The role of the media in mobilising public opinion about crime motivates some criminologists to participate as experts in media constructions of crime and social control. These public discourses help shape the social construction of offending, the public response to victims of violence and the organisation of popular consent for particular crime control strategies. This article reviews and critiques the empirical and theoretical foundations of a criminological discourse of gender symmetry in domestic violence, and gender bias in the criminal justice system, that has galvanised the popular press in New Zealand and disrupted widely accepted views of domestic violence and criminal justice processes.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AllenM. (2000). Provocation's reasonable man: A plea for self control. Journal of Criminal Law, 64, 216–244.
2.
AriasI. (1999). Women's responses to physical and psychological abuse. In ArriagaX.B.OskampS.(Eds.), Violence in intimate relationships. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
3.
BarakG. (1988). Newsmaking criminology: Reflections on the media, intellectuals and crime. Justice Quarterly, 5, 565–588.
4.
BarnardG.W.VeraM.NewmanG. (1982). Till death us do part? A study of spouse murder. Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and Law, 10, 271–280.
5.
BarwickH.GrayA.MackyR. (2000). Domestic Violence Act 1995: Process evaluation. Wellington: Ministry of Justice and Department for Courts.
6.
BrownB. (1995). Women and crime: The dark figures of criminology. In NaffineN. (Ed.), Gender, crime and feminism. Aldershot: Dartmouth.
7.
BrowneA.WilliamsK.DuttonD. (1999). Homicide between intimate partners: A 20-year review. In SmithM.D.ZahnM.A. (Eds.), Homicide: A sourcebook of social research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
8.
DalyK. (1989). Rethinking judicial paternalism: Gender, work–family relations and sentencing. Gender and Society, 3, 9–36.
9.
DalyK. (1994). Gender, crime, and punishment. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
10.
DobashR.P.DobashR.E.WilsonM.DalyM. (1992). The myth of sexual symmetry in marital violence. Social Problems, 39, 71–91.
11.
Dominion. (1997, September 9).
12.
Dominion. (1997, September 20).
13.
Dominion. (1997, September 24).
14.
DuganL.NaginD.S.RosenfeldR. (1999). Explaining the decline in intimate partner homicide: The effects of changing domesticity, women's status, and domestic violence resources. Homicide Studies, 3, 187–214.
15.
EastealP.W. (1993). Killing the beloved: Homicide between adult sexual intimates. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology.
16.
Evening Standard. (1997, July 23).
17.
FieldingK.ScottH. (1999). Domestic violence: A workshop to enhance case management and learning: Tools for Safety Questionnaire, Version 2. Paper prepared for International Society for Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect, Publications, Reports: 1999, Wellington: Ministry of Justice. Retrieved, August, 13, 2002, from http://www.justice.govt.nz.
18.
GellesR.StrausM.A. (1999). Profiling violent families. In SkolnickA.SkolnickJ. (Eds.), The family in transition. White Plains, NY: Longman.
19.
Girls gone bad even the score. (2000, June 16). Truth.
20.
HallG. [1985a]. Sentencing (I) matters of aggravation and mitigation. New Zealand Law Journal, 139–143.
21.
HallG. [1985b]. Sentencing (II) matters of aggravation and mitigation. New Zealand Law Journal, 184–191.
22.
HallG. (1992). Victim impact statements: Sentencing on thin ice?New Zealand Universities Law Review, 15, 143–162.
23.
HallG.G.O'DriscollS. (2002). The New Sentencing and Parole Acts. New Zealand Law Society Seminar: NZLS.
24.
HambergerL.K.GuseC.E. (2002). Men's and women's use of intimate partner violence in clinical samples. Violence Against Women, 8, 1301–1331.
25.
HandJ.ElizabethV.MartinB.RauwheroH.BurtonM.SelbyS.. (2002). Free from abuse: What women say and what can be done. Auckland: Auckland District Health Board.
26.
HealeyK.SmithC.O'SullivanC. (1998). Batterer intervention: Program approaches and criminal justice strategies. National Institute of Justice, Washington, DC: US Department of Justice.
27.
JacobsonN.GottmanJ.WaltzJ.RusheR.BabcockJ.Holtzworth-MunroeA. (1994). Affect, verbal content, psychophysiology in the argument of couples with a violent husband. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 62, 982–988.
28.
Jail “less likely for women”. (1999, August 21). Press.
29.
JamesK. (1999) Truth or fiction: Men as victims of domestic violence? In BreckenridgeJ.LaingL. (Eds.), Challenging silence: Innovative responses to sexual and domestic violence. Sydney: Allen & Unwin.
30.
JeffriesS. (2001). Gender judgments: An investigation of gender differentiation in sentencing and remand in New Zealand. Unpublished Doctoral thesis, Canterbury University, Christchurch.
31.
JeffriesS. (2002). Just or unjust? Problematising the gendered nature of criminal justice. Women's Studies Journal, 18, 24–41.
32.
JeffriesS.NewboldG. (1999). Gender disparity in court sentencing: Preliminary results of a New Zealand Study. Unpublished. Canterbury University, Christchurch.
33.
JohnsonM.P. (1995). Patriarchal terrorism and common couple violence: Two forms of violence against women. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 57, 283–294.
34.
JohnsonM.P. (2000). Conflict and control: Symmetry and asymmetry in domestic violence. In BoothA.CrouterA.ClementsM. (Eds.), Couples in conflict. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
35.
JohnsonM.P.FerraroK.I. (2000). Research on domestic violence in the 1990s: Making distinctions. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, 948–963.
36.
KazantzisN.FlettR.A.LongN.R.MacDonaldC.MillarM. (2000). Domestic violence, psychological distress, and physical illness among New Zealand women: Results from a community-based study. New Zealand Journal of Psychology, 29, 67–73.
37.
KimmelM.S. (2002). “Gender symmetry” in domestic violence. Violence Against Women, 8, 1332–1363.
38.
LangleyJ.MartinJ.Nada-RajaS. (1997). Physical assault among 21-year-olds by partners. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 12, 675–684.
39.
LeibrichJ.PaulinJ.RansomR. (1995). Hitting home: Men speak about abuse of women partners. Wellington: Department of Justice.
40.
MagdolL.MoffittT.E.CaspiA.NewmanD.L.FaganJ.SilvaP.A. (1997). Gender differences in partner violence in a birth cohort of 21-year-olds: Bridging the gap between clinical and epidemiological approaches. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65, 68–78.
41.
McDonaldE. (1993). Provocation, sexuality and the actions of “thoroughly decent men”. Women's Studies Journal, 9, 126–147.
42.
Ministry of Justice. (2001). The age of physical abuse victims and the sentence imposed on their abusers. Wellington: Author.
43.
MoffittT.CaspiA.RutterM.SilvaP. (2001). Sex differences in antisocial behaviour: Conduct disorder, delinquency, and volence in the Dunedin Longitudinal Study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
44.
MorrisA. (1998). The prevalence in New Zealand of violence against women by their current male partners. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 31, 267–286.
45.
NewboldG. (2000). Crime in New Zealand. Palmerston North: Dunmore Press.
46.
NewboldG. (2000b). Author's response to reviewer: Greg Newbold “Crime in New Zealand”. New Zealand Sociology, 15, 373–375.
47.
New Zealand Law Commission. (2001). Some criminal defences with particular reference to battered defendants. R 73. Wellington: Author.
48.
New Zealand Law Commission. (2001). Proof of disputed facts on sentence. R 76. Wellington: Author.
49.
NourseV. (1997). Passion's progress: Modern law reform and the provocation defense. Yale Law Journal, 106, 1331–1448.
50.
Off the hook: Do female criminals get off the hook too easily? (2000, January 30). Sunday Star Times.
51.
Otago Daily times (2000, November 2).
52.
PolkK. (1994). When men kill: Scenarios of masculine violence, Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.
53.
Press. (2000, October 10).
54.
PuzoneC.SaltzmanL.KresnowM.ThompsonM.MercyJ. (2000). National trends in intimate partner homicide. Violence Against Women, 6, 409–426.
55.
RennisonC.M. (2001). Intimate partner violence and age of victim 1993–1999. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
56.
RennisonC.M.WelchansS. (2000). Intimate partner violence, Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
57.
Report findings that men are more bashed than bashing “misleading”. (2000, November 2). Otago Daily Times.
58.
SchernitzkiR.A. (2000). What kind of mother are you? The relationship between motherhood, battered woman syndrome and Missouri law. Journal of the Missouri Bar, 56, 50–57.
59.
SchwartzM.D.DeKeseredyW.S. (1993). The return of the “battered husband syndrome” through the typification of women as violent. Crime, Law and Social Change20, 249–265.
60.
Seeking an equality of revulsion. (2000, February 4). Press.
61.
Sensitive service monstered. (1996, March 31). Sunday News.
62.
SkinaziH.R. (1997). Not just a conjured afterthought: Using duress as a defense for battered women who fail to protect. California Law Review, 85, 993–1042.
63.
Social welfare admits it failed [W's] child. (1996, March 27). Dominion.
64.
Social worker in fear of sex “beast” — report. (1997, May 2). Dominion.
65.
SpierP. (1999). Conviction and sentencing of offenders in New Zealand: 1989–1998. Wellington: Ministry of Justice.
66.
StalansL.LurigioJ.ArthurJ. (1995). Public preferences for the court's handling of domestic violence situations. Crime and Delinquency, 41, 399–408.
67.
SteffensmeierD.AllanE. (1990). Gender, age and crime. In SheleyJ. (Ed.), Handbook of criminology. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
68.
SteffensmeierD.KramerJ.StreifelC. (1993). Gender and imprisonment decisions. Criminology, 31, 411–444.
69.
StrausM.A. (1995). Measuring intrafamily conflict and violence: The Conflict Tactics (CT) Scales. In StrausM.A.GellesR. (Eds.), Physical violence in American families. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
70.
StrausM.A. (1999). The controversy over domestic violence by women: A methodological, theoretical, and sociology of science analysis. In ArriagaX.B.OskampS. (Eds.), Violence in intimate relationships. Thousand Oaks, CA: SageSage.
71.
StrausM.A.GellesR.J.SteinmetzS. (1980). Behind closed doors: Violence in the American family. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
72.
Study finds violent women risk retaliation. (2002, May 12). Sunday Star Times.
73.
Sugar and Spice. (2001, June 10). Sunday Star Times.
74.
Threats to harm children. (1996, March 27). Evening Post.
75.
TjadenP.ThoennesN. (2000). Extent, nature and consequences of intimate partner violence: Findings from the National Violence Against Women survey. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
76.
TriggsS. (1999). Sentencing in New Zealand: A statistical analysis. Wellington: NZ Ministry of Justice.
77.
US Department of Justice. (1998). Violence by intimates: Analysis of data on crimes by current or former spouses, boyfriends and girlfriends. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
78.
Victims of violence. (1997, November 9). Sunday Star Times.
79.
Violence by women “ignored”. (1996, October 27). Sunday Star Times.
80.
Waikato Times. (1999, February 27).
81.
What others are saying. (1996, April 3). Evening Post.
82.
WilsonM.DalyM. (1993). Spousal homicide risk and estrangement. Violence and Victims, 8, 3–16.
