Female-perpetrated sexual abuse: a review of victim and professional perspectives

Professional attitudes towards female-perpetrated sexual abuse (FPSA) reportedly reflect he gender-role expectations found in broader society, which cast males almost exclusively as sexual aggressors or willing sexual recipients, females as sexually non-coercive or victims and male-perpetrated sexual abuse as particularly significant or injurious. Such views, however, appear to stand in contrast to the perspectives of individuals who have experienced FPSA. This paper details a systematic review of peer-reviewed quantitative and qualitative literature examining these different (professional and victim) perspectives. Although the methodological shortcomings of primary papers limit the conclusions that can be drawn, the findings suggest that victim and professional perspectives of FPSA remain discrepant; professionals generally considered FPSA as less serious, less harmful and less deserving of investigation than male-perpetrated abuse; while victims of FPSA felt their experiences influenced significantly their psychological wellbeing and abilities to form and maintain interpersonal relationships. These findings are discussed in relation to professional practice and suggestions for future research

Women convicted for violent offenses: Adverse childhood experiences, low level of education and poor mental health

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In past years, the female offender population has grown, leading to an increased interest in the characteristics of female offenders. The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of female violent offending in a Swiss offender population and to compare possible socio-demographic and offense-related gender differences.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Descriptive and bivariate logistic regression analyses were performed for a representative sample of N = 203 violent offenders convicted in Zurich, Switzerland.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>7.9% (N = 16) of the sample were female. Significant gender differences were found: Female offenders were more likely to be married, less educated, to have suffered from adverse childhood experiences and to be in poor mental health. Female violent offending was less heterogeneous than male violent offending, in fact there were only three types of violent offenses females were convicted for in our sample: One third were convicted of murder, one third for arson and only one woman was convicted of a sex offense.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The results of our study point toward a gender-specific theory of female offending, as well as toward the importance of developing models for explaining female criminal behavior, which need to be implemented in treatment plans and intervention strategies regarding female offenders.</p

Diverse perspectives on interdisciplinarity from members of the college of the Royal Society of Canada

Various multiple-disciplinary terms and concepts (although most commonly “interdisciplinarity,” which is used herein) are used to frame education, scholarship, research, and interactions within and outside academia. In principle, the premise of interdisciplinarity may appear to have many strengths; yet, the extent to which interdisciplinarity is embraced by the current generation of academics, the benefits and risks for doing so, and the barriers and facilitators to achieving interdisciplinarity, represent inherent challenges. Much has been written on the topic of interdisciplinarity, but to our knowledge there have been few attempts to consider and present diverse perspectives from scholars, artists, and scientists in a cohesive manner. As a team of 57 members from the Canadian College of New Scholars, Artists, and Scientists of the Royal Society of Canada (the College) who self-identify as being engaged or interested in interdisciplinarity, we provide diverse intellectual, cultural, and social perspectives. The goal of this paper is to share our collective wisdom on this topic with the broader community and to stimulate discourse and debate on the merits and challenges associated with interdisciplinarity. Perhaps the clearest message emerging from this exercise is that working across established boundaries of scholarly communities is rewarding, necessary, and is more likely to result in impact. However, there are barriers that limit the ease with which this can occur (e.g., lack of institutional structures and funding to facilitate cross-disciplinary exploration). Occasionally, there can be significant risk associated with doing interdisciplinary work (e.g., lack of adequate measurement or recognition of work by disciplinary peers). Solving many of the world’s complex and pressing problems (e.g., climate change, sustainable agriculture, the burden of chronic disease, and aging populations) demands thinking and working across long-standing, but in some ways restrictive, academic boundaries. Academic institutions and key support structures, especially funding bodies, will play an important role in helping to realize what is readily apparent to all who contributed to this paper—that interdisciplinarity is essential for solving complex problems; it is the new norm. Failure to empower and encourage those doing this research will serve as a great impediment to training, knowledge, and addressing societal issues

A Quantitative Study on Gender Differences in Disclosing Child Sexual Abuse and Reasons for Nondisclosure

Despite the available literature on disclosure of child sexual abuse (CSA), little is known about how gender affects disclosure. This article aims to quantitatively examine whether gender differences exist in formal (to legal or child protection authorities) and informal (to a family member or friend) disclosure of CSA and, if so, to assess whether this relation is associated with abuse characteristics and attitudes toward gender roles. The study also aimed to examine whether gender differences exist in reasons not to disclose CSA. Data of a sample of 586 participants, who reported to have experienced CSA committed by a single person, have been used for the analyses. There were no gender differences for formal disclosure, but the informal disclosure rate of CSA was 2.4 times higher for women than men, and this effect remained significant after controlling for abuse characteristics and attitudes, even though the gender difference decreased slightly. Furthermore, women and men reported different reasons for not disclosing CSA in their personal network. Women were more worried than men that family and friends would discover the abuse and reported more insecurity of what to do in this situation. Professionals in the field of CSA should consider a gender perspective when developing guidelines. Men have rarely been the subject of studies of disclosure after CSA. Professionals should focus more on general mental health outcomes of men that are not related with CSA directly, but where the effects of CSA may exert more indirectly through associations with other problems in life