No abstract

No abstract

Two antithetical arguments have raised controversies over the effect of recreational marijuana legalization on hard drug use. The gateway perspective posits that marijuana use diffuses hard drug use; however, recent studies argue that marijuana legalization displaces hard drug use. This study examines these conflicting arguments by investigating temporal patterns of hard drug–related hospitalizations (HDHs) before and after marijuana legalization. Using county-level State Inpatient Database data from Washington State for the years 2009–2015, along with other federal data sources, this study assesses temporal changes in HDH using growth curve modeling. Initial findings show support for the displacement perspective, though controlling for other county-level factors (education and economic change) indicates that the legalization of recreational marijuana may be a gateway toward harder drugs. Considering the economic situation of the United States during the study period, this study concludes that marijuana legalization functioned as a gateway toward increased hard drug use.

Since the 1970s, the number of women under correctional supervision has risen drastically. With the increase in women’s system-involvement, it is important to consider the impact that crime-focused labels may have on women’s self-perceptions and reentry. This study applies a feminist lens to labeling theory. Through phenomenological interviews and focus groups with 19 women under community supervision in a Northwestern State, women’s responses were analyzed using thematic analysis. Four major themes emerged highlighting the distinct contexts of women’s responses to labels and the impacts of such labels on their lives. Theoretical and policy implications are discussed.

Our commentary responds to claims made by DiMarco and colleagues in an article published in this journal that the majority of victims of rape are men and that 80% of those who rape men are women. Although we strongly believe that studying male sexual victimization is a highly important research and policy endeavour, we have concerns with the approach taken by DiMarco and colleagues to discuss these incidents. Specifically, we critique their paper by addressing the definitions of rape used by the authors, questioning their interpretation of national victim surveys, evaluating their analysis of the underreporting of male rape, and highlighting the heteronormative framework they use to outline the landscape of male sexual victimization. With this commentary, we call for a holistic, nuanced, and balanced study of male sexual victimization that recognizes the reality of both female-on-male and male-on-male violence, the experiences of survivors, and multi-layered barriers that male victims often encounter.