Colonial-Carceral Violence: The Pains of Imprisonment for First Nations Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article explores the structural violence that the colony inflicts on Aboriginal women in prisons. Based on two large-scale NSW studies, it highlights the impacts of imprisonment on Aboriginal women’s health, families and social, cultural and emotional wellbeing. The stories of Aboriginal women in prison are more than a glimpse into the ‘pains of imprisonment’. The walls, bars and cages do not define the totality of the pains imposed on Aboriginal women by the colonial regime. Aboriginal women suggest life beyond prison is endured as an open-air prison. This article argues that violence in prisons cannot be separated from the violence on the outside and that decolonisation is a necessary antidote. By engaging the voices of imprisoned First Nations women, the article shifts the focus in violence studies from inter-personal violence to state-sanctioned violence. It contends that strong community-controlled justice organisations that are run by and for Aboriginal women provide a pathway to strengthen and empower First Nations women. These organisations enact self-determination and sovereignty on the ground and counter the colonial structural violence of imprisonment.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".