Search Results

Online fraud victimisation affects millions of individuals globally. Despite its prevalence, it remains a contested area, whereby there is a strong victim blaming attitude towards those who are victims. There is a strong negative stereotype that victims are greedy, gullible, uneducated and somewhat deserving of their victimisation. This works as a barrier to silence and stigmatise individuals who are fearful to disclose their victimisation to family, friends, law enforcement and other third parties. Using Christie’s (1986) notion of the ‘ideal victim’, this chapter examines how online fraud victims are denied victim status despite the offences perpetrated against them. Through an application of the five characteristics that Christie (1986) asserts constitute an ideal victim, this chapter explores the challenges that currently exist for online fraud victims to be recognised as legitimate victims, and the factors which operate to deny them of this victimisation status. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the implications for online fraud victims in the current environment. It advocates the need for change to better respond to online fraud victims, rather than exacerbating or adding to the trauma they have already experienced at the hands of offenders.

Female sex worker victim characteristics and their social, situational and interactive contexts have not substantially changed. Yet, the manner in which female sex worker victimisation is currently understood has changed in some quarters. This chapter documents the unusual inclusion of female sex workers into Merseyside police hate crime policy and practice. Given that female sex workers embody a ‘non-ideal’ victim identity the focus here is to consider what this development may mean for Christie’s (1986) ‘ideal victim’ thesis. In so doing the role (or lack of) emotion and compassion will be discussed. The chapter concludes that victims and victimisation have been reimagined and new victimisations have arisen. However, with regard to hate crime, and the social construction of, and criminal justice responses to the victimisation of female sex workers Christie’s ‘ideal victim’ thesis remains contemporarily relevant and predominantly intact.

In comparison to Christie’s focus on characterising the ‘ideal victim’ and the sociology of the phenomena, this chapter instead focuses on the non-ideal victim and how this sub-group of victims is linked to individual reactions to victimisation. Christie’s discussion of the non-ideal victim goes only so far as ‘witches and workers’ – those victims who are made so due to either their ill health or ignorance of their victimisation, who do not have sufficient strength/power to claim legitimate victim status. Christie does not however consider the individual who doesnot want to be associated with the victim label, and will in fact go to great lengths to avoid victim status, including not reporting crimes to the police or further engaging with criminal justice. Avoiding victimisation, or at least avoiding the victim identity and label, is thereby potentially an effective means of protecting one’s foundational belief systems and maintaining personal wellbeing.

Lynndie England’s conviction, and highly publicised dishonourable discharge from the United States military, for crimes that included photographically documented acts of sexual violence against male detainees in her care, finally succeeded in bringing female sexual offending against male victims to the fore, and served as a watershed moment that forever changed the discourse. Except it didn’t. This event did not disrupt orthodox discourse. It did not breach the gendered binary that casts men as offenders and women as victims. A decade later, it can instead be argued to have bolstered it – being pivotal in maintaining ‘discursive equilibrium’ in preservation of those gendered, normative, binaristic, subject positions that serve to cast men outside of legitimate victimhood; particularly men assaulted by women. This Foucauldian analysis of knowledge production in the academy will examine this stasis, and articulate the discursive mechanisms underlying it - arguing that the ideal victim binary, in the area of sexual violence, constitutes a gender-normative taxonomy that functions as a governmentalised ‘regime of truth’. Ironically, this influence is most stymieing amongst those best placed to resist it.This chapter complexifies Christie’s (1986) concept of the ideal victim through the lens of Foucauldian theory, presenting a clarion call to victimology.

This chapter argues for the need to make victimised lesbian, gay, bisexual and/or transgender (LGB and/or T) people visible within discussions of eligibility for ideal victim status. In considering two examples of victimisation the authors consider why LGB and/or T people can more easily access an ideal victim status when victimised by hate than is possible for those victimised by (or enacting) DVA. The contrasting examples demonstrate that LGB and/or T individuals’ status as ideal victims (or offenders) is tenuous and dependent on the type of victimisation experienced. In both cases, the importance of raising awareness, countering victim-blaming and building trust and accessibility of support services is critical to improve responses to LGB and/or T people.

Victimology is about human suffering, often focusing on the consequences generated by crime and how these affect victims and their lives. It analyzes how society manages pain, so concern about victims’ status and needs are important issues. Yet victimology has an undeserved bad reputation, often being accused of exercising commiseration towards certain victims while forgetting others, or providing excuses for the punitive turn in criminal policy. This chapter argues that another type of victimology is possible. Challenging inadequate understandings of compassion and its limits provides us with a useful tool rooted in public virtue which generates stronger and more accurate victim support. An analysis of victim hierarchies illustrates perceptions of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ victims; those worthy of support and compassion and those that inspire only oblivion or contempt. Further reflection on the ideal victim stereotype present in Nils Christie’s work offers a starting point from which to achieve an inclusive and critical victimology; a victimology that really embraces the conception of useful compassion which is strongly connected with justice as a public virtue in a democratic and decent society. The chapter argues that this may be a way to recover some of the lost prestige of the discipline.

This chapter explores the content and impact of Nils Christie’s seminal essay Revisiting the ‘Ideal Victim’: Developments in Critical Victimology. The chapter outlines Christie’s understanding of the ‘Ideal Victim’ and situates his work within a broader exploration of the emergence of victimology as a discrete field within criminology. The introduction goes on to outline the collection, providing summaries of the later chapters.

Domestic violence victimisation has long been a contested issue with regards to ‘idealised’ victims. Socio-political rhetoric often questions ‘why didn’t she leave?’ yet feminist research has long indicated that leaving a violent partner may increase a female victim’s vulnerability to escalated – and fatal – violence. This chapter assesses a relatively new policy designed to safeguard people from domestic abuse. The Domestic Violence Disclosure Scheme, also known as ‘Clare’s Law’ permits members of the public to apply for information from the police about a partner who they have concerns about regarding abusive behaviours. If a disclosure of previous violence is made, the victim must decide whether to remain in or leave the relationship. Elements of this policy are evaluated in line with Christie’s ‘ideal victim’ concept to demonstrate how it may account for greater harms to applicants. In addition, the chapter explores expectations of safeguarding measures and the potential impact on wider victim-blaming discourses linked to domestic violence.

This chapter reiterates the importance of Christie’s work, and this volume’s reinterrogation of the ‘Ideal Victim’, both historically and in our modern age. The chapter then explores the relationship between Christie’s work and the development of restorative and transitional justice movements. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the limitations of the volume and suggests further work to be undertaken both in keeping with Christie’s work and in the field of victimology more generally.