Prisoning Indigenous Women: Strength and Resilience in the Face of Systemic Trauma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The overrepresentation of Indigenous peoples in the Canadian criminal justice system is an enduring and systemic issue that must be addressed. Over the past 10 years, the proportion of women behind bars has increased by almost 30 percent; for Indigenous women, this number is 60 percent (Office of the Correctional Investigator 2017). Using a critical feminist criminological lens, this paper explores the ways in which colonial legacies, patriarchy, trauma, and systemic victimization inside and outside the criminal justice system contribute to the criminalization and (over)prisoning of Indigenous women and questions the practice of prisoning an already marginalized and oppressed group of people. Drawing on critical feminist criminological research and empirical studies, I theorize a victimization–criminalization–incarceration cycle concept to explain the ways in which societal- , institutional- , and individual-level factors intersect and impact Indigenous women’s journeys through the criminal justice system in tangled and complicated ways. Future research could provide additional insights into the potential value of this concept for policy and practice.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".