Investigating Difference Human Cultural Relations 3Rd Full Chapter

Investigating Difference Human
Cultural Relations 3rd

Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebooksecure.com/download/investigating-difference-human-cultural-relations-3
rd/
Contents vii
Constructing Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity 92

The Status of Lgbtq Individuals in Criminology
and Under Law 95
Victimization: Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity, and Gender
Expression 99
Offending: Policing and Criminalizing Sexual Orientation and Gender
Expression 103
Justice Work and Sexual Orientation 105
Transgender Individuals and the Criminal Justice
System– Sarah Prior 106
Conclusion 108
Questions for Review 108 • References 109 • Suggested
Websites for More Information 112
Chapter 8 Victimization in the Context of Difference—

Brooke de Heer and Lynn Jones 113
Chapter Objectives 113
Understanding the Role of Difference in the Victimization
Experience 114
Ncvs and Victimization Statistics 115
Biases Against Marginalized Groups in Ncvs 115
Violence Against Women Statistics 117
Victimization Theories: A Focus On Gender and Power 118
The Victim’s Role and Experience Within the System:
Revictimization 120
Compassion Fatigue and Self-Care Among Victim Advocates:
Transcending Self-Sabotage Through Aggressive Self-Love–
Myra Ferell-Womochil 124
Contemporary Issue: Gendered Injustice in Campus Sexual Assault 125
Victims’ Rights and Difference 128
Questions for Review 130 • References 131
Part Three Categories of Difference: Class and Race 133
Chapter 9 Social Class, Crime, and Justice—Raymond J.

MichalowskI 136
What Is Social Class? 137
Why Do We Have Social Classes? 141
Social Class and the Definition of Crime 145
Social Class, Criminology, and Crime 148
Social Class and Victimization 152
Conclusion: Social Class and the Future of Justice 153
Homelessness and the Criminal Justice System: Repaving the Path–
Daniel Horn 154
Chapter 10 Whiteness and the Construction of Crime—

Rebecca Maniglia 161
Origins: History of Whiteness 163
White Privilege: Facing Facts 164
viii Contents
Excerpt from White Like Me: Reflections on Race from a Privileged

Son, by Tim Wise, pp. xiii–xiv 165
Whiteness and Offending 166
Whiteness and Victimization 168
Whiteness and System Professionals 170
Law Enforcement 171
Courts 171
Corrections 172
White Privilege Revisited: A Systemic Perspective 172
Chapter 11 Stolen Lands, Stolen Lives, Revisited: Native

Americans and Criminal Justice—Marianne O.
Nielsen and Linda Robyn 175
Historical Context 176
Native American Offenders 179
Native American Victims of Crime 181
Violence Against Women Act: More Revisions Needed
for American Indian and Alaska Native Women– Linda Robyn 182
State-Corporate Crime and Environmental Injustice on
Native Lands– Linda Robyn 184
Native American Service Providers 185
Chapter 12 The Continuing Significance of Race: African

Americans and the Criminal Justice System—
Stephani Williams 190
Considering the Consequences of Assumptions 190
The Construction of Difference 191
Re-examining the Consequences of Difference 191
Justice Policy and Practice: Criminalizing African Americans 192
Historical Legal Context 192
Contemporary Context (Post-Civil Rights Era) 193
The “War on Drugs” 194
Policing Practices 195
Policing Practices Related to Offending Rates 196
African Americans as Offenders 197
Understanding African-American Offending 198
Data on African-American Offending 199
Understanding the Importance of Intersectionality as it Relates
to the Punishment Strategies Applied to Young, African American
Girl– Stephani Williams 201
African-American Victimization 202
Violent Victimization 202
Hate Crime Victimization 202
Innovation and Cooperation: Bridging the Police–Community Divide 203
Conclusion 205 • Questions for Review 206 • References 206
Contents ix
Chapter 13 Aliens Within: Asian Americans and U.S. Legal

and Criminal Justice System—An Tuan
Nguyen 209
“Strangers from a Different Shore”: Asian Immigration to
the United States 210
Gold Mountain, Transcontinental Railroad, Sugar Plantations,
and Agricultural Farms: Early Wave of Asian Migration, 1848 to
1930 210
Immigrants with Human and Social Capital Versus War Refugees: Post-
1965 Asian Migration 211
“Because of You…” Asians as Victims 212
Institutionalizing Racial Discrimination: Asian Immigrants and U.S.
Immigration and Citizenship 212
“The Chinese Must Go!” A History of Asian Immigrants Encountering
Violence and Hate Crimes 214
“An Isolated Boy in a World of Strangers”: Asian Americans as
Offenders 216
Model Minority Myth– Lynn Jones 217
“The Working Man’s Opportunity to Move Up the Ladder”: Asian
Americans as Service Providers 219
Part Four Categories of Difference: Immigration and Race 223
Chapter 14 Coming to America: Immigration, Crime, and the

Criminal Justice System—Michael Costelloe 225
Introduction 225
Immigration Patterns and Trends 226
Colonial America (1620–1776) 226
Post-Colonial America (1815–1850) 227
The Late Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries (1850–1920) 228
Post-1920 to Present 228
Political Rhetoric, Media Representations, and Anti-Immigrant
Attitudes 230
Crimmigration– Raymond Michalowski 232
Criminal Immigrants 234
Immigrants as Victims 236
Immigrants as Service Providers in the Criminal Justice System 238
Chapter 15 Unwelcome Citizens: Latinos and the Criminal

Justice System—Alexander Alvarez 241
Latino Demographics 243
History 244
Race, Space, and Belonging: The Battle for Ethnic Studies in Arizona–
Grace Gamez 246
Perpetrators 248
x Contents
Victims 251
Practitioners 251
Chapter 16 Undocumented Immigration as Moral Panic:

Casting Difference as Threat—Michael
Costelloe 256
Introduction 256
Moral Panic 258
Moral Panics as Ideology 260
Perceived Immigrant Threats and Justice Policy– Lynn Jones 261
A Discourse of Threat 262
Immigration Policy 265
Part Five Categories of Difference: Forgotten Difference 271
Chapter 17 Youth, Crime, and Justice: Challenges and

Contradictions—Rebecca Maniglia 273
History of the Juvenile Justice Movement 273
Juveniles as Offenders 276
A Case for an Intersectional Approach to Criminal Justice:
Gender-Specific Programming in Juvenile Justice– Lisa Tichavsky 278
Juveniles as Victims 279
Special Issues in Juvenile Justice 280
Mental Health Issues 280
Zero Tolerance Policies, Policing in Schools, and the School-to-Prison
Pipeline 281
Sexual Abuse-to-Prison Pipeline: New Issues of Gender 282
Waiver to Adult Court and Mandatory Sentencing 283
Juveniles as Service Providers 284
Conclusion 285 • Questions for Review 286 • References 286
Chapter 18 Many Faces of Aging: Victimization, Crime, and

the Incarcerated Elderly—Carole Mandino and
Sherry Bell 288
Who Are the Elderly? 288
Crimes Committed Against the Elderly 289
Elder Abuse/Mistreatment 290
Physical Abuse 290
Psychological or Emotional Abuse 291
Sexual Abuse 291
Neglect 291
Financial Abuse 292
Crimes Committed By the Elderly/Elderly Offending 292
The Impact of Aging and Infirm Inmates on the U.S. Prison System 294
Summary 297 • Questions for Review 298 • References 298
Contents xi
Chapter 19 Imprisoning Disability: Difference, Punishment,

and the Criminal Justice System—Katherine
Mahosky, Meghan G. McDowell, and Karen
Applequist 300
Introduction 300
Defining Disability 301
Disability, Labels, and Stigmatization 301
Persons with Disability and the Criminal Justice System 303
Persons with Disabilities and Interpersonal Violence 303
Criminalizing Disability: Persons with Disability and Structural
Violence 304
Homicides Against People with Disabilities– Katherine Mahosky 307
Individuals with Disabilities As Employees in the Criminal Justice
System 307
Future Directions for Disability Justice 308
Chapter 20 Religion, Politics, and Criminal Justice—Mohamed

Mosaad Abdelaziz Mohamed 311
Introduction 311
Historical Background 311
Religious Freedom 312
Religious Groups 313
Native Americans 314
Anti-Semitism 316
Islamophobia 316
Religiously Motivated Violence 317
Antiabortion Movement 317
Religiously Motivated Bias Against Individuals Who Are Lesbian, Gay,
Bisexual, Transgender, or Queer (LGBTQ) 318
Religious White Supremacy 319
Radical Muslims’ Terrorism 320
Religion Among the Incarcerated 320
Conclusion 321
Part Six Reframing Difference 323

Reference 323
Chapter 21 Reconstructing Difference for Criminal Justice

and Social Justice—Lynn Jones and Sarah
Prior 324
References 327
Contributors 329
Co-editors 329
Contributors 329
Credits 333
Index 337
Foreword
“Discovery consists of looking at the same thing as everyone else does

and thinking something different.”
Albert Szent-Györgyi
This book is an invitation to think differently about justice. Readers will be guided in
deep exploration of justice—its meaning and administration—through consideration
of difference.
The third edition of Investigating Difference is produced by faculty primarily
housed in the College of Social and Behavioral Sciences at Northern Arizona University
with leadership from scholars in the Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice.
Investigating Difference offers readers a distinctive collection of essays that weave
together insights from social sciences in an interdisciplinary study of intersectionality
of socially constructed difference and systems of justice.
Readers will develop a rich understanding of the meaning of difference, espe-
cially its significance in relation to notions and administration of justice. By examining
how difference is constructed, manifested, and perpetuated through systems of justice,
readers will gain insights about how intersecting dimensions of difference shape norms
and policies that define criminality, dynamics of social control, experiences of victim-
ization, and the operation of systems of justice. Investigating Difference offers a dis-
tinctive framework for understanding tensions, paradoxes, and problems inherent in
efforts to achieve justice in societies around the world. It reveals how inequality, glo-
balization, culture, international/intercultural relations, politics, religion, social move-
ments, and changes affect conceptions and experiences of justice, laws, and systems of
adjudication and sanction.
In this place and time, we tend to think about justice in terms of individual con-
duct and outcomes. At the same time, we are likely to conceive of difference as matter
of individual variations. The essays in this book coalesce around the insight that indi-
vidual attributes are meaningless outside a context that construes their meaning, desig-
nates associated traits and proclivities, and ascribes on their basis position in a structure
of relations and power. The radical implications of the perspectives of construction of
difference and intersectionality for the practice of justice are considered by authors
who bring focus to varied dimensions of social stratification.
Investigating Difference takes readers on a journey of inquiry to discovery.
Readers will be provoked to bring a new perspective to familiar ideas, practices, and
patterns in the administration of justice. I congratulate the editors and authors for craft-
ing this powerful volume and bringing to students of justice a new edition that elabo-
rates on the core themes of prior editions with attention to new and emerging issues.
Royalties from sales of this book are directed exclusively to scholarships and
other support for students at Northern Arizona University. I thank the authors for
investing in our students—those who will shape the future.
Karen Pugliesi, Ph.D.
Dean, College of Social and Behavioral Sciences
Northern Arizona University
April 2016
xii
Preface
As this book was going to press, Donald Trump was elected President of the United
States, even as Hillary Clinton won the popular vote. This was reminiscent of the 2000
presidential election in which Al Gore lost to George W. Bush, even though Gore won
the popular vote. The social and political dynamics of difference played an important
role in this election as they do in all elections. Social scientists are quick to point out
the gender gap in voting, or how different racial and ethnic groups align with particular
candidates. Intersections of social class, education, and age with gender and race/
ethnicity also matter significantly as we attempt to understand voting patterns.
In part, the outcome of this election is surprising as many look back to the cam-
paign itself. The campaign period emphasized difference with a female candidate in
Clinton and the negative rhetoric of Trump. Several chapters in this book highlight
Trump’s negative characterization of difference regarding immigrants, members of the
LGBTQ community, women, people with a disability, and members of racial minority
communities. These comments exacerbated an already divided nation around issues of
identity. In the coming weeks, months, and years, difference will continue to hold cen-
ter stage in social interactions, political decisions, and our laws and policies. It is up to
us as students, as scholars, as justice workers and professionals to continue to recog-
nize difference as a resource rather than a source of division or hatred.
New to This Edition:

• R eorganization of the chapters and book sections to move beyond a prioritization of
race and instead to emphasize the multitude of social identity categories that matter
in the justice system
• New content including chapters on intersectionality, specialty courts, and whiteness,
as well as newly authored and conceptualized chapters on gender, sexual orientation
and gender identity, victimization, African Americans, Asian Americans, immigra-
tion, disability, and religion
• Priority given to the theme of intersectionality and overlapping identities in the con-
text of criminal justice and social justice
• Additional discussion of globalization and the impact on victims, offenders and prac-
titioners in the justice system
• Special topics within chapters in the form of short text boxes, including case studies
and a few personal experiences written by practitioners doing justice work in the
community
• Each chapter begins with learning objectives and ends with discussion questions
xiii
INSTRUCTOR SUPPLEMENTS
Instructor’s Manual with Test Bank. Includes content outlines for classroom
discussion and teaching suggestions from the text. This also contains a Word docu-
ment version of the test bank.
PowerPoint Presentations. Our presentations are clear and straightforward. Photos,
illustrations, charts, and tables from the book are included in the presentations when
applicable.
To access supplementary materials online, instructors need to request an instructor
access code. Go to www.pearsonhighered.com/irc, where you can register for an
instructor access code. Within 48 hours after registering, you will receive a confirming
email, including an instructor access code. Once you have received your code, go to
the site and log on for full instructions on downloading the materials you wish to use.
ALTERNATE VERSIONS
eBooks. This text is also available in multiple eBook formats. These are an exciting
new choice for students looking to save money. As an alternative to purchasing the
printed textbook, students can purchase an electronic version of the same content.
With an eTextbook, students can search the text, make notes online, print out reading
assignments that incorporate lecture notes, and bookmark important passages for later
review. For more information, visit your favorite online eBook reseller or visit www.
mypearsonstore.com.
xiv
Acknowledgments
In the time since the previous two editions of this book, our department has changed
somewhat in terms of personnel, and so the process of creating a third edition shifted.
Rather than creating a collectively edited volume, we instead grounded the third edi-
tion in information gathered about “what works” regarding the text and its content with
discussions among the faculty teaching our Investigating Difference course, as well as
a publishers’ survey of faculty use of the text. We acknowledge the hard work of the
faculty involved in the original edition, including Marianne Nielsen and Barbara Perry
who led that first editorial effort. In her role as Chair of the Department of Criminology
and Criminal Justice, Marianne Nielsen facilitated the work of the current editorial
team in launching the third edition; our current Chair, Phoebe Morgan, continued to
facilitate department support of this project. We also thank the Dean of the College of
Social and Behavioral Sciences for her interest in the new edition, as well as for her
involvement by writing our foreword.
With the first edition, the emphasis on difference and criminal justice was a fairly
novel idea for a text and for criminal justice curriculum. In our own department, what
was a single class on difference has evolved into a broader curricular emphasis such
that issues of social construction of difference, inequality, criminal justice, and social
justice cut across most of our courses. As such, we were able to draw on many of our
faculty to author chapters and textboxes (which are a new feature of the third edition)
in ways that reflect their own research and teaching on issues of difference. Some
chapters in this third edition reflect our new department, and we are excited to have
new authors in the book: Christy Arazan (specialty courts), Stephani Williams (race),
Brooke de Heer (victims), and Sarah Prior (multiple chapters and co-editor). We also
appreciate the additional contributions by authors in the second edition who agreed to
write new chapters: Rebecca Maniglia (whiteness), Nancy Wonders (gender), Lynn
Jones (multiple chapters and co-editor), and Mike Costelloe (immigration). We are
grateful for the willingness of individuals outside our department who participated by
writing in their areas of expertise, as well as followed our requests to incorporate more
justice themes or topics. In particular, we acknowledge these contributions by our
Northern Arizona University colleagues and those outside the university: An Tuan
Nguyen (Ethnic Studies, chapter on Asian Americans); Mohamed Mohamed
(Sociology, chapter on religion); Carole Mandino (Civic Service Institute, chapter on
the elderly) and her co-author, Sherry Bell (Arizona attorney); Katherine Mahosky and
Karen Applequist (Institute for Human Development, chapter on individuals with
disability) and their co-author, Meghan McDowell (Winston Salem State University).
We also thank our numerous textbox authors, including our department colleagues and
others outside the department and university. Look for these in each chapter—these
really improve the new edition!
We thank the NAU Interns-2-Scholars program, which funded student support for
our project. Dominic Garduno, an undergraduate Criminology and Criminal Justice
major, helped gather data for authors. We also thank two graduate students, Madeline
Stenger and Jenna Fejervary, for their research assistance and editorial support in
response to our many requests as editors. We would like to thank Nicole Jamila
Hendricks (Holyoke Community College) who reviewed the previous edition and
provided helpful comments. We also thank Gary Bauer, Jennifer Sargunar and Purnima
Narayanan (and the many others behind the scenes) at Pearson for their help with the
editorial and production process, and their sustained interest and enthusiastic encour-
agement for a revised edition of this book.
xv
xvi Acknowledgments
We are pleased to remind you that we continue to deposit all royalties from this
book into our Investigating Difference Scholarship Fund. Undergraduate and graduate
students receive support for travel to present their research at conferences or to other-
wise support their scholarly activities. Cheers to our next generation of researchers!
Sarah Prior and
Lynn Jones
May 2016
▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪
1
Introduction
Investigating Difference
Sarah Prior and Lynn Jones
The United States remains one of the most diverse countries in the world. As we discussed
in the first two editions of Investigating Difference, difference matters, particularly in the
United States and in the globalized world, because of the increased contact and interaction
with people we see as “others.” Difference matters, period. In the ever-globalizing world
with increased trade and communication, socially constructed ideas about difference matter.
As we discussed in the second edition of this book, understanding difference is critical for
society as a whole, but particularly crucial for those involved in the criminal justice system.
Seeing difference and diversity as a resource, rather than a problem or as something to fear
or hate, allows us to strive for equality, equity, and justice.
Though we know that ideas about gender, race, sexuality, ability, and class, among oth-
ers, are “real” in the sense that they matter and have significant social and institutional con-
sequences, we also know that the meaning behind these identity categories is socially
constructed and that it changes over time. There is no biological race. Instead, there are the
socially constructed meanings that we have applied to race, thus prioritizing whiteness in
the United States over other racial groups. Skin pigmentation, phenotype, ethnic origin, and
similar characteristics have all been used to justify ideas about who should and who should
not have power in the United States. Socially constructed ideas about gender roles and sex
categories perpetuate a patriarchal system that prioritizes hegemonic masculinity and het-
eronormativity over femininity and sexual minorities. This means that society, not biologi-
cal fact, has created the notion that men are strong and women are weak.
As we wrote the third edition, significant events took place in the United States that
reignited discussions of how difference matters in relation to the criminal justice system.
Many of these events will be discussed in further detail in later chapters: the shooting of
Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, and the killing of Eric Garner in New York; the riots
that took place in Baltimore in response to the death of Freddie Gray, and the growth of the
Black Lives Matter movement; and Trayvon Martin’s death and George Zimmerman’s
acquittal—all further charged the national dialogue about race. We are in the middle of a very
contentious political election. The media coverage and national conversation about Republican
candidate Donald Trump and his proposals to ban Muslims from the United States and to
build a wall between the United States and Mexico have further sparked contention about
racialized politics, immigration, and the distinction between free speech and hate speech. We
have felt the consequences of the implementation of the Affordable Care Act, both positive
and negative, and the ways health care has continued to be an issue of justice and equity (or
lack thereof) in the United States. The Supreme Court struck down the Defense of Marriage
Act (DOMA) and ruled in favor of legalizing marriage equality (Obergefell v. Hodges).
Transgender advocates grew more vocal in their quest for equality, which was further empha-
sized in the public transition of Bruce Jenner, a U.S. Olympic gold medal athlete, to Caitlyn
Jenner. These are just a few of the many widely publicized issues that took place since the last
edition of this book. It is a particularly ripe moment to discuss issues of difference.
1
2 Chapter 1 • Introduction
Third Edition Roadmap

The previous editions of Investigating Difference have helped students and faculty
acknowledge and understand that difference is something to be seen as a resource and
to be celebrated. There are those who continue to view difference as a negative, or as
something to be feared or hated. This fear often results in violence. In addition to vio-
lence, these views of difference also create bias or unequal justice responses. It is
because of this we continue to think about how difference matters in the justice
system.
As a department of criminology and criminal justice, we continue to promote a
broader curricular emphasis on issues of the social construction of difference, inequal-
ity, criminal justice, and social justice, and our faculty continue to engage in these
broader issues in their teaching and scholarship. As such, the third edition of this text
reflects changes to the department and an evolution of how our single class, CCJ
345W: Investigating Difference, has transformed into a broader departmental stand-
point on issues of difference, diversity, and justice.
There are changes in the third edition that are both structural and c ontent-oriented.
In this edition, readers will notice new textboxes in each chapter that are used to further
emphasize ideas presented throughout the text. Some of these textboxes present case
studies, while others are anecdotes or personal stories from professionals in the field.
Authors for these textboxes come from a broad range of disciplinary backgrounds,
including faculty from our department, colleagues with expertise in certain areas from
other departments within the College of Social and Behavioral Sciences (SBS) and
other colleges at Northern Arizona University, community partners, and other justice
professionals.
In addition to the textboxes within each chapter, readers will also notice that each
chapter begins with chapter objectives and ends with chapter discussion questions.
These objectives and questions are meant to facilitate learning for students and provide
teachers with additional tools to utilize concepts within the book. We hope that stu-
dents and teachers find these additions helpful as they traverse often-complicated dis-
cussions about difference. Additionally, the book has been reorganized and sections
have been restructured. In each new part, there are section introductions that provide
readers with an overview of the important concepts and ideas presented in that section,
as well as more thematic linking to the book as a whole.
As we thought about how to investigate difference in our own lives, in our teach-
ing, and in our commitment to the community and to our students, we recognized that
our previous editions of this text seemed to prioritize certain kinds of difference over
others. This is true in our everyday lives. Race, in particular, is a difference category that
is prioritized in the United States. We do not mean prioritized in that race is privileged,
but rather that it is the difference category most often talked about. We fell into the same
problem. Our previous edition spent significant time discussing issues of race and
neglected other difference categories. We wanted to spread out the discussion of differ-
ence in this new text. As you will see, we still spend significant time discussing racial
categories; however, we have reframed several other chapters to more thoroughly
address other issues of difference. Some chapters in this text have been updated, while
others have been completely rewritten. In addition to the updating and re-envisioning of
some chapters, we also wanted to prioritize and more clearly discuss the importance
of intersectionality. In the second edition, Nancy Wonders wrote that “the organization
of this book uses specific historic group identities as a heuristic device for exploring dif-
ferences. However, to the extent that it is possible, each chapter will touch on some of
the ways that differences overlap to affect justice experiences and outcomes as a way to
remind readers that lived experiences are always a product of unique intersections
between individual biographies and the larger social world” (2009, p. 20). While some
Chapter 1 • Introduction 3
chapters throughout the text did a strong job of discussing how experiences are affected
by overlapping identities, many did not do so thoroughly. Some identities are more
likely to have a positive or negative impact on experiences with the justice system, yet
some compounded identities either further advantage or further disadvantage individu-
als. In this edition, we wanted to emphasize that identities and their social meanings
matter for how people experience the criminal justice system in the United States in
both positive and negative ways.
Chapter Overview
Based on this, we have reorganized the chapters in this current edition. We begin with
a more theoretical focus on issues that pertain to investigating difference in the crimi-
nal justice system in Part One: Framing Difference, such as social construction, racism,
sexism, intersectionality, microaggressions, and privilege, among many others. The
next two chapters (Wonders, Chapter 2, and Prior and Jones, Chapter 3) define and
discuss important concepts that will be threaded throughout the entire text. Wonders’
chapter (Chapter 2) is an updated version of the chapter in the second edition, while the
chapter by Prior and Jones (Chapter 3) is a newly written chapter highlighting concepts
that are linchpins throughout the text. We then move to an updated version of Nielsen
and Maniglia’s chapter on cultural competency and communication (Chapter 4) and to
finish out Part One is a new chapter on specialty courts in the United States (Arazan,
Chapter 5). In this chapter, Arazan highlights how the use of specialty courts (like drug
courts, veterans courts, and family courts) can further advance equity in our justice
system. These types of courts move beyond a sole focus on incarceration and instead
emphasize the important context of offending and the value of rehabilitation and
restoration.
With Part Two: Categories of Difference: Gender and Sexuality, we decided to
discuss issues of gender and sexuality earlier in this version of the text. Part of this was
due to the fact that our survey of instructors teaching the course, both on our campus
and on campuses around the country, highlighted that these issues were eclipsed by the
many chapters devoted to race and thus presenting them earlier will help shed addi-
tional light. This is particularly timely given the recent legal battles regarding every-
thing from marriage equality to public bathrooms, as well as political contests in which
female candidates sometimes experience sexism. All three chapters in this section are
newly written chapters that address issues discussed in previous editions, but in new
ways and by new authors. Chapter 6 is a re-envisioning of the discussions on gender by
Wonders. Too frequently when we discuss gender, it is code for “women.” The chapter
in the previous edition was limited in this way. Though the chapter provided excellent
information about women in the criminal justice field as victims, offenders, and pro-
fessionals, it neglected to discuss how men’s experiences with the justice system differ.
The next chapter (Jones and Prior, Chapter 7) is a new look at issues faced by people in
the LGBTQ community as well as broader sexuality and gender identity issues. This
chapter builds on Wonders’ discussion of sex and gender and emphasizes that while
sex and gender are often conflated with sexuality, each are related but distinct. To
round out this section, we have a new chapter on victimization (de Heer and Jones,
Chapter 8) that is theoretically grounded in victimology and utilizes campus sexual
violence as a case study to highlight intersectional issues in victimization. This chapter
further elaborates on the overall section themes around gender, and the authors also
illustrate common misconceptions about victims and victimhood that are detrimental
to victims of crime who do not fit within the “good victim” framework.
Part Three: Categories of Difference: Class and Race focuses primarily on race
and class issues in the United States. Michalowski (Chapter 9) revisits his previous
chapter on social class and provides a broad and intersectional discussion of class in America.
4 Chapter 1 • Introduction
This section then moves to discuss issues of race in the United States, including a newly
written chapter on whiteness (Maniglia, Chapter 10), an updated and revised chapter on
Native Americans (Nielsen and Robyn, Chapter 11), and two newly authored chapters
on African Americans (Williams, Chapter 12) and Asian Americans (Nguyen, Chapter 13).
Michalowski’s and Nielsen and Robyn’s chapters (Chapters 9 and 11, respectively) are
both revisions of chapters that appeared in the second edition of this text. The chapter on
whiteness is a concept that was not addressed in the previous edition. The other
chapters in this section are topics that were discussed in the previous edition,
but new authors have revitalized and re-envisioned them into what you see here
(Chapters 12 and 13).
We live in northern Arizona, and our state is a ripe place for discussions on issues
of immigration and justice. While ultimately this is a continuation of identity catego-
ries based on race/ethnicity, we have decided to combine these chapters into their own
section, Part Four: Categories of Difference: Immigration and Race, given the primacy
of immigration panic that happens around us. First, Costelloe (Chapter 14) re-envisions
the chapter from the previous edition on issues of immigration and violence. He pro-
vides a historical overview of immigration and immigrant mobility in the United States.
Alvarez (Chapter 15) revises and updates his previous chapter on Latinos in the United
States and highlights important regional issues such as Arizona Senate Bill 1070
(SB 1070). Lastly, Costelloe (Chapter 16) concludes this section with an updated dis-
cussion of how immigration (particularly undocumented immigration) serves as a
moral panic in the United States and casts immigrants (documented or not) as threats.
Our final content section, Part Five: Categories of Difference: Forgotten Difference,
investigates identity categories that are often neglected in the typical “race, class, gen-
der” discussions. We start this section with two chapters focused on age as a category of
difference. Maniglia (Chapter 17) updates her discussion on juveniles/youth in the jus-
tice system, and Mandino and Bell (Chapter 18) revise and update Mandino’s previous
discussion of aging and the elderly in the justice system. Chapter 19 is a newly written
chapter by Mahosky, McDowell, and Applequist that looks at disability in terms of dif-
ference. Lastly, Mohamed (Chapter 20) wrote a new chapter on religion and discusses
the historical and contemporary significance religion plays in interactions with the
justice system.
The concluding section of the book, Part Six: Reframing Difference, briefly wraps
up the text and reminds us that difference matters, and that meanings of difference can
be reconstructed for social justice and criminal justice.
Reference
Wonders, N. (2009). Conceptualizing difference. In The cultural relations in criminal justice (2nd ed., pp. 10–22).
Criminology and Criminal Justice Collective of Northern Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Arizona University, Investigating difference: Human and
PART ONE
▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪
Framing Difference
This section of the book provides readers with an overview of how difference matters in
the criminal justice system. As was discussed briefly above, some chapters in this section
are more theoretical in nature and focus on important concepts that are used throughout
the remainder of the text. These chapters are really the foundation of the book. Rather
than focusing on specific identity categories (i.e., race, gender, ability, etc.), these c hapters
look at the structural and institutional components of difference and examine how
difference is constructed, criminalized, celebrated, and contested within the criminal
justice system.
Some Notes on Terminology

Throughout these first few chapters, readers will be provided with a number of important
concepts that will be further elaborated on throughout the rest of this book. Some of these
terms appeared in previous editions of this text, others are new to this edition. Many of these
concepts are hotly debated and are often sources of significant contestation.
Chapters 2 and 3 that follow are best discussed together not only because they are
thematically related, but also because Chapter 3 builds on and further defines concepts
discussed by Wonders in Chapter 2. In her update to the chapter “Conceptualizing
Difference,” Wonders provides additional clarification to her chapter in previous editions.
She discusses the power of ordinary people to construct difference differently through poli-
tics, social movements, daily life, and, importantly, in their work as justice professionals.
She has provided additional context and elaboration on some of the contemporary global
justice challenges that are linked to difference and provides additional attention to strate-
gies of social change. Her updated chapter also provides important new concepts such as
cultural capital in her discussion of social class and social stratification in her discussion
of structured social inequality. In her discussion on the socially constructed and blurred
nature of gender, she provides additional discussion of concepts like gender identity and
gender expression. Additionally, Wonders introduces the concept of microaggressions,
which is discussed throughout the text in order to highlight the destructive impact of these
kinds of devaluations. Overall, this chapter has additional references to historical circum-
stances, and provides broad discussion on issues such as the micropolitics of everyday
life, color-blind and gender-neutral ideologies, additional challenges facing a globalized
world, and a discussion of how human rights can be an important framing device.
Building on Wonders’ incredibly strong introduction, Prior and Jones’ newly added
chapter provides readers with additional theoretical discussion on some of the important
concepts that are emphasized throughout the book. First, Prior and Jones provide a much
more thorough discussion of the theoretical concept intersectionality. They build on
Wonders’ brief discussion and elaborate on the historical nature of the concept and how it
has been used. Kimberle Crenshaw (1989) originally coined intersectionality when she
attempted to discuss the experiences of women of color, specifically black women, in
the legal sphere. Similar to Wonders, Prior and Jones expand on the point that understanding
5
6 Part One • Framing Difference
the experience of blacks and then analyzing the experience of women is by no means
the same as understanding the experience of black women. The fact that multiple
identity categories can be compounded to further disadvantage and oppress certain
groups of people further emphasizes the need to understand difference from an inter-
sectional framework. While intersectionality can be an important framing tool, some
scholars have argued that it has been applied in an inconsistent and messy manner and
instead urge us to utilize other frameworks such as Ken’s (2007) interlocking oppres-
sions framework. In their discussion of interlocking oppressions, Prior and Jones high-
light some of Ken’s key arguments such as the use of social locations as a tool to think
theoretically about both social and physical locations because individuals are often
relegated to specific social locations that come with a variety of advantages and disad-
vantages. In using the term interlocking, Ken is pushing scholars and activists to recog-
nize that social identity categories do not merely intersect one another. They are
“completely bound up with one another, incapable of being separated” (Ken, 2007,
p. 13). Prior and Jones also highlight the fact that the previous discussion of race, class,
and gender tended to ignore the experiences of “unmarked” normative groups such as
white people, members of the middle class, and able-bodied individuals. Building on
Wonders’ discussion of microaggression, Prior and Jones provide a definition and
numerous examples of how microaggressions have become part of the national dia-
logue. As will be discussed in more detail throughout the text, in contrast to the kinds
of blatant overt discrimination that the United States saw during the Jim Crow era,
microaggressions emphasize the subtler and covert kinds of discrimination commonly
found in everyday language and interactions. These kinds of microaggressive behav-
iors often come from well-intentioned people, who do not know, understand, or realize
how harmful their behavior is. It is what Harvard Professor of Psychiatry Alvin
Poussaint calls “death by a thousand nicks.” Prior and Jones additionally add a
discussion of racialization in order to demonstrate the complex process of socially
constructing and ascribing characteristics and meanings to biological racial categories.
Lastly, Prior and Jones discuss the importance of understanding privilege in order to
understand difference. In the previous edition of this text, Gould (2009) described the
importance of understanding privilege as being earned or unearned. Prior and Jones
further this discussion of privilege and describe how most privilege and disadvantage
comes from unearned identities. For example, race, gender, and ability are identities
that are unearned, so any advantage/privilege or disadvantage/oppression that comes
with them is also unearned. Prior and Jones close this discussion by providing the
example of how difficult it is for some groups to understand privilege when they do not
feel like they are experiencing it.
In the second edition of this text, Nielsen and Maniglia provided important dis-
cussion of cultural competency and the significance of communication for justice pro-
fessionals. Throughout their revised chapter, Nielsen and Maniglia (Chapter 4) provide
several examples of communication competence and the rewards of competent com-
munication. While justice professionals have been receiving training on intercultural
communication since the 1960s, recently these trainings have been reexamined to
ensure that justice professionals, especially police officers, get the training they need to
deal with cultural changes in the communities they serve. As the authors highlight,
diversity significantly influences communication. They specifically examine three
such diversity categories, gender, culture, and power/status, in order to demonstrate
the importance of cross-cultural communication and competency. Nielsen and Maniglia
further elaborate that since culture is largely non-spoken/nonverbal in that it is trans-
mitted through observation and imitation rather than through explicit instruction,
becoming culturally competent is also about navigating nonverbal communication
such as posture, dress, touching, facial expressions and eye behavior, or similar. The
authors conclude their discussion of cultural competency and communication by
Part One • Framing Difference 7
discussing the challenges to communication. They highlight issues of stereotyping,

ethnocentrism, and naming and emphasize six critical skills for culturally competent
communication, including being mindful, managing ambiguity, managing anxiety,
practicing empathy, adapting, and making accurate predictions and explanations.
These skills are crucial for all individuals interacting in our very diverse world, but are
particularly crucial for justice professions in the pursuit of sustained justice.
The concluding chapter in Part One provides readers with a new chapter that
investigates how difference matters in specialty courts. As Arazan (Chapter 5) describes,
the United States has a history of responding to social problems with criminalization
and incarceration, particularly in ways that create inequality. This will be further
emphasized in many chapters throughout the text. This incarceration response, what
many call the prison-industrial complex because of its apparent tie to economic inter-
ests, has disproportionately and significantly affected poor communities of color.
Policies implemented in response to the War on Drugs have been statistically more
harmful to non-white communities, which means that many of our jails and prisons
have disproportionate minority populations in their facilities. The failure of mandatory
minimums and other policies in achieving their goals has fueled incarceration and this
has led to grassroots social movements seeking a justice system that meets the unique
needs of the offenders, victims, broader community, and the courtroom workgroup. In
this chapter, Arazan provides a historical overview of how specialty courts were cre-
ated and gives the social and political context to how they currently operate. She dis-
cusses how specialty courts function differently from traditional criminal courts, such
as by replacing the traditional adversarial court process with a process that is more
collaborative, often treatment-oriented, and is geared to long-term success. She exam-
ines many examples of specialty courts, including the most prevalent court, drug
courts, but also mental health courts, veterans treatment courts, tribal health to well-
ness courts, and domestic violence courts. Arazan concludes her discussion of spe-
cialty courts with an overview of the benefits as well as unintended consequences and
the future of these courts. As Arazan points out, existing research on specialty courts
shows the potential of this alternative, which has saved taxpayer dollars, reduced recid-
ivism, and can more adequately address the unique needs of some offenders than can
traditional criminal courts.
Taken together, the chapters in Part One are meant to provide readers with a very
broad understanding of how difference matters in terms of academic theories, overall
societal interaction, and also in terms of the criminal justice system. These chapters
provide the framework for the later discussions of specific categories of difference. It is
our hope that by the end of this book readers are better equipped with a historical
understanding of difference, with new terminology, and with a contextualized knowl-
edge of how issues of difference and privilege intersect and inform how we interpret
and understand each other.
References
Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of Collective of Northern Arizona University (Eds.),
race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimi- Investigating difference: Human and cultural rela-
nation doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. tions in criminal justice (2nd ed., pp. 23–38). Upper
University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1989(1), article 8. Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Gould, L. (2009). Privilege and the construction of Ken, I. (2007). Race–class–gender theory: An image(ry)
crime. In The Criminology and Criminal Justice problem. Gender Issues, 24(2), 1–20.
▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪
2
Conceptualizing Difference
Nancy A. Wonders
Chapter Objectives
• Explore how and why difference is socially constructed.
• Analyze the relationship between power, privilege, and difference.
• Explain how soft and hard social control, categorization, prejudice, stereotyping,
discrimination, and law help to create and maintain difference.
• Explore how the concept of intersectionality informs consideration of difference.
• Discuss the consequences of the social construction of difference for justice
professionals.
• Consider the challenges and opportunities globalization poses for investigating
difference and attaining greater justice for all.
Despite the critical role that difference plays within the criminal justice system, it is rare for
either practitioners or scholars to spend time investigating difference. It is often taken for
granted that the differences between people are natural and obvious and, therefore, uncon-
troversial. Yet, little about difference is actually either natural or obvious. And difference is
far from uncontroversial.
In this chapter, I outline some of the important insights about difference that have
emerged from the contemporary literature on difference and identity. My primary objec-
tives are to explore “difference” as a topic of study, introduce some of the key concepts and
common themes regarding difference that are contained in the chapters that follow, and
examine links between difference and contemporary justice challenges. The subsections
that follow offer answers to these questions: What is difference, and where does it come
from? Why do some differences matter while others do not? What is the relationship
between law and difference? Why study difference within the field of criminology and
criminal justice?
Difference is Socially Constructed

A great many people think that the most important differences between individuals are fun-
damentally biological. Race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, age, and even social class
are frequently viewed as inherited traits—what sociologists call ascribed characteristics.
In this view, people are designated “female” or “male” because they are born with particular
genitalia. People are “black” because they were born with dark skin; “white” because their
skin is lighter in color. What is most interesting about biology, however, is not how different
we all are from each other, but rather how remarkably similar most people are in both design
and function.
Indeed, the biological differences that do exist between people rarely matter in them-
selves; instead, people make differences matter through the process of social interaction,
which is to say that difference is socially constructed. It is the meaning attached to
differences—including biological differences—that makes some kinds of difference matter
8
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
firing, a pool of molten iron is formed by the thermit, which is very
penetrating and affords a good combustible surface for the oil, which
burns for an additional ten minutes.
It has an advantage over the Mark I dart in that it penetrates, and
over the Mark II bomb in that it is smaller and lighter in weight.
Incendiary Shell
Incendiary shell have been successfully used against aircraft and

to some extent in bombardments of inflammable ground targets.
Anti-aircraft shell are of small caliber and are usually tracer-
incendiary. Such shell are filled with pyrotechnic mixtures which
ignite at the moment of firing, or by time fuse, and are effective
against highly inflammable material. Shell filled with thermit which
explode and scatter the molten iron have been used against aircraft
and ground targets, but with rather poor results. Large shell, which
burst upon impact and scatter units of burning materials, have been
used with some success against ground targets.
Tracer shell contain such mixtures as barium nitrate, magnesium
and shellac, or red lead and magnesium.
Incendiary Bullets
Incendiary bullets are only effective against highly inflammable

material, and are therefore used principally in aerial warfare against
aircraft, either for the purpose of igniting the hydrogen of the gas
bag, or the gasoline. The present tendency is towards the use of the
large size (11 mm.) bullet, because of its greater incendiary action.
The incendiary material is either white phosphorus or a special
incendiary mixture consisting of an oxidizing agent and some
combustible or mixture of combustibles. The white tracer bullet
contains a mixture of barium peroxide and magnesium. A red bullet
contained in addition, strontium nitrate and chloride, or peroxide.
Incendiary Hand Grenade

While the use of incendiary grenades and other small incendiary
devices is limited, such armament is considered very valuable in
trench warfare. They can be used to set fire to inflammable material,
either in offensive or defensive operations.
Phosphorus grenades, while used principally for producing
smoke (see page 302), have considerable value as an incendiary
weapon.
Thermit grenades are very useful in rendering unserviceable
guns and other metallic equipment which must be abandoned. They
permit aviators to destroy planes which motor troubles oblige to land
in enemy territory. They are also used to ignite inflammable liquids,
thrown into a dugout, or sprayed over an objective by a flame
projector.
The Mark I hand grenade was developed for burning enemy
ammunition dumps, for clearing away brush or other material in front
of trenches and for use in dugouts. The standard H.E. grenade body
was half-filled with thermit and half with a celluloid container filled
with a solidified fuel oil. The grenade is fired by the spit of the fuse of
the bouchon firing mechanism. This, through the booster, lights the
thermit igniter, which in turn fires the main charge of thermit. The
resulting molten iron readily penetrates the grenade case, at the
same time igniting the celluloid case and its contents. The oil burns
for about 3.5 minutes. This grenade was never used since it was
considered that an all thermit grenade would be of more value.
Trench Mortar Equipment
Special projectiles were designed for use with the Stokes mortar
and the Livens’ projector. Thermit was used only in Stokes’
projectiles. The Livens’ projectile was filled with inflammable units
(chlorated jute) immersed in a light oil mixture. Thrown from a
projector into the enemy’s trench, it explodes, giving a large flash
and scattering the burning units over an area of forty yards. The
Mark II projectile, designed for general incendiary effect against
readily inflammable material, consists of an altered 8-inch Livens’
gas projectile filled with chlorated jute units impregnated with solid oil
and immersed in a spontaneously inflammable oil. After a short
delay, these units burst into flame and burn vigorously for several
minutes. It is almost impossible to extinguish them without large
quantities of water. Such bombs have only a very limited use, so that
it is questionable if they are really worth while.
Fig. 111.—German 8"
Incendiary Bullet.
Fig. 112.—German Incendiary
Blue Pencil.
German Blue Pencil
A very interesting and curious device was developed by the

Germans in the form of an incendiary pencil. Similar in appearance
to a common blue pencil, sharpened at one end, they are
distinguished only by a small, almost imperceptible, point placed on
the outside 11 mm. from the unsharpened end. They are 175 mm.
long, 11.1 mm. in diameter and weigh 12 to 13 grams. The interior of
the pencil contains a glass bulb, with two compartments filled with
sulfuric acid and a celluloid tube filled with potassium chlorate. The
glass bulb ends in a slender point; when this is broken the acid
comes into contact with the chlorate and causes an explosion. The
two materials are separated by a layer of clay, which causes a
delayed action of about 30 minutes. The operator breaks the point of
bulb, buries the pencil vertically in the inflammable material and then
has half an hour in which to get away, before any possibility of a fire.
He cuts the pencil with a knife 2 cm. from the point, so that if caught
he has the appearance of simply sharpening a pencil.
Flaming Gun
Among the unsuccessful weapons of the late war, the liquid fire
gun or Flammenwerfer, as the German called it, is probably the most
interesting. Its origin, according to a German story, was due to a
mere accident. A certain officer, during peace maneuvers, was
ordered to hold a fort at all cost. During the sham fight, having
employed all the means at his disposal, he finally called out the fire
brigade and directed streams of water upon the attacking force.
Afterwards, during the criticism of the operations in the presence of
the Kaiser, he claimed that he had subjected the attackers to
streams of burning oil. The Kaiser immediately inquired whether
such a thing would be possible, and was assured that it was entirely
feasible.
Copyright by Kadel and Herbert, N. Y.
Fig. 113.—Liquid Fire Attack.
Long series of experiments were necessary before a satisfactory

combination of oils was produced, which could be projected as a
flame on the enemy, but they were finally successful. Unlike the use
of poison gas, however, the flaming liquid gun did not prove to be a
successful weapon of warfare. True, at first they were rather
successful, but this was before the men learned their real nature. In
the first attack, the Allies were completely surprised and the troops
were routed by the flames. Auld tells of one of the early attacks (July
29, 1915) when, without warning, the front line troops were
enveloped in flames. Where the flames came from could not be
seen. All that the men knew was that they seemed surrounded by
fierce, curling flames, which were accompanied by a loud roaring
noise, and dense clouds of black smoke. Here and there a big blob
of burning oil would fall into a trench or saphead. Shouts and yells
rent the air as individual men, rising up in the trenches or attempting
to move in the open, felt the force of the flames. The only way to
safety appeared to be to the rear. This direction the men that were
left took. For a short space the flames pursued them and the local
retirement became a local rout. After the bombardment which
followed, only one man is known to have returned.
After a study of the pictures of the liquid fire gun in operation, it is
evident that the men could not be blamed for this retirement. One
has only to imagine being faced by a spread of flame similar to that
used for the oil burners under the largest boiler, but with a jet nearly
60 feet in length and capable of being sprayed round as one might
spray water with a fire hose.
Later, when the device was better known it was different, though
even then it was a pretty good test of a man’s nerve. It was found
that the flames could not follow one to the bottom of a trench as the
gas did, and that, if a man crouched to the bottom of his trench, his
head might be very warm for a minute or so but that the danger was
soon past and he then could pick off the man who had so recently
made things uncomfortable for him.
While it is said that Major R., who invented the Flammenwerfer,
enjoyed a great popularity among his men, and is familiarly known
as the Prince of Hades, there is no doubt that this was not shared by
the Allies. Their rule was: “Shoot the man carrying the apparatus
before he gets in his shot, if possible. If this cannot be done, take
cover from the flames and shoot him afterwards.”
The German had several types, which may be grouped into the
small or portable and the large Flammenwerfers.
The portable Flammenwerfer consisted of a sheet steel cylinder
of two compartments, one to hold compressed nitrogen, the other to
hold the oil. The nitrogen furnished the pressure which forces the oil
out through the flexible tube. Air cannot be used, because the
oxygen would form an explosive mixture with the vapors of the oil,
and any heating on compression, or back flash from the flame or
fuse might make things very unpleasant for the operator. A pressure
of about 23 atmospheres is reached when the cylinder is charged.
The nitrogen appeared to be carried on the field in large containers
and the flame projectors actually charged in the trenches.
The oil used in the flame projectors varied from time to time, but
always contained a mixture of light or easily volatile and heavy and
less volatile fractions of petroleum or mineral oil, very carefully
mixed. In some cases even ordinary commercial ether has been
found in the cylinders.
Fig. 114.—Small Flammenwerfer.

The most interesting part about the flame projector is the lighting
device. This is so made that the oil ignites spontaneously the minute
the jet is turned on, and is kept alight by a fiercely burning mixture
which lasts throughout the discharge. This mixture is composed of
barium nitrate, potassium nitrate, metallic magnesium and charcoal,
with some resinous material. The priming consists of black powder
and metallic magnesium.
When the oil rushes out of the jet, it forces up the plunger of a
friction lighter and ignites this core of fiercely burning mixture.
The range of these small projectors is from 14 to 17 meters (17 to
20 yards) but the duration of the flame is rather less than a minute.
In a later pattern, it was designed that one nozzle should be
issued to three reservoirs. After the discharge of one, the jet is
attached to the others in succession. This is called the “Wx”
Flammenwerfer (interchangeable). In this way a squad of three men
could carry 58 pints of inflammable oil. It is a question, though,
whether the third man would live to use his reservoir.
Fig. 115.—Boyd Flame Projector.
The fact that the trenches were often very close together during
the early part of the war, made possible the use of large or stationary
Flammenwerfer. These consisted of a steel reservoir 3⅓ feet in
height and 1⅔ feet in diameter, weighing about 250 pounds, which
could be connected to two steel cylinders, containing nitrogen under
pressure. These carried 180 liters (40 gallons) of liquid and operated
under a pressure of 15 atmospheres. The discharge nozzle was at
the end of a metal tube three feet long, and its orifice was about ⁵/₁₆
of an inch in diameter. The range of this apparatus was from 33 to 40
yards and the duration of the flame from one to two minutes.
Because of the comparatively short range of these guns and the
ease with which they could be destroyed, if located by the enemy,
their use was very limited.
Even with the portable flammenwerfer, the most difficult thing to
do is to get near enough the target to make the shoot effective.
Another serious disadvantage is its very short duration. It is
impossible to charge up again on the spot, and the result is that once
the flame stops, the whole game is finished and the operators are at
the mercy of the enemy.
With these facts in mind it is easy to see how service in the
flaming gun regiments is apparently a form of punishment. Men
convicted of offenses in other regiments were transferred either for a
time or permanently and were forced under threat of death in the
most hazardous enterprises and to carry out the most dangerous
work. Taken all in all the flame thrower was one of the greatest
failures among the many promising devices tried out on a large scale
in the war.
CHAPTER XXI
THE PHARMACOLOGY OF WAR GASES
The pharmacology of war gases plays such an important part in chemical warfare that
a brief discussion may well be given of the methods used in the testing of gases for
toxicity and other pharmacological properties.
War gases may be divided into two groups: persistent and non-persistent, each of
which may include several classes:
I. Lethal
II. Lachrymatory
III. Sternutatory
IV. Special
Each class necessitates special tests in order to determine whether or not it is suitable
for further development.
Toxicity
One of the first points which must be carefully determined in investigating a substance
is its toxicity. It is important that this be determined for numerous reasons:
1. To determine what concentrations are dangerous in the field.
2. To ascertain how effective protective devices have to be to furnish sufficient
protection against the gas.
3. To furnish a basis for accurate experimental work on the treatment of gassed cases.
4. To decide whether or not the material is worthy of further development in the
laboratory or in the plant.
These considerations necessitate the determination of the toxicity in the form of a
vapor and not by the ordinary method of administration by mouth, through the skin
(subcutaneously) or through the blood (intravenously). The simplest method of
determining the toxicity of a substance as a vapor would be to place animals in a gas-tight
box and introduce a known amount of the substance in the form of vapor. But by this
method the concentration is not accurately known unless chemical analyses of the air are
made, and then it is found to be much less than that calculated from the amount of
substance introduced, because of condensation on the walls of the chamber, or
absorption of the substance by the skin and hair of the animal and in some cases, of
decomposition of the substance by moisture in the air. Moreover, it is found that the
concentration decreases markedly with time. Because of these factors, the figures used
for the concentration are more or less guess work. To overcome these difficulties, a
chamber is used through which a continuous current of air, containing a known and
constant amount of the poisonous vapor, is passed. Such an apparatus is shown in Fig.
116.
Fig. 116.—Continuous Flow Gassing Chamber for Animals.
The flask E is a 300 cc. Erlenmeyer flask, with a ground glass stopper. The liquid to be
tested is placed in this flask together with a sufficient quantity of glass wool to prevent
splashing and the carrying over mechanically of droplets of the liquid. Air is passed
through A and C (calcium chloride drying tubes) and the rate measured by the flow meter
D. The air and gas are mixed in F before passing into the chamber G. This chamber is
made of plate glass, is of about 100 liters capacity, and is air-tight. The entire flow of air
and gas through the box, kept constant at 250 liters per minute, is measured at H. The
gas is removed through K, which is filled with charcoal and soda-lime, in order that little
gas may pass into the pump.
By weighing the flask E, and its contents before and after passing air through it, and
knowing the total volume of the mixture passing through the chamber during the same
period, the concentration of the substance can readily be calculated. This concentration,
as determined by the “loss in weight” method, can be checked by chemical analysis
(samples taken at M—M). The method has been found to give accurate values.
The concentration in the chamber reaches its constant level within 30 to 40 seconds
after the apparatus is started.
With the flow of 250 liters per minute, the difficulties mentioned above are reduced to a
point where they are practically negligible.
All toxicity tests on mice were made with an exposure of ten minutes, while dogs were
exposed for thirty minutes. In case death did not occur during exposure, the animals were
kept under observation for several days. Toxicity and all other figures are expressed in
milligrams per liter of air, though parts per million (p.p.m.) was frequently used during the
early work.
Another point of difficulty is the great individual variation in the susceptibility of
animals. This is probably greater than when the poison is administered subcutaneously or
intravenously. It necessitates the use of a large number of animals in making a
determination of the toxicity of a gas. Again, the toxicity for different species may vary,
and as the ultimate aim is a knowledge of the toxicity for man, a great many different
species must be used. If the toxicity is widely different for different animal species, it is
hard to arrive at a definite conclusion as to the toxicity for man.
With longer exposures than thirty minutes the lethal concentration is usually less, there
being a cumulative effect. This is not true for hydrocyanic acid. If the concentration is not
enough to kill at once, an animal can stand it almost indefinitely. Whether the action is
cumulative or not depends on the rate at which the system destroys or eliminates the
poison. If the poison is being eliminated as fast as received the concentration in the
tissues cannot increase. It is stated, for example, that the amount of nicotine in a cigar
would kill a man if taken in one dose. If it is spread over twenty minutes, the destruction or
elimination of the nicotine is so rapid that no obviously bad effects are noted.
Another interesting thing about the work on poison gases is that in most cases a
preliminary exposure to less than the lethal concentration does not seem to make the
animal either more or less sensitive on a later exposure. This is quite unexpected,
because we know that with irritating gases, especially lachrymators, men adapt
themselves to much higher concentrations than they could stand at first. In view of the
experiences of arsenic eaters, it is quite possible that the experiments, which showed no
accustoming to toxic gases, were not continued long enough to give positive results.
Not only does the susceptibility of different animals of the same species vary greatly
for a particular gas, but the susceptibility of different species varies greatly with different
gases. Thus while the effects of certain gases on mice are quite comparable to the effects
on man, it is very far from being true with other gases.
Lachrymators
While one cannot determine the lethal concentrations of poison gases for men, it is
possible to determine the concentration that will produce lachrymation. The threshold
value is that at which two-thirds of the observers experience irritation. The lachrymatory
value is considerably higher than the threshold value.
Fig. 117.—Aeration Apparatus for Testing Lachrymators.
A very satisfactory method for determining lachrymatory values is shown in Fig. 117.
Air is measured at A and bubbled through the lachrymatory substance in B. The air and
gas are mixed in D and pass into E, a gas-tight, glass-walled chamber of about 150 liters
capacity. The gas is removed through Ef, by suction and the volume of the air-gas mixture
measured by the flow meter, F.
After the apparatus has run a few minutes, and the concentration of the gas has
become constant, the subject is instructed to adjust the mask, attached at H, and to tell
whatever he notices just as soon as he notices it. The operator stands in such a position
that he can manipulate the stopcock H without being observed by the subject. After
breathing air for a time (H is a two-way cock, connected with the air through J, and to the
chamber through Eg) both to become accustomed to the mask and to eliminate, as far as
possible, any “psychological symptoms,” the subject is allowed to breathe the gas mixture
for a maximum of three minutes. If the expected symptoms are produced in less than this
time, the test is discontinued as soon as they develop.
Fig. 118.—Type of Spray Nozzles.
For accurate work, it is necessary to work with a pure sample which is at least fairly
volatile. Mixtures cannot be run by this method. In this case it is necessary to volatilize
each separately, passing the vapors simultaneously into the mixing chamber E.
A spray method may also be used with satisfactory results. Types of sprays are shown
in Fig. 118.
Odors
Because of the great value in detecting low concentrations of gases in the field, it is
important to know the smallest amount of a gas that can be detected by odor. In some
cases, this test is more delicate than any chemical test yet devised.
Odors may be divided into two classes, true odors, and mild irritation. By true odor is
meant a definite stimulation of the olfactory nerve, giving rise to a sensation which is more
or less characteristic for each substance producing the stimulation. Mild irritation defines
the sensation which is confused with the sense of smell by untrained observers, but which
is really a gentle stimulation of the sensory nerve endings of the nose. This so-called odor
of substances producing this effect is not characteristic. Higher concentrations of these
compounds almost invariably cause a definite irritation of the nose.
Examples of true odors are the mercaptans, mustard gas, bromoacetone, acrolein,
chlorine and ammonia. Substances which cause mild irritation are chloroacetone, methyl
dichloroarsine, ethyl iodoacetate and chloropicrin.
In making the test for odor, the same apparatus is used as for lachrymators. The time
of exposure is shortened to 30 seconds, as the subject always detects the odor at the first
or second inhalation.
In this connection the recent work of Allison and Katz (J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 11, 336,
[1919]) is of interest. They have designed an instrument, “the odorometer,” for measuring
the intensity of odors in varying concentrations in air. It is based on the principle given
above. A measured volume of air is passed through the liquid and then diluted to a given
concentration. The mixture is then passed through a rubber tube with a glass funnel at the
open end. Only one inhalation of the mixture is used to determine the intensity of the odor.
The position of any strength of odor on the scale depends upon the sensitiveness and
judgment of the operator, but with one person conducting the entire test, the results have
been found quite satisfactory. (See tables on pages 360 and 361.)
Skin Irritants
Substances which seem useful for producing skin burns are studied both on animals
and on man. Dichloroethyl sulfide (mustard gas) is used as a basis of comparison.
Several methods are available.
Direct Application. This method consists of the direct application of the compound
itself to the skin, using a definite quantity (0.005 cc. or 0.005 mg.) over a definite area (5
square centimeters) of the skin. With such a quantity of mustard gas a rather severe burn
on animals is produced. No precautions are taken to prevent evaporation from the skin
since it is believed that in this way the test will approximate fairly closely the field
conditions.
Vapor Tests. Preliminary tests with vapors of volatile compounds are best made by
placing a small amount of the material on a plug of cotton in the bottom of a test tube
enclosed in a larger test tube which acts as an air jacket. After about an hour at room
temperature the mouth of the test tube is applied to the skin. The concentration is not
known, but one is dealing practically with saturated vapor. If an exposure of from 30 to 60
minutes produces no effect, one is safe to assume that the compound is not sufficiently
active to be of value as a skin irritant.
If quantitative results are desired, the apparatus shown in Fig. 119 is used. Dry air is
blown through the bubbler, which is connected with a series of glass skin applicators. The
concentration is determined in the usual way. The skin applicator consists of a small
cylinder about 1.5 to 2 cm. in diameter and about 4 cm. long with a small glass handle
attached on top. The opening is 1 cm. in diameter. When the concentration of the gas is
constant, the exposure to the skin is made directly for any desired length of time. The skin
irritant efficiency is judged by comparing the per cent of positive responses to
approximately equal concentrations of the vapors, using mustard gas as a standard.
TABLE I—Physical and Physiological Properties

of Chemicals Used as Stenches
Boiling Freezing Physiological
Character
Chemical Point, Point, Properties Remarks
of Odor
°C. °C. of Vapor
Amyl acetate 148 -75 Banana oil Harmless Pleasant to most
(thick) people;
disagreeable to
some
Ethyl acetate 77.4 -83.8 Fruity, pleasant Harmless
Amyl alcohol 137.8 Alcoholic Harmless
Butyric acid 162.3 -7.9 Very disagreeable Harmless
Valeric acid 186.4 -58.5 Very disagreeable Harmless
Ethyl ether 35 -112.6 Pungent Soporific
Phenyl Very disagreeable Unknown
165
isocyanide
Allyl Mustard oil, Lachrymatory and
151
isothiocyanate disagreeable toxic
Methyl Mustard oil, Lachrymatory and
119 34
isothiocyanate disagreeable toxic
Amyl isovalerate 190 Very disagreeable Harmless
Butyl mercaptan 97 Very disagreeable Harmless
Isobutyl Very disagreeable Unknown Probably harmless
88
mercaptan
Ethyl mercaptan 37 -144.4 Very disagreeable Harmless
Propyl mercaptan 67 Very disagreeable Unknown Probably harmless
Oil of wintergreen, Harmless
Methyl salicylate 222.2 -8.3
pleasant
Amyl thioether 95-98 Very disagreeable Unknown Probably harmless
Ethyl thioether 92 -99.5 Very disagreeable Unknown Probably harmless
Carbon Sweet, unpleasant Harmless
76.74 -19.5
tetrachloride
Chloroform 62 -63.2 Sweet, agreeable Soporific
Iodoform Decomposes 119 Unpleasant Harmless
Artificial musk Pleasant Harmless Unpleasant in
higher
concentration
Nitrobenzene 209.4 5.71 Almonds, pleasant Toxic
Oil of peppermint Pleasant Harmless
Pyridine 115.2 -42 Very disagreeable Toxic
TABLE II—Results of Measurement of the Intensity

of Various Stenches
Volumes of the Chemical, as a Perfect
Gas, per Million Volumes of Air,
Intensity of Odor
Chemical
Quite Very
Detectable Faint Strong
Noticeable Strong
Amyl acetate 7 10 13 90 246
Volumes of the Chemical, as a Perfect
Gas, per Million Volumes of Air,
Intensity of Odor
Chemical
Quite Very
Noticeable Strong
Ethyl acetate 190 339 615 1236 1753
Amyl alcohol 63 83 123 439 601
Butyric acid 2.4 6 18 91 161
Valeric acid 7 29 125 332 962
1923 4927 5825 19982
Ethyl ether
3352
Butyl mercaptan 6 12 18 38 56
Isobutyl mercaptan 3.5 5 7 11 16
Ethyl mercaptan 18 35 73 141 198
Propyl mercaptan 2 7 9 14 17
Amyl thioether 0.2 1 1.6 1.7 2.2
Ethyl thioether 3 12 29 61 74
Allyl isothiocyanate ?2 3 6 8 50
Methyl 5 13 23 36 48
isothiocyanate
Amyl isovalerate 1.7 3 6 10 12
Carbon 718 1461 1588 4964 6091
tetrachloride
674 1389 2600 5887
Chloroform
19528
Iodoform 1.1[35]
Artificial musk
Nitrobenzene 29 36 44 114 296
Phenyl isocyanide 0.5 1 3 10 25
Pyridine 10 45 93 700 1764
[36]
Methyl salicylate 16.1 23 29 244
Oil of peppermint
Milligrams of Chemical
per
Cu. Ft. of Air,
Chemical
Intensity of Odor
Quite Very
Noticeable Strong
Amyl acetate 1.1 1.5 2 14 38
Ethyl acetate 19.4 34.6 63 126 191
Amyl alcohol 6.4 8.5 13 45 61
Butyric acid 0.3 0.6 2 9 16
Valeric acid 0.8 3.4 15 39 114
Ethyl ether 165.1 287.7 423 500 1715
Butyl mercaptan 0.5 1.0 2 3 5
Isobutyl mercaptan 0.2 0.5 0.7 1 2
Ethyl mercaptan 1.3 2.5 5 10 14
Propyl mercaptan 0.2 0.6 0.8 1.2 1.6
Amyl thioether 0.04 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Ethyl thioether 0.3 1.2 3 6 8
Allyl isothiocyanate 0.2 0.3 0.7 0.9 6
Methyl 0.4 1.1 2 3 4
isothiocyanate
Amyl isovalerate 0.4 0.5 1 2 2.3
Carbon tetrachloride 128 260 283 886 1087
Chloroform 93 192 360 816 1321
[37]
Iodoform 0.5
Artificial musk 0.001[38]
Nitrobenzene 4 5 6 16 42
Phenyl isocyanide 0.06 0.1 0.4 1 3
Pyridine 0.9 4 9 64 162
[39]
Methyl salicylate 2.8 4 5 43
Oil of peppermint 0.68 0.9 3 9.5 9.9

Investigating Difference Human Cultural Relations 3Rd Full Chapter

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Investigating Difference Human Cultural Relations 3Rd Full Chapter

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Investigating Difference Human

Cultural Relations 3rd

Constructing Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity 92

Chapter 8 Victimization in the Context of Difference—

Part Three Categories of Difference: Class and Race 133

Chapter 9 Social Class, Crime, and Justice—Raymond J.

Chapter 10 Whiteness and the Construction of Crime—

Excerpt from White Like Me: Reflections on Race from a Privileged

Chapter 11 Stolen Lands, Stolen Lives, Revisited: Native

Chapter 12 The Continuing Significance of Race: African

Chapter 13 Aliens Within: Asian Americans and U.S. Legal

Part Four Categories of Difference: Immigration and Race 223

Chapter 14 Coming to America: Immigration, Crime, and the

Chapter 15 Unwelcome Citizens: Latinos and the Criminal

Chapter 16 Undocumented Immigration as Moral Panic:

Part Five Categories of Difference: Forgotten Difference 271

Chapter 17 Youth, Crime, and Justice: Challenges and

Chapter 18 Many Faces of Aging: Victimization, Crime, and

Chapter 19 Imprisoning Disability: Difference, Punishment,

Chapter 20 Religion, Politics, and Criminal Justice—Mohamed

Part Six Reframing Difference 323

Chapter 21 Reconstructing Difference for Criminal Justice

“Discovery consists of looking at the same thing as everyone else does

New to This Edition:

Third Edition Roadmap

Some Notes on Terminology

discussing the challenges to communication. They highlight issues of stereotyping,

Difference is Socially Constructed

Incendiary shell have been successfully used against aircraft and

Incendiary bullets are only effective against highly inflammable

Incendiary Hand Grenade

Trench Mortar Equipment

German Blue Pencil

A very interesting and curious device was developed by the

Copyright by Kadel and Herbert, N. Y.

Fig. 113.—Liquid Fire Attack.

Long series of experiments were necessary before a satisfactory

Fig. 114.—Small Flammenwerfer.

Fig. 116.—Continuous Flow Gassing Chamber for Animals.

TABLE I—Physical and Physiological Properties

TABLE II—Results of Measurement of the Intensity

You might also like