Reframing criminal victimization: Finding a place for vulnerability and resilience

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to examine the ways in which studies of criminal victimization have contributed to this presumption of human vulnerability, and to examine the potential in understandings of resilience for overcoming this presumption. In order to do this the argument falls into three parts. In the first part I shall consider the different ways in which victimization and vulnerability have been linked together. In the second I shall examine the concept of resilience and its relationship, if any, with vulnerability and victimization. Throughout this discussion I shall draw on feminist informed work as a way of suggesting a differently oriented approach to both of these concepts: presented here as thinking otherwise. In the final and concluding part of this article the implications of contemporary understandings of these concepts will be situated within the broader policy context characterized by Aradau (2004) as informed by a ‘politics of pity’.

Talking about risk-taking with potentially ‘problematic’ risk-takers: a study of preventive interactions under high uncertainty

“…Drawing upon feminist informed work applied to the study of domestic violence, Walklate and Mythen (2011 -see also Walklate 2011) argue that the intimate experience of living with what is framed as risk provides -as a form of 'knowing otherwise' -an intrinsic added-value for domestic violence risk assessment (Walklate and Mythen 2011). As such, this can become a specific resource for the development of self-resilience in situations of adversity (Walklate 2011). In this sense, their view contrasts with those of Prior (2003).…”

From offender to victim-oriented monitoring: a comparative analysis of the emergence of electronic monitoring systems in Argentina and England and Wales

“…The lived experience of those subject to surveillance has been subjected to enhanced scrutiny although this experience is often misunderstood within the policy arena. VOEM actively challenges the offender-oriented assumptions and priorities of state, private and third sector officials and their tendency to focus upon victims' administrative needs -such as rights, voice and satisfaction -to the detriment of experiential and actualized notions of victim safety and mechanisms for building resilience (Walklate, 2011;Duggan & Heap, 2014). In the Buenos Aires case study, traditional criminal justice agencies remain stakeholders but the emphasis placed upon the individual as the active decision-maker (Christie, 2008) takes the concept of bi-lateral EM further and delineates VOEM from previously offender-oriented policy.…”

Resilience in UK counter-terrorism

“…On the one hand, some criminologists believe it to be an empowering doctrine which can benefit marginalized groups (Mason and Pulvirenti, 2013;Walklate, 2011). On the other hand, Foucauldian approaches stress that governments are inculcating self-discipline and legitimizing the expansion of their own power (Ball, 2011;O'Malley, 2010).…”