Women fear crime more than men (Cops and Pleysier, 2011), have heightened awareness of everyday risks particularly of sexual and physical danger (Stanko, 1990), and they engage in more constrained behaviours than men (Rader et al, 2007; Tomsich et al, 2011). Little research had examined the adoption of such risk management strategies and the impact of gender (May et al, 2010), in an English context. However, focusing on the most at risk age-group for criminal victimisation, 393 students completed an online survey, which was designed to assess whether gender affected the strategies they adopted to prevent victimisation of both acquisitive and personal crimes, on-campus, and to stay safe. The findings indicate that females are more likely to adopt risk-management strategies to prevent personal sexual attack during the day and after dark, compared to males. Females also adopt additional strategies after dark to stay safe. The implications of the findings to convey accurate messages about risks of victimisation are discussed.
This chapter discusses the policy context of South Korea, dating back to the Asian Financial Crisis in 1997, which provided the initial foundation for the birth of a substantial anti-poverty policy. The National Basic Living Security Scheme has since remained an important feature of the current socio-economic and political context. The chapter provides an overview of whether there have been any significant changes in the social context that have influenced the broad direction of this initial policy. In relation to our understanding of the economic and political context of this period, the chapter addresses trends over time in dominant public discourse concerning the nature, manifestations and causes of poverty and how these changing discourses may have changed poverty’s psycho-social dimensions. Finally, the chapter outlines the relevant dynamics of political power and its protagonists that have framed recent anti-poverty policy in South Korea.
Many undergraduate students in the UK fall into age groups particularly at risk from interpersonal violence. Recent evidence suggests that a range of interpersonal violence is part of the university experience for a significant number of students. In this article, we report on the findings of an online survey of male and female students administered at a university in the north of England in 2016 exploring experiences of interpersonal violence during their time as a student. Focusing on the qualitative responses, 75 respondents, mostly women, wrote about their experiences of sexual violence. In presenting women’s accounts, we challenge the construction of the ‘ideal victim’ who is viewed as weak, passive and without agency or culpability (). Women adopt a range of strategies to actively resist men’s sexual violence. In doing so, they challenge and problematise perpetrators’ behaviours particularly tropes that communicate and forefront the heterosexual dating model of courtship. These findings raise implications for women’s strategies of resistance to be viewed as examples of social change where victim-blaming is challenged, perpetrator-blaming is promoted and femininity/victims are reconstructed as agentic. Universities must educate students about sexual violence, dating and intimacy, as well as provide support for victims of sexual violence.
This chapter reports on the findings from an online survey of female students administered at a university in the north of England exploring perceptions of safety and experiences of interpersonal violence, predominantly in public spaces. The chapter considers how landscapes of (un)safety feature in female students’ experiences of, and strategies to avoid, predominantly sexual harassment, abuse and violence. While certain places and spaces within the urban landscape are regarded as ‘safe’ and ‘unsafe’, their status as such is contingent. Material characteristics of urban landscapes are brought together with social, emotional and affective aspects, to form ‘atmospheres’. The chapter explores how female students recognize, experience and negotiate these hostile yet ‘ambivalent’ and potentially shifting emotional and material environments and atmospheres of university life. The chapter further argues that these atmospheres are shaped by broader processes of neoliberal urbanism.