Cited by 3Criminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisCriminal Justice and PenologyHistorical Gender and Feminism Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 51 of the 51 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 153 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Engendering carcerality: An introduction

Open access
Boris, Eileen, Butler, Sara M., Mireles, Alex·2024·Gender & History

Abstract

Reflecting the carceral turn in scholarship, this introduction to a special issue on engendering carcerality explores the difference that gender makes in the history of the carceral in its various forms over time and space. It considers the multiple meanings and spaces of imprisonment, surveillance, and confinement; incarceration of mothers; confinement of sex workers; imprisoning of political prisoners, and reforming of youths, taking account of intersectional identities, sexuality and resistance. It looks forward by looking back, engaging in a dialogue with abolitionist movements and current global struggles to encourage critical gendered histories of incarceration and resistance.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This introduction to a *Gender & History* special issue argues that gender is a central analytic for understanding carcerality across time and space, and that carceral spaces extend far beyond the prison. It synthesizes contributions on women in prison, mothers, sexuality, and resistance to call for gendered, intersectional, and abolitionist histories of incarceration.

Key findings

  • Gender shapes carceral regimes: carcerality includes control of nonnormative behaviour and gendered/racialised classification, and carceral spaces include monasteries, gulags, workhouses, asylums, Native boarding schools, immigrant detention centres, and refugee camps, among others. The introduction argues Foucault’s carceral-society thesis did not take gender into account.
  • Women are a persistent minority in prison: Barbara Hanawalt found one woman to every nine men accused of felony in three English counties between 1300 and 1348, resembling 1955 United States (1:8) and 1970s Britain (1:7.4); Traylor and Richie document the continuation of this imbalance into the twenty-first century. Women’s pathways differ: the US Department of Justice observes that over half of women incarcerated in state prisons reported a history of physical and sexual abuse, and Kruttschnitt and Gartner argue women in prison are more likely than men to have extensive histories of disability, disadvantage, and misfortune.
  • Gendered punishment and confinement persist: Pemberton observes higher rates of punishment for infractions in women’s prisons than in men’s prisons; during the Northern Ireland Troubles, strip-searching was imposed only on women convicts; anchoresses outnumbered anchorites 4:1; and mothers’ pregnancy and parental rights were rarely recognised, with examples from the Dutch prison of ’s-Hertogenbosch, the Gulag, and Alderson Federal Reformatory.
  • Resistance takes multiple forms: New York streetwalkers collectively deployed habeas corpus and mutual aid; incarcerated women formed Convicted Women Against Abuse and launched a joint clemency movement in California; Gulag prisoners used crafts and correspondence; and the Borstal in India became a means for elite Indians to contest colonial rule.

Methods

  • Design: conceptual and historiographical introduction to a special issue on “engendering carcerality,” not an empirical study.
  • Data or sample: the special issue’s articles and secondary scholarship in gender, carceral, criminological, and historical studies; no new primary data collection is reported.
  • Main analysis: thematic synthesis organised around women in prison, forms of carcerality, mothers in prison, sexuality in prison, and resistance, with a comparative and longue-durée framing.

Limitations

  • Stated: the resulting issue overrepresents modern, even twentieth-century history; the prison looms large; and Europe and the United States predominate, which the authors attribute to the chronological imbalance of Women and Gender History and English-language scholarship. The authors also state that no one issue can cover the world.
  • Evident: as an introduction, it synthesises selected articles and secondary literature rather than systematically reviewing evidence, and its comparative scope is illustrative rather than exhaustive.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/1468-0424.12822

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

0 of 153 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

Show all 91 claims

  • Probably not a substantial claim. 87
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 81
140 of 140
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    We have entered a carceral turn in scholarship, reflective of the rise of mass imprisonment and expansion of policing and surveillance in many areas of the world.

    “We have entered a carceral turn in scholarship, reflective of the rise of mass imprisonment and expansion of policing and surveillance in many areas of the world.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    No one issue can cover the world.

    “Recognising that no one issue can cover the world, in this introduction we offer a longer history to emphasise the continuity of the problems addressed within this issue.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The chronological imbalance of Women and Gender History and scholarship in the English language explains why the resulting issue overrepresents modern, twentieth-century, Europe and United States history.

    “That the resulting issue overrepresents modern, even twentieth-century history, while the prison looms large, and Europe and the United States predominate, is not surprising, given the chronological imbalance of Women and Gender History and scholarship in the English language.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The special issue articles accurately represent the histories and arguments they present.

    “The articles in this special issue demonstrate the myriad locations, modalities and ideological regimes that have historically punished or confined gendered and racialised bodies.”
4 of 4

Citations

Cites

The publisher hasn’t deposited this paper’s reference list.

Research works printed but not linked: 19

  1. Angela Y. Davis, Gina Dent, Erica R. Meiners, and Beth E. Richie, Abolition.Feminism.Now (Chicago: Haymarket Books, 2022), especially, pp. 29-76.
  2. Beth E. Richie, 'Carcerality', Keywords for Gender and Sexuality Studies, (ed.), The Keywords Feminist Editorial Collective (New York: New York University Press, 2021), p. 41.
  3. Michel Foucault, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, trans. Alan Sheridan (London: Penguin, 1975), pp. 304-5.
  4. The feminist engagement with Foucault is vast. See, for example, Irene Diamond and Lee Quinby (eds), Feminism & Fou- cault: Reflections on Resistance (Boston: Northeastern University Press, 1988); Lois McNay, Foucault and Feminism: Power, Gender, and the Self (Boston: Northeastern University Press, 1993);
  5. Susan J. Hekman (ed.), Feminist Interpretations of Michel Foucault (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1998);
  6. See Nicole Hahn Rafter, 'Female State Prisoners in Tennessee: 1831-1979', Tennessee Historical Quarterly 39, no. 4 (1980), pp. 485-97;
  7. Jen Manion, Liberty's Prisoners: Carceral Culture in Early America (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2015) offers a concrete example of how gender, along with race, mattered in early America.
  8. Sandra Scicluna, 'The Mad, the Bad and the Pauper: Help and Control in Early Modern Carceral Institutions', in Michael Tonry (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Crime and Criminal Justice (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), p. 656; see also, Peter Spierenburg, The Prison Experience: Disciplinary Institutions and Their Inmates in Early Modern Europe (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1991).
  9. Sharon A. Kowalsky, 'Continuity and Change: Russian and Early Soviet Criminology and the Criminal Woman', in Michael Tonry (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of the History of Crime and Criminal Justice (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), p. 422.
  10. Jennifer C. Nash, Black Feminism Reimagined: After Intersectionality (Durham: Duke University Press, 2019);
  11. Angie-Marie Hancock, Inter- sectionality: An Intellectual History (New York: Oxford University Press, 2016); for a classic statement, Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw, 'Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color', Stanford Law Review 43.6 (1991), pp. 1241-99.
  12. Richard van Dülmen, 'Rituals of Execution in Early Modern Germany', in his Theatre of Horror: Crime and Punishment in Early Modern Germany, trans. Elisabeth Neu (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1990), p. 121.
  13. Susan Burch, Committed: Remembering Native Kinship in and beyond Institutions (Chapel Hill: University of North Car- olina Press, 2021);
  14. Rech, 'Black Women's Domestic Labor', pp. 44-46; Ariel Ludwig, 'The Labor of Care in Carceral Spaces: The Work of Resistance in New York City Jails', pp. 64-76. 42 Special Issue: 'Historians and the Carceral State', Journal of American History 102, no. 1 (2015), see especially: Kelly Lytle Hernández, Khalil Gibran Muhammad, and Heather Ann Thompson, 'Introduction: Constructing the Carceral State', pp. 18- 24. Special Issue: 'Gendering the Carceral State: African American Women, History, and the Criminal Justice System', Journal of African American History 100, no. 3 (2015), see especially Kali N. Gross and Cheryl D. Hicks, 'Introduction -Gendering The Carceral State: African American Women, History, and the Criminal Justice System', pp. 357-65. Other notable special issues were the aforementioned Signs issue in 2013 and 'The Prison Issue', Feminist Studies 30, no. 2 (2004), pp. 261-534.
  15. Rafter, 'Gender, Prisons, and Prison History', pp. 236-37.
  16. Nicole Hahn Rafter, 'Chastizing the Unchaste: Social Control Functions of a Women's Reformatory, 1894-1931', in S. Cohen and A. Scull (eds), Social Control and the State: Historical and Comparative Essays (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1983), pp. 300-1.
  17. Kruttschnitt and Garner, 'Women's Imprisonment', 28. See also Mary Bosworth, Engendering Resistance: Agency and Power in Women's Prisons (London: Routledge, 1999).
  18. Rachel E. Dubrofsky and Shoshana Magnet (eds), 'Feminist Surveillance Studies: Critical Interventions', in Feminist Surveillance Studies (Durham: Duke University Press, 2015), pp. 1-17.
  19. Viviana Beatriz MacManus, Disruptive Archives: Feminist Memories of Resistance in Latin America's Dirty Wars, Dissident Feminisms (Champaign: University of Illinois Press, 2020).

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Boris, E., Butler, S. M., & Mireles, A.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Santa Barbara (US)
  • The Ohio State University (US)
Corresponding author
  • Boris, Eileen
  • Butler, Sara M.
Venue
Gender & History
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2024-10
Volume
36
Issue
3
Pages
807-823
ISSN
  • 0953-5233 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-0424
OpenAlex
W4403038873
Cited by
3
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1
FWCI
1.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Gender & History (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
  • Social Sciences › Law › Criminal Justice and Penology
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Historical Gender and Feminism Studies
Keywords
gender and incarceration, incarceration, surveillance, confinement, sex workers, political prisoners, juvenile reform, intersectionality, sexuality, resistance, abolitionism

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-08, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-08 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review