This Article Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 1043986208318228v1 24/3/314    most recent References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Herzog, S. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The Lenient Social and Legal Response to Trafficking in Women

An Empirical Analysis of Public Perceptions in Israel

Hebrew University of Jerusalem

Trafficking in women for prostitution remains a modern form of slavery. Paradoxically, governments and legal systems tend to target the victims (trafficked women) instead of the criminal traffickers. The present study attempted to investigate the roots of such a lenient social response. Following a consensus perspective, it was first hypothesized that this offense was considered by the public to be a relatively nonserious offense because it involved prostitutes, and second, as in other cases of male violence against women, it was hypothesized that the public views toward this offense were affected by traditional gender-role attitudes toward women. To this end, respondents from a national sample were asked to evaluate hypothetical short crime scenarios representing cases of trafficking in women and other offenses. The findings indicate that the public perceives such criminal acts as serious, both for egalitarian and traditional respondents. This finding challenges the consensual basis of the lenient approach toward traffickers in women. The implications of the findings are discussed.

Key Words: trafficking in women • seriousness perceptions • Israel • lenient response • consensus and feminist perspectives

This version was published on August 1, 2008

Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, Vol. 24, No. 3, 314-333 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/1043986208318228


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?