Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35982941›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2022

Me too! A case study of gendered victimization and feminist development in a Swedish peer support organization for people with experiences of criminalization and substance abuse.

Emy Bäcklin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Emy BäcklinDepartment of Criminology, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Even if peer support is commonly defined as horizontal in contrast to the more hierarchical relationship between client and professional, peer support is not free from power dynamics. This article considers feminist organizing in the context of peer support for people with experiences of criminalization and substance abuse and addresses questions of (un)equal peer support, sexual victimization, (re)integration, and organizational change in the #MeToo era. Drawing on qualitative interviews with support organization representatives and discussion material from a study circle and a men's group, this article analyses one organization's framing of, and responses to, allegations of sexual victimization of female members, and their ongoing work toward increased equality. The study shows that a number of measures have been taken in the organization in order to give voice to women whose lives are affected by crime, imprisonment, violence, and drug abuse. Interview participants put strong emphasis on the need to counteract what is described as a "macho culture" embedded in the peer support organization (PESO), which is seen as repeating structures of masculinity and power from the previous criminal lifestyle as well as reproducing specific gendered vulnerabilities. The organization's patriarchal structure is understood as connected to a culture of silence that has allowed for sexism and marginalization of female members to continue. The women's lived experiences of trauma within peer support practices and their struggles to redefine the foundations of their organization emphasizes the lived gendered emotionality of peer support, and uncovers how power structures can be challenged by putting the gendered lived experiences of women with a history of criminalization and substance abuse in the center of ex-offender peer support.

Indexed as

feminism#MeToopeer supportreintegrationsubstance abuse

Identifiers

PMID35982941
PMCPMC9378983

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.