CD14- Victimology 

Introduction to Victimology

Victimology is the study of victims of crime, their experiences, and the factors that make individuals or groups more likely to be victimised. It examines how crime affects people and why some are more vulnerable than others. This field explores the definition of a victim, patterns of victimisation based on social categories such as class, age, gender, ethnicity, and sexuality, and the societal impact of being labelled a victim.

By studying victimology, sociologists aim to uncover the inequalities in victim experiences, shedding light on how factors like social structures and stereotypes influence who is considered a victim and how they are treated. Understanding these patterns helps challenge misconceptions and advocate for fairer treatment of all individuals affected by crime.

What Does It Mean to Be a Victim?

Victimology is the study of victims of crime, exploring who they are, why they become victims, and the impact crime has on them. But what does it really mean to be a "victim"? According to the United Nations, a victim is

"Someone who suffers physical, psychological, or emotional harm, economic loss, or the loss of their rights due to illegal actions."

For example, if your house is robbed, you're directly affected. Even family or friends of a murder victim are indirectly impacted.

When we talk about victims, we refer to people harmed by criminal activity. They are seen as innocent individuals affected by the actions of others. However, the way we view victims can change depending on stereotypes, media portrayals, and statistics.

Who Are Crime Victims?

Stereotypes vs. Reality

Understanding who becomes a victim of crime is complicated by the way society views and portrays victims. These perspectives can shape public opinion and influence how victims are treated by authorities, the media, and the criminal justice system.

Traditional View

The traditional view of victims paints them as weak, vulnerable, and blameless individuals who are unfairly harmed by crime. This view often assumes that victims are passive and unable to defend themselves, making them sympathetic figures deserving of protection and justice. This stereotype can be comforting to society, as it reinforces the idea that "bad things only happen to good people who were in the wrong place at the wrong time."

Media Portrayal

The media plays a huge role in shaping how we see victims of crime. Often, the focus is on white, middle-class women, portrayed as innocent and relatable. This bias has led to the term "missing white woman syndrome", referring to how cases involving young white women are given disproportionate attention in news coverage. For example, the high-profile cases of individuals like Gabby Petito in the United States received extensive media coverage, while similar cases involving people from minority backgrounds were overlooked. The media’s portrayal creates a narrow and often misleading image of who victims are, sidelining other groups who experience crime at higher rates.

Statistical Reality

Contrary to media portrayals, data paints a very different picture. Studies show that the people most likely to become victims of crime are:

  • Young men: Particularly those aged 19–28, who are more likely to experience violent crimes like assault or robbery.
  • Ethnic minorities: These groups face heightened risks, including hate crimes, systemic bias, and police profiling.
  • Working-class individuals: Limited financial resources and insecure living conditions make this group more vulnerable to crimes like burglary and robbery.

For example, a young Black man in an urban area is statistically more likely to be a victim of violent crime than a middle-aged white woman living in a suburban neighbourhood. However, this reality rarely receives equal attention.

Why These Misconceptions?

The media focuses on cases that are more likely to captivate public attention, often favoring stories about middle-class families and individuals who fit the traditional victim stereotype. These narratives align with societal expectations and are more likely to evoke sympathy from viewers or readers.

At the same time, crimes involving marginalized groups—such as young men from ethnic minority backgrounds—are either underreported or framed in ways that blame the victims themselves. For instance, the media might emphasize a victim's alleged involvement in gang activity rather than exploring the systemic issues that contributed to their victimization. This lack of coverage perpetuates the idea that certain groups are less deserving of sympathy or justice.

These biases matter because they influence not only public perception but also how resources and attention are allocated to different types of victims. Groups that are ignored or misrepresented may struggle to access the help and recognition they need.

Victimisation and Social Factors 

Victimisation doesn’t occur randomly; it is deeply influenced by social factors such as class, age, gender, ethnicity, and sexuality. These factors shape both the likelihood of becoming a victim and how victims are treated by society and institutions.

Social Class

Social class is a major determinant of victimisation, with wealth and status playing significant roles in influencing crime rates and responses to crime.

  • Working-Class: Those from working-class backgrounds are more likely to become victims of crime. This is often because they cannot afford security measures such as burglar alarms, gated communities, or secure housing. In areas with higher poverty levels, crimes such as theft, assault, and vandalism are more common. Sociologists have linked this to the concept of structural powerlessness, where working-class individuals are more exposed to criminal activity due to systemic inequalities.

  • Middle-Class: Middle-class individuals fear crime more than they experience it, a phenomenon largely driven by sensationalist media portrayals of crime. For instance, middle-class families often worry about burglaries or street violence, even though statistically, they are less likely to be victims. This heightened fear may lead to investments in home security systems and safer neighbourhoods.

  • Upper-Class: Wealthier individuals are less likely to experience crime directly but are more likely to report crimes when they occur. Their high social status often ensures that their cases are prioritized by the police and justice system. For example, a high-profile theft involving an affluent family is more likely to be thoroughly investigated than a similar crime affecting a working-class household.

Age

Different age groups experience victimisation in distinct ways, reflecting their vulnerability and social roles.

  • Infants and Children: The youngest members of society are particularly vulnerable to neglect and abuse, often by caregivers. Cases of infanticide—the killing of an infant—may sometimes be misclassified as Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS), masking the true extent of harm.

  • Teens and Young Adults: Young people between 16 and 28 are the most likely to experience violence, sexual assault, and crimes related to their lifestyles, such as peer conflicts or risky behaviours like drinking and late-night socializing. For example, statistics show that a significant portion of violent crimes involves young males as victims, often in urban areas where social tensions are high.

  • Elderly: Older adults face unique risks, such as neglect, financial scams, and abuse, particularly from family members or caregivers. Financial exploitation is a growing concern, as highlighted in the Netflix film I Care a Lot, where a con artist manipulates elderly individuals into losing their life savings.

Gender

Gender significantly impacts the types of crime individuals are likely to experience.

  • Men: Men are disproportionately victims of violent crimes like assault and murder. This aligns with theories of masculinity, which suggest that social expectations encourage risk-taking behaviours and physical altercations among men. For instance, statistics from the UK show that 70% of homicide victims are male.

  • Women: Women are more vulnerable to sexual crimes, domestic violence, and trafficking. While these crimes often go unreported due to stigma or fear, attitudes are slowly changing. Increasingly, male victims of domestic abuse, including heterosexual and LGBTQ+ men, are coming forward, challenging stereotypes that men cannot be victims in abusive relationships.

Ethnicity and Sexuality

Race, ethnicity, and sexual orientation are key factors influencing victimisation, often tied to systemic inequalities and social prejudice.

  • Ethnic Minorities: Hate crimes are a major issue, with over 300 incidents reported daily in the UK. Following events like 9/11 and Brexit, there has been an increase in racially motivated attacks. Ethnic minorities, particularly those of mixed ethnicity, face heightened risks due to both racial prejudice and structural disadvantages, such as living in economically deprived areas.

  • LGBTQ+ Individuals: Members of the LGBTQ+ community are frequent targets of harassment, discrimination, and violence. For instance:

    • Gay Men: Often face verbal abuse and harassment in public settings, such as being accused of "corrupting" traditional family structures.
    • Transgender Women: Experience disproportionately high levels of physical and verbal abuse compared to other groups. Studies show that trans women are more likely to be targeted for hate crimes than trans men, often due to heightened societal hostility toward their gender identity.

These trends highlight the deep inequalities in how society perceives and addresses victimisation. Certain groups, like ethnic minorities and LGBTQ+ individuals, face unique challenges, such as systemic bias and underreporting of crimes, due to fear or distrust of authorities.

Theories of Victimisation 

Critical Victimology

Critical victimology emphasizes how social structures and power imbalances shape victimisation. It critiques the role of institutions and societal norms in determining who is recognized as a victim and how victimhood is treated.

Structural Powerlessness

Sociologists Mawby and Walklate highlight how systemic inequalities, such as poverty and social exclusion, increase vulnerability to crime. Those in lower-income communities often lack the resources to protect themselves, making them easier targets for crimes like theft or assault. For instance, rough sleepers frequently experience violence due to their lack of protection and societal marginalization. This perspective is particularly valuable for addressing inequalities but has been criticized for downplaying individual agency and the role of personal decision-making in victimisation.

Hierarchy of Victimisation

Tombs and White introduce the concept of the hierarchy of victimisation, which examines how societal biases determine who receives sympathy and resources. Victims who fit the "ideal" profile—such as elderly, middle-class women—are more likely to gain public and institutional support. For example, media coverage of the Madeline McCann case was extensive, while similar cases involving children from ethnic minority or working-class backgrounds received far less attention. On the other hand, groups like sex workers, drug users, or homeless individuals are often excluded from this hierarchy, as their victimhood is dismissed as self-inflicted. This concept effectively critiques institutional biases but can oversimplify the complexities of societal attitudes toward victimhood.

Labelling Theory 

Drawing on Becker's labelling theory, critical victimology argues that authorities like the police and media play a central role in determining who is recognized as a victim. Crimes against marginalized groups, such as sex workers or ethnic minorities, are often dismissed or deprioritized. For instance, during the Yorkshire Ripper case, early victims who were sex workers were ignored by the police, delaying a proper investigation until "respectable" middle-class women became victims. While this exposes institutional biases, critics argue that it places too much emphasis on societal perceptions and insufficiently addresses the actions of perpetrators.

Positivist Victimology

Positivist victimology focuses on identifying factors that make individuals more likely to become victims. This approach seeks to find patterns in victimisation by examining personal traits, behaviours, and circumstances.

Meirs’ Three Features of Positivist Victimology

Positivist victimology, as defined by Meirs (1989), has three key features:

  1. Identifying Patterns of Victimisation: Meirs examines how victimisation is not random but influenced by recurring factors such as age, gender, or location.
  2. Focus on Interpersonal Crimes: This approach primarily studies crimes between individuals, such as assault or theft, rather than systemic or institutional crimes.
  3. Victim Responsibility: It explores how victims’ actions or behaviors may increase their likelihood of being targeted, such as leaving doors unlocked or engaging in risky behaviors. While this can help prevent crime, it is often criticized for victim-blaming, particularly in cases of sexual assault.

Hans von Hentig’s Victim Typology

Sociologist Hans von Hentig proposed a typology of victims, identifying 13 characteristics that make individuals more vulnerable to crime:

  1. Young people
  2. Elderly individuals
  3. Females
  4. Immigrants
  5. Depressed individuals
  6. Mentally ill individuals
  7. Those with emotional instability
  8. Wanton individuals (engaging in risky sexual behaviors)
  9. Tormentors (provoking conflict)
  10. Mentally weak individuals
  11. The acquisitive (focused on material wealth)
  12. Dull normals (less socially aware)
  13. The lonely or socially isolated

For example, elderly individuals often fall victim to financial scams due to their perceived vulnerability and trust in authority figures. While von Hentig’s work offers a framework for understanding risk factors, it has been criticized for focusing too much on individual traits and ignoring broader societal influences.

Tierney’s Victim Proneness and Victim Precipitation

Tierney expands on victim characteristics by introducing two concepts:

  1. Victim Proneness: Certain individuals or groups have inherent vulnerabilities that make them more likely to become victims. For example, young men in urban areas may be at higher risk of violent crime due to their lifestyles or social environments.
  2. Victim Precipitation: This refers to how victims may play a role in their own victimisation by provoking or enabling criminal acts. For instance, leaving a car unlocked may increase the likelihood of theft. While this idea sheds light on situational risk factors, it has been heavily criticized for implying that victims bear responsibility for crimes committed against them.

Impact of Victimisation 

The impact of victimisation can be profound and long-lasting, affecting individuals emotionally, mentally, and socially. These effects vary depending on the nature of the crime, the victim’s circumstances, and how society or the justice system responds to their experience. Sociologists like Hoyle, Walklate, and others have explored these impacts, offering insights into the complexities of victimisation.

Emotional and Mental Health Effects

Victims of crime often suffer significant emotional and psychological distress. Sociologist Carolyn Hoyle identified 12 reactions to being a victim, including anxiety, depression, withdrawal, panic, shock, poor health, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). For instance, victims of burglary frequently report a sense of violation, as their homes—spaces meant to be safe—are no longer perceived as secure. This aligns with Parsons' "warm bath" theory, where the home is meant to be a haven from external stresses. Violent crimes, such as assault or sexual violence, can lead to more severe mental health challenges, including long-term PTSD and feelings of powerlessness.

A contemporary example of this is the aftermath of terrorist attacks, such as the Manchester Arena bombing (2017), where survivors reported ongoing trauma, nightmares, and fear of public spaces. These emotional impacts can extend beyond the direct victims to their families, friends, and even broader communities, illustrating the ripple effect of crime.

Blaming Victims

Victim-blaming remains a pervasive issue, particularly in cases of sexual violence. Victims often face questions like, "What were you wearing?" or "Why were you there?" These inquiries unfairly shift responsibility onto the victim, reinforcing societal stereotypes about behaviour and morality. Sociologists argue that such attitudes are deeply ingrained in cultural narratives about crime and gender.

For example, high-profile cases like the rape trial in Ireland (2018), where a teenager's underwear was used as evidence against her, highlight the damaging effects of victim-blaming. These attitudes not only undermine victims’ credibility but also discourage others from coming forward, perpetuating cycles of silence and impunity. Feminist scholars point to this as a form of structural inequality, where victims—particularly women—are scrutinized more than perpetrators.

Double Victimisation

Victims often experience what sociologist Sandra Walklate terms double victimisation—first through the crime itself and then through their treatment by the criminal justice system. This is particularly evident in court proceedings, where victims of sexual violence or domestic abuse may face harsh questioning, invasive scrutiny of their personal lives, and even outright disbelief. Such experiences exacerbate their trauma, leading many to avoid reporting crimes altogether.

A well-known example is the treatment of victims in cases of domestic violence. Before her death, Caroline Flack, a British TV presenter, faced intense media scrutiny and public judgment during her court case, illustrating how institutional and societal responses can further harm victims. Walklate also links double victimisation to a fear of crime, particularly among women, who often alter their behaviours—avoiding certain areas or staying indoors at night—to reduce perceived risks. This fear can limit personal freedom and perpetuate feelings of vulnerability.