men. We have white women too, ones that want the audience to focus on women who have been killed by men, but who cannot actually be bothered to find out how to say their names, stumbling over any name that is not anglicised.

In the audience it is notable that there are few Black and Brown women present. Even when they are invited as speakers, they are cut short, talked over, their names forgotten or mispronounced. They are the add-ons, a pathetic attempt at inclusivity, but don’t worry they’re never the main attraction. That spotlight is always reserved for men. No wonder Black and Brown women can’t face attending, or leave part way through, they’re sick and tired of being patronised while they pick up the broken pieces of men’s violences.

So what do women actually learn from these events? They learn to keep quiet, to pretend they’re learning something, but in the breaks they get together and talk about their frustrations, their ongoing exclusion from discussions. They learn that the problem belongs to them. That not only have they got to mop up women’s blood, sweat and tears, using plenty of their own in the process, to support and rebuild women after trauma, they are also responsible for the boys and men.

It really does not have to be this way! In every community there are women of all colours, all religions, all sexualities, all nations, doing the hard work. Building each other up against a maelstrom of never ending male violence, not to mention the additional violences of racism, microaggressions and exclusion. These are the experts, these are the people with whom the solutions lie. The police have had almost 200 years to get it right, they are nowhere near, time for them to move over and let the real experts do the talking, whilst they listen and start to hear and learn!

A Criminal Called Bob

It was years ago that Bob was born in St. Mary’s Hospital.  His mum delivered a relatively healthy baby that she called Robert, after her father despite kicking her out when he found out that she was pregnant from a casual encounter.  Bob’s early memory was of a pain in the arm in a busy place he could not remember what it was.  His mother was grabbing his arm an early sign that he was unwanted.  He would remember many of these events becoming part of everyday life.  He remembers one day a stern looking woman came to the place he was living with his mother and take him away.  This was the last time he would ever see his mother; he was 5 or 6.  A few years afterwards his mother will die from a bad heart.  Later, he would find out it was drugs related. 

 The stern looking lady will take him to another place to live with a family.  One of many that he would be placed in.  At first, he tried to get to know the hosts but soon it became difficult to keep track.  He also lost track of how many times he moved around.  There were too many to count but the main memory was of fear going into a place he did not know to stay with people who treated him as an inconvenience.  He owned nothing but a bin bag with a few clothes and people will always comment on how scruffy he looked.  He remembers discovering some liquorice allsorts in a drawer with the kid he was sharing the room with.  He cannot forget the beating he got for eating some of them.  The host was very harsh, and they used the belt on him. 

School was hell for Bob.  As he moved from place to place the schools also changed.  The introduction to the class was almost standard.  Bob is joining us from so and so and although he lives in foster care, I hope you will be making him feel welcomed…and welcomed he was.  The bullying was relentless so was the name calling and the attacks.  On occasion he would meet an aloof man who was his “designated tutor”.  His questions were abrupt and focused only if he was behaving, if he was making any trouble, if he did as was told.  It was hardly ever about education or any of his needs.  He remembers going to see him once with a bruised eye to be asked “what did you do?”

And he did a lot!  Early on he learned that in order not to go hungry he must hide food away.  If he was to meet a new person, he had to show them that he is cannot be taken for granted, he needed to show them he can handle himself.  Sometime during his early teenage years his greeting gesture was a headbutt.  Violence was a clear vehicle for communication.  One person is down the other is up.  This became a language he became prolific in.  He could read a room quickly and in later years be able to assess the person opposite.  If he can take him or not! 

The truth that others kept talking about around him became a luxury and an unnecessary situation.  Lying about things got him to avoid punishment and any consequences to any of his actions.  The only problem was when he was get caught lying.  The consequences were dire.  So, what he needed to do was to become very good at it.  He did.  He could lie looking people straight in the eye and not even blink about it.      

Later in life he discovered this was an amazing talent to possess.  It was useful when he was stealing from shops, it was good when people asking him for the truth, it was profitable when his lies covered other people’s crimes.  Before he turned 18, he was an experienced thief and a creative liar.  His physique allowed him to take to violence should anyone was to question his “honesty”.  When he was 15, he discovered that a combination of cider and acid gives him such a buzz. To mute his brain and to relax his body even for little was so welcomed.  This habit became one of his most loyal relationships in his life.             

In prison he didn’t go until he was 22 but he went to a young offender’s institution at the age of 17 for GBH.  The “victim” was a former friend who stole some of his gear.  That really angered him; even days after the event in court he was still outraged with the theft.  He was still making threats that he will find him and kill him, in some very graphic descriptions!  The court sought no other way but to send him away.  From the age of 22 he would become a “frequent flyer” of the prison estate!  A long list of different sentences ranging from everything on offer.  Usually repeated in pattern; fine, community sentence, prison….and back again!  By the time he was 35 he had been in prison for more than 8 years collectively.  He did plenty of offender management courses and met a variety of probation and prison officers, well-meaning and not so good.  Some tried to help, and others couldn’t care but all of them fade in the background. 

Now at the ripe age of 45 he is out of the prison, and he is sofa surfing and claiming universal credit.  He gets nothing because he has unpaid fines, so he is struggling financially.  In prison he did a barista apprenticeship, but he cannot find any work.  As it stands, he is very likely to be recalled back to prison, if the cold weather doesn’t claim him first.    

In context, there are some lives that are never celebrated or commemorated.  There are people who exist but virtually no one recognises their existence.  Their lives are someone else’s inconvenience and in a society that prioritises individual achievement and progression they have none.  Bob is a fictional character.  His name and circumstances are made up but form part of a general criminological narrative that identifies criminality through the complexity of social circumstance.           

Sabrina Carpenter and Feminist Utopia

I have recently been introduced to Sabrina Carpenter via online media commentary about the image of her new album cover Man’s Best Friend. Whilst some claim the image is playing with satire, the image appears to have been interpreted by others as being hyper-sexual and pandering to the male gaze.  

I am not sure why this specific album cover and artist has attracted so much attention given that the hyper-sexual depiction of women is well-represented within the music industry and society more generally. However, because Sabrina’s main audience base is apparently young women under 30 it did leave me thinking about the module CRI1009 and feminist utopia, as it left me with questions that I would want to ask the students like: In a feminist utopia should the hyper-sexualized imagery of women exist?    

Some might be quick to point out that this imagery should not exist as it could be seen to contribute towards the misogynistic sexualisation of women and the danger of this, as illustrated with Glasgow Women’s Aid comments about Sabrina’s album cover via Instagram (2025)  

Sabrina Carpenter’s new album cover isn’t edgy, it’s regressive. 
Picturing herself on all fours, with a man pulling her hair and calling it “Man’s Best Friend” isn’t subversion. 😐 
It’s a throwback to tired tropes that reduce women to pets, props, and possessions and promote an element of violence and control. 🚩 
We’ve fought too hard for this. ✊🏻 
We get Sabrina’s brand is packaged up retro glam but we really don’t need to go back to the tired stereotypes of women. ✨ 
Sabrina is pandering to the male gaze and promoting misogynistic stereotypes, which is ironic given the majority of her fans are young women! 
Come on Sabrina! You can do better! 💖’  

However, thinking about utopia is always complicated as Sabrina’s brand appears to some a ‘sex-positive feminism’ by apparently allowing women to be free to represent themselves and ‘feel sexy’ rather than being controlled by the rules and expectations of other people. For some this idea of sexual freedom aka ‘sex-positive feminism’ branded via an inequitable capitalistic male dominated industry and represented by an incredibly rich white woman would be a bit of a mythical representation. As while this idea of sexy feminism is promoted by the privileged few this occurs in a societal context where many feel that women’s rights are being/at risk of being eroded and women are being subjected to sexual violence on a daily basis.  

I am not sure what a workshop discussion with CRI1009 students would conclude about this, but certainly there would need to be a circling back to more never- ending foundational questions about utopia: what else would exist in this feminist utopia? Whose feminist utopic vision should get priority? Would anyone be damaged in a utopic society that does promote this hyper-sexualization? If so, should this utopia prioritise individual expression or have collective responsibility? In a society without hyper-sexualisation of women would there be rule breakers, and if so, what do you do with them?  

Changing the Narrative around Violence Against Women and Girls

For Criminology at UON’s 25th Birthday, in partnership with the Northampton Fire, Police and Crime Commissioner, the event “Changing the Narrative: Violence Against Women and Girls” convened on the 2nd April. Bringing together a professional panel, individuals with lived experience and practitioners from charity and other sectors, to create a dialogue and champion new ways of thinking. The first in a series, this event focused on language.

All of the discussions, notes and presentations were incredibly insightful, and I hope this thematic collation does it all justice.

“A convenient but not useful term.”

Firstly an overwhelming reflection on the term itself; ‘Violence Against Women and Girls’ – does it do justice to all of the behaviour under it’s umbrella? We considered this as reductionist, dehumanising, and often only prompts thinking and action to physical acts of violence, but perhaps neglects many other harms such as emotional abuse, coercion and financial abuse which may not be seen as, or felt as ‘severe enough’ to report. It may also predominantly suggest intimate partner or domestic abuse which may too exclude other harms towards women and girls such as (grand)parent/child abuse or that which happens outside of the home. All of which are too often undetected or minimised, potentially due to this use of language. Another poignant reflection is that we may not currently be able to consider ‘women and girls’ as one group, given that girls under 16 may not be able to seek help for domestic abuse, in the same way that women may be able to. We also must consider the impact of this term on those whose gender identity is not what they were assigned at birth, or those that identify outside of the gender binary. Where do they fit into this?

To change the narrative, we must first identify what we are talking about. Explicitly. Changing the narrative starts here.

“I do not think I have survived.”

We considered the importance of lived experience in our narratives and reflected on the way we use it, and what that means for individuals, and our response.

Firstly, the terms ‘victim’ and ‘survivor’ – which we may use without thought, use as fact, particularly as descriptors within our professions, but actually these are incredibly personal labels that only individuals with such experience can give to themselves. This may be reflective of where they are in their journey surrounding their experiences and have a huge impact on their experience of being supported. It was courageously expressed that we also must recognise that individuals may not identify with either of those terms, and that much more of that person still exists outside of that experience or label. We also took a moment to remember that some victims, will never be survivors.

Lived experience is making its way into our narratives more and more, but there is still much room for improvement. We champion that if we are to create a more supportive, inclusive, practical and effective narrative, we must reflect the language of individuals with lived experience and we must use it to create a narrative free from tick boxes, from the lens of organisational goals and societal pressure.

Lived experience must be valued for what it is, not in spite of what it is.

“In some cases, we allow content – which would otherwise go against our standards – if its newsworthy.”

A further theme was a reflection on language which appears to be causing an erosion of moral boundaries. For example, the term ‘misogyny’ – was considered to be used flippantly, as an excuse, and as a scapegoat for behaviour which is not just ‘misogynistic’ but unacceptable, abhorrent, inexcusable behaviour – meaning the extent of the harms caused by this behaviour are swept away under a ‘normalised’ state of prejudice.

This is one of many terms that along with things like ‘trauma bond’ and ‘narcissist’ which have become popular on social media without any rigour as to the correct use of the term – further normalises harmful behaviour, and prevents women and girls from seeking support for these very not normal experiences. In the same vein it was expressed that sexual violence is often seen as part of ‘the university experience.’

This use of language and its presence on social media endangers and miseducates, particularly young people, especially with new posting policies around the freedom of expression. Firstly, in that many restrictions can be bypassed by the use of different text, characters and emoji so that posts are not flagged for certain words or language. Additionally, guidelines from Meta were shared and highlighted as problematic as certain content which would, and should, normally be restricted – can be shared – as long as is deemed ‘newsworthy.’

Within the media as a whole, we pressed the importance of using language which accurately describes the actions and experience that has happened, showing the impact on the individual and showing the extent of the societal problem we face… not just what makes the best headline.

“We took action overnight for the pandemic.”

Language within our response to these crimes was reflected upon, in particular around the term ‘non-emergency’ which rape, as a crime, has become catalogued as. We considered the profound impact of this language for those experiencing/have experienced this crime and the effect it has on the resources made available to respond to it.

Simultaneously, in other arenas, violence toward women and girls is considered to be a crisis… an emergency. This not only does not align with the views of law enforcement but suggests that this is a new, emerging crisis, when in fact it is long standing societal problem, and has faced significant barriers in getting a sufficient response. As reflected by one attendee – “we took action overnight for the pandemic.”

“I’ve worked with women who didn’t report rape because they were aroused – they thought they must have wanted it.”

Education was another widely considered theme, with most talk tables initially considering the need for early education and coming to the conclusion that everyone needs more education; young and old – everything in between; male, female and everything in between and outside of the gender binary. No-one is exempt.

We need all people to have the education and language to pass on to their children, friends, colleagues, to make educated choices. If we as adults don’t have the education to pass on to children, how will they get it? The phrase ‘sex education’ was reflected upon, within the context of schools, and was suggested to require change due to how it triggers an uproar from parents, often believing their children will only be taught about intercourse and that they’re too young to know. It was expressed that age appropriate education, giving children the language to identify harms, know their own body, speak up and speak out is only beneficial and this must happen to help break the cycle of generational violence. We cannot protect young people if we teach them ignorance.

Education for all was pressed particularly around education of our bodies, and our bodily experiences. In particular of female bodies, which have for so long been seen as an extension of male bodies. No-one knows enough about female bodies. This perpetuates issues around consent, uneducated choices and creates misplaced and unnecessary guilt, shame and confusion for females when subjected to these harms.

“Just because you are not part of the problem, does not mean you are part of the solution.

Finally, though we have no intention or illusion of resolution with just one talk, or even a series of them – we moved to consider some ways forward. A very clear message was that this requires action – and this action should not fall on women and girls to protect themselves, but for perpetrators for be stopped. We need allies, of all backgrounds, but in particular, we need male allies. We need male allies who have the education, and the words necessary to identify and call out the behaviour of their peers, their friends, their colleagues, of strangers on the bus. We asked – would being challenged by a ‘peer’ have more impact? Simply not being a perpetrator, is not enough.

St Valentines Day! Love and other emotions

This blog today is all about love…. or maybe not!  As criminologists, we tend to see things slightly different, and our perspective is influenced by functions other than undying declarations of love.   

Saint Valentine is associated with love and people celebrate the day with their special romantic person, or by pursuing any person of interest, with romantic cards.  Greeting cards, bottles of wine, boxes of chocolates, bunches of flowers, heart shaped jewellery, lovely sonnets, sexy underwear, kinky gifts and over the top romantic gestures!  All of the above are anticipated actions on this day.  Any of these will act as a demonstration of love.  In some ways the more enormous the gesture the greater the demonstration of love and intimacy to the intended special person.  Many times, we hear those in a relationship rut complaining that “they don’t even buy me chocolates anymore” a sign that love has fizzled out. 

Love is a powerful emotion, and I dare not to challenge it.  Artists have created their best work on love!  Religion has created its strongest appeal on love. People, the world over, have based their entire lives of how they feel about a person they choose to be their partner and share their lives with.  So clearly love is important! Enough for an Austrian psychotherapist to create an entire theory on love and sex.  We feel ready to go to war for love and we are completely convinced that love is the force that keeps us going. Love is strong and we feel it every day.   

Therefore, it is slightly surprising that the patron saint of romantic love is a rather fictional character!  The saint is meant to be a priest who lived in the 3rd century AD and martyred by tortured for his faith.  There was no romance involved and there were no love poems written of the time.  In fact, the Roman Catholic church did not recognise or mentioned this martyrdom at the time.  The first accounts on St Valentine appear in the 6th and later the 9th centuries, some centuries later.  Since then, the story of the saint is embellished further, until the 19th century when it becomes connected with romantic love in some tenuous way.  For example, the more recent narratives claim that before his execution he would convert and cure the daughter of his jailer.  He was also officiating wedding ceremonies between Christians which may have given him the romantic connection.  In the 19th century we have the first mass production of love tokens dedicated to the day and in the 20th, century especially post 1960s the celebration was growing in popularity and appeal.  Currently the day is a celebration that has a significant capitalist value.  It is usually a commercial success midway between Christmas and Easter.   

Some religious historians noted that in the Roman calendar in February there have been rituals and celebrations on fertility and cleanliness (physical, spiritual).  It was the time presumably when young Romans prepared for sexual relations.  Therefore, an amalgamation of the old practices and the then new religion overlap with an obscure Saint to act as the glue to connect them and reaffirm the importance of love.  Ironically the Roman citizens of the time, in particular the patricians, would not recognise such acts!  They married out of interest, connecting the wealth and power of different factions.  In those cycles love was more of a chimera rather than a reality. 

Romantic love with knights, towers, dragons and gestures of devotion will appear as fanciful tales.  Who hasn’t heard of Odysseus and his beloved wife Penelope who remained faithful to him for 20 years!  Her fidelity was not reciprocated, and Odysseus had multiple affairs and fathered several children across the Mediterranean.  Not quite the romantic story people would like to believe.  Romantic love was always a tale, with vivid twists and turns.  Love appears almost pure, undiluted that lifts those in its path.  Shakespeare wrote fantastic sonnets on love.  Some of the best things ever written in English.  Still his contemporaries did not recognise this love.  The majority of people at the time died young, malnourished and exhausted.  Those who barely survive cannot afford to embrace love.  As for those in power their relationship with love can be summed up in the old mnemonic rhyme “divorced, beheaded, died; divorced, beheaded, survived”! 

We presume that romantic love is a representation of two people having feelings for one other.  That is a nice sentiment but historically weak.  Love for women does not exist.  Not because women are devoid of emotions; quite the contrary!  Because women have been used in social transactions between men who barter and use them as part of their household.  A feminist today can recognise, despite all assurances for equality, how unequal life is.  Especially in the household!  If anyone wants to see why love is not equal only see how domestic and intimate violence is spread between gender lines.  Because St Valentine brings flowers and chocolates, but it also brings beatings and abuse.  Across the year it is during holidays and significant dates, including St Valentines that violence against women surges.  One can unfortunately deduce that love is not for women. Oh…. The irony as romantic novels and movies are presented mostly for women as “chick flicks”!    

Earlier in this post, it was said that the bigger the romantic move the better!  Who will do this big romantic gesture?  A man with chivalrous intent.  Our household data reveal that men will spend more than double on what women will spend on the day, making their romantic intent more obvious.  Perhaps men are more romantic and feel the need to satisfy that internal need.  Or maybe there are other emotions at play.  Love is very powerful, but so is possessiveness.  In a history of transactions men used women for trading, so their gestures may be a latent act of dominance, a fresh reminder of possession.  Instead of giving them chocolates, you may as well urinate all over them.  That way your beloved will have your scent and keep other suitors away.  So, this is not love but control, jealousy and dominance.  Every drop of wine, every piece of chocolate, every flower petal, is yet another link in the chain of ownership.  In case this gets misunderstood, the individual who buys flowers isn’t a villain, but the history of this kind of love is pointing in this direction.  Your partner may have the best intentions and the greatest love and regard for you, but our society has never really acknowledged the transactional relationship between men and women.  It is similar to those who speak of the evils of slavery, but with no recognition of reparations.  This love is not pure and clean.  It is the darkest form of patriarchy that controls people making them to believe in an adult fairytale once the other story of Santa Claus is not believed any more.

Romantic actions target all incomes and all ages, but of course there is a drive to get younger people, new generations of customers, on the love spending machine.  At this stage I shall write…what not to do when you are planning a romantic day!  Do not go overboard.  Love is something felt in the heart not in the pocket.  Heart-shaped products do not say “I love you” more than square or round ones!  Red is no more appealing than any other colour and of course if emotions are high, they tend to last more than a day!  Ideally do not spend any money!  In the unfortunate event that you do, do not cook your romantic meal with a sharp knife.  You may pierce the palm of your hand and end up with stitches.  Do not spread chocolate on a partner before establishing if they are allergic to any of the ingredients, you may end up in A&E.  Do not offer them wine, if they have an intolerance to alcohol, they may vomit all over your pristine bedspread. Do not write something funny or profound if they are thick and unable to comprehend deeper meanings (in that case what are you doing with them???). Love is not an idea, a moment, a day, an instant.  It is a lifetime however long or short it is. You will live in love and you will die in love. Even when you are by yourself love is in you and it cannot be defined by the actions of people around you.  Finally, love is selfless so do not try to control them, “love is a rebellious bird that nobody can tame”!   

Let’s talk about sex!  

Very few topics receive attention as much as sex.  A very primal human behaviour that gets people talking.  In Criminology any discussion on sex contains those elements that make it less than appealing, abuse, exploitation and violation.  Our focus on the criminal dimensions of sexual behaviour can disfigure the way we talk about it and misrepresent the joys of sex.  It can be argued however that outlining the negatives gives way to a positive outlook to sex in a similar way to health professional’s focus on avoiding sexually transmitted diseases, leading to a healthy sexual life. 

Sex is about affirming social relations, as part of our own intimacy.  There is a variety on sex from feelings, practices and expressions that is as wide as humanity itself.  It is a language we talk that needs no translation.  This is why that abusive behaviours are regarded such a violation of the person.  Rape, legally, is as serious as murder.  The person victimised is losing something so intimate that it may never be recovered; one of the many reasons why people who suffered abuse are called survivors. 

Our perspectives on sex changes and our society tried to accommodate them.  Some years ago, Holland decided to include some scenes on “public liberal expressions on sexuality” as part of their material for their immigration test.  This is a marked difference from the UK who decriminalised homosexuality but only behind closed doors.

Criminologically speaking there are certain elements that safeguard sexual behaviours.  Age, relation, location and consent.  The age of consent is recognising the minimum age any person can be legally responsible to engage in sexual relations.  Under that age and it is statutory rape.  Any relationship between close relatives in the UK can lead to imprisonment.  Any sexual acts in public are regarded illegal, including sex in public toilets (cottaging) so sex remains behind closed doors.  The final point is the most controversial; consent is paramount to any sexual relations.  The important thing in sex is that we choose to engage with others or not.

Part of the criminological process is to ascertain how we understand consent and disseminate it to others.  Academically there are several issues to consider and to investigate.  This is one of criminology’s strengths to tap into the sociological and philosophical discourses offering some practical perspectives.  In recent years the discussion about sex on campus for example has been one that raised awareness on consent.  In criminology we discuss it in ways to amplify the importance of consent in sex and in relationships in general. 

For a long time now, we have talked about safe spaces as a mechanism of allowing people to talk without judgement.  We focus on educational practices that are focused on inclusion and empathy and disseminate work that challenges established notions that mythologise sexual relations and minimise the importance of consent. 

Let’s explore some of the key points we disseminate. Sex is an individual right for all regardless of origin or identity, which makes it also a universal right.  Law safeguards sexual relations, but the lack of reporting of sexual violence, the low conviction rate of those processed cases and the volume of unknowns underscore that we cannot resolve sexual violence legally.  We cannot police sexual relations when our community does not prioritise the importance of safeguarding human rights.  What we can do instead is to change that social discourse on sex.  In one of my previous posts, I underscored the irony of proliferating legal interventions, whilst culturally we seem happy to receive expressions on misogyny, abuse and exploitation as legitimate expressions on sexuality.  Policing sexual behaviours for example comes with a long history of retaining the straight man’s privilege of pleasure over all others.  A privilege long retained unchallenged making the work of current and future criminologists even more pressing! At the end of this month, it is International Day of Consent in November 30, so from today until the end of the month, ask yourself what you have done to change the established narrative to make your own space more inclusive. 

The bitter-sweet sport of boxing   

For over a decade, the sport of boxing had not witnessed an undisputed heavyweight championship. The last time the undisputed heavyweight title was held was by Lennox Lewis in 1999. However, on Saturday, the 18th of May, the boxing world witnessed a historic moment as a new king was crowned in the heavyweight division. The Ukrainian boxer, Oleksandr Usyk handed Tyson Fury his first career loss, becoming the first undisputed heavyweight champion and the only one to hold all the belts simultaneously.                                      

Boxing is a sport that unites people from diverse backgrounds, where we celebrate the tactical movements and the sweet science of the sport. It is a discipline filled with emotions, deep concentration, and strategic movements. While the crowning of a new undisputed heavyweight champion is a momentous occasion and a historic achievement worth celebrating, it is also important to reflect on the inherent dangers of the sport. The tragic death of British boxer Sherif Lawal serves as a sobering reminder of the risks that these athletes face every time they step into the ring. Boxing, like many combat sports, carries the potential for serious and life-altering injuries, including traumatic brain injuries, concussions, facial injuries, and so forth.. The sport has witnessed several heartbreaking stories, such as the case of Muhammad Ali and Michael Watson, who suffered devastating injuries that forever changed the course of their lives. Thus, as we celebrate in the excitement of a new undisputed heavyweight champion, we must also acknowledge the sacrifices these warriors make and the commitment they have to their craft. It is a delicate balance – celebrating the sweet science of boxing while recognising the inherent dangers that come with it. By keeping these realities in mind, we can appreciate the greatness of the sport while advocating for the utmost safety measures and support for those who put their well-being on the line for our entertainment.

Rest easy Champ!! 🕊 🕊

It’s all about perspective…

Is it a rabbit or a duck?

Within criminology, and other social science disciplines, the understanding that knowledge is socially constructed and meaning is given to things from people and their interactions is particularly pertinent: especially for researchers involved with people. And ‘perspective’ can be challenging to navigate, challenging to be critical of and challenging to recognise within and outside of a research context. Thinking about the public, the understanding of the nature of knowledge is often taken at face value and not viewed critically; perhaps a skill or requirement which should be part of mainstream education, then again maybe not. Consider the below example, your thoughts and attitudes towards the actors, actions and outcomes… consider your perspective.

A boy begins testing boundaries with his father, he deliberately disobeys him around where he can go and what he can do. He even encourages a friend to join him on his adventures: ducking away from the adult eyes that are watching over them. The boy is told off for putting himself and friend in a dangerous situation, and he appears sincere for his mistakes. Alas, he finds himself in trouble again; this time with dire consequences. The boy’s father dies trying to get him out of trouble. The boy runs away to a place where his past is unknown, and joins a group of outcasts. He grows up into a young man on the fringes of society. He is persuaded to return home, whereby he is involved in a violent fight, which almost results in his death. Luckily, he overcomes his opposition; finding himself with a only a few cuts and bruises. His opponent is forced to flee. He is triumphant, but at what cost?

This is one perspective and overview: from an outsider looking in. There are other ways to describe the example below (which we will come on to), but firstly: what are your thoughts on the young boy and his behaviour? What outcomes are required, if any, and at what stages of this boy’s life? Is this something which requires support, love and care or surveillance, control and discipline?

Another way of looking at the above scenario is to watch the Lion King (1994).1 The young boy in question is Simba. Maybe you already spotted that, maybe you aren’t familiar with the story or perspectives the film is told by. Perspectives matter….

  1. For those less familiar with Disney animations, the themes are also apparent within Shakespeare’s Hamlet (c. 1600). ↩︎

Justice or Just Another One?

Luckily I’ve never been one for romantic movies. I always preferred a horror movie. I just didn’t know that my love life would become the worst horror movie I could ever encounter. I was only 18 when I met the monster who presented as a half decent human being. I didn’t know the world very well at that point and he made sure that he became my world. The control and coercion, at the time, seemed like romantic gestures. It’s only with hind sight that I can look back and realise every “kind” and “loving” gesture came from a menacing place of control and selfishness. I was fully under his spell. But anyway, I won’t get into every detail ever. I guess I just wanted to preface this with the fact that abuse doesn’t just start with abuse. It starts with manipulation that is often disguised as love and romance in a twisted way.

This man went on to break me down into a shell of myself before the physical abuse started. Even then, him getting that angry was somehow always my fault. I caused that reaction in his sick, twisted mind and I started to believe it was my fault too. The final incident took place and the last thing I can clearly recall is hearing how he was going to cave my head in before I felt this horrendous pressure on my neck with his other hand keeping me from making any noise that would expose him.

By chance, I managed to get free and RUN to my family. Immediately took photos of my injuries too because even in my state, I know how the Criminal Justice System would not be on my side without evidence they deemed suitable.

Anyway, my case ended up going to trial. Further trauma. Great. I had to relive the entire relationship by having every part of my character questioned on the stand like I was the criminal in this instance. I even got told by his defence that I had “Histrionic Personality Disorder”. Something I have never been diagnosed with, or even been assessed for. Just another way the CJS likes to pathologise women’s trauma. Worst of all, turns out ‘Doctor Defence’ ended up dropping my abuser as he was professionally embarrassed when he realised he knew my mother who was also a witness. Wonderful. This meant I got to go through the process of being criminalised, questioned, diagnosed with disorders I hadn’t heard of at the time, hear the messages, see the photos ALL over again.

Although “justice” prevailed in as much as he was found guilty. All for the sake of a suspended sentence. Perfect. The man who made me feel like he was my world then also tried to end my life was still going to be free enough to see me. The law wasn’t enough to stop him from harming me, why would it be enough to stop him now?

Fortunately for me, it stopped him harming me. However, it did not stop him harming his next victim. For the sake of her, I won’t share any details of her story as it is not mine to share. Yet, this man is now behind bars for a pretty short period of time as he has once again harmed a woman. Evidently, I was right. The law was not enough to stop him. Which leads me to the point of this post, at what stage does the CJS actually start to take women’s pleas to feel safe seriously? Does this man have to go as far to take away a woman’s life entirely before someone finally deems him as dangerous? Why was my harm not enough? Would the CJS have suddenly seen me as a victim, rather than making me feel like a criminal in court, if I was eternally silenced? Why do women have to keep dying at the hands of men because the CJS protects domestic abusers?”



Christmas Toys

In CRI3002 we reflected on the toxic masculine practices which are enacted in everyday life. Hegemonic masculinity promotes the ideology that the most respectable way of being ‘a man’ is to engage in masculine practices that maintain the White elite’s domination of marginalised people and nations. What is interesting is that in a world that continues to be incredibly violent, the toxicity of state-inflicted hegemonic masculinity is rarely mentioned. 

The militaristic use of State violence in the form of the brutal destruction of people in the name of apparent ‘just’ conflicts is incredibly masculine. To illustrate, when it is perceived and constructed that a privileged position and nation is under threat, hegemonic masculinity would ensure that violent measures are used to combat this threat.    

For some, life is so precious yet for others, life is so easily taken away. Whilst some have engaged in Christmas traditions of spending time with the family, opening presents and eating luxurious foods, some are experiencing horrors that should only ever be read in a dystopian novel.  

Through privileged Christmas play-time with new toys like soldiers and weapons, masculine violence continues to be normalised. Whilst for some children, soldiers and weapons have caused them to be victims of wars with the most catastrophic consequences.   

Even through children’s play-time the privileged have managed to promote everyday militarism for their own interests of power, money and domination. Those in the Global North are lead to believe that we should be proud of the army and how it protects ‘us’ by dominating ‘them’ (i.e., ‘others/lesser humans and nations’).  

Still in 2023 children play with symbolically violent toys whilst not being socialised to question this. The militaristic toys are marketed to be fun and exciting – perhaps promoting apathy rather than empathy. If promoting apathy, how will the world ever change? Surely the privileged should be raising their children to be ashamed of the use of violence rather than be proud of it?