Contemporary Patterns of Female Gangs in Correctional Settings

MICHAEL LAUDERDALE School of Social Work, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas MICHELLE BURMAN Doctoral Candidate, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas

This article addresses the current state of female participation in street and prison gangs. Data come predominantly from interviews with observers (correctional officials) and from the authors’ expe- riences in working with correctional, police, and school personnel. The methodology used is an opportunity sample. The article reviews the literature on gangs and addresses why early studies showed few females in gangs and then typically in defined peripheral roles.

KEYWORDS Gangs, female gangs, correctional settings, security threat groups

INTRODUCTION

Males form gangs. Today, neighborhoods, schools, and correctional institutions struggle with these informal social groups that direct males toward committing illegal acts including violence, drug trade, and extortion. Gangs can be pervasive and extremely threatening—so much so that correctional facilities refer to them as security threat groups (STGs) to lessen their psy- chological impact. Some gangs are neighborhood-based and last only a few years. Others will last more than a generation, acknowledging veterans and holding a territory. Gangs may extend beyond a single neighborhoodand use economic activities to impact those social institutions seeking to eliminate or control them (e.g., crime syndicates such as the Mafia and groups in Mexico that war with local and federal authorities to control the drug trade and the movement of drugs into the United States). During the last 5 years, some cities, such as Nuevo Laredo, appear to be mostly in the control of

Address correspondence to Michael Lauderdale, School of Social Work, University of Texas at Austin, 1925 San Jacinto Boulevard, Austin, TX 78712. E-mail: [email protected]

258 Female Gangs in Correctional Settings 259 competing drug gangs that have weaponry that exceeds that of municipal police authorities. Gangs cross city, state, and country borders. One gang, Mara Salva- trucha, or MS-13 as it is commonly known, developed as a result of the civil war and unrest in El Salvador during the 1980s and early 1990s that drove many to emigrate primarily to Washington, DC, and the Rampart area of Los Angeles. When these refugees were not accepted by the Hispanic community, they formed their own group to protect themselves from and challenge other Hispanic gangs, primarily the 18th Street Gang in Los Angeles. The gang has now spread beyond these borders, claiming an estimated 30,000 to 50,000 members internationally. In all these gangs, little is known about, or perhaps less attention is paid to, the role of females. This article examines just that.

POPULAR NOTIONS ABOUT GANGS

When one thinks of gangs, the usual notion is an entity such as the Mafia deeply involved in highly organized illegal activities such as narcotics, smug- gling, and gambling. Since the 1980s, a public assumption of the manifes- tation of gangs has been of street gangs such as the Crips and Bloods as popularized through movies, including ‘‘Colors’’ and ‘‘Boyz ‘n the Hood.’’ These are gangs that are neighborhood-based, wear distinctive clothing, are visible and violent, and have limited female involvement in restricted roles. Through all of this public interest and media focus—actually fascination— citizens, youth, and current and potential researchers are made aware of the reality, characteristics, and activities of gangs. However, much of this attention with lurid media reports of gang activities may or may not be an accurate depiction of gangs, their activities, and their members. Especially the emphasis on violence, high activity, romanticism, and male membership may not be wholly accurate. Public awareness of gangs has been significant throughout the twentieth century. At the turn of the century, many of the themes of popular, Western pulp fiction focused upon gangs such as the James Gang, the Wild Bunch, or the Hole in the Wall Gang. Both news reports and light fiction focused upon stories of conflict among mostly young men in the new communities developing in the American West. People being uprooted and moving into new settings was a theme not only in the West but also in the growing cities of the East. Herbert Asbury wrote a popular series of articles in the 1920s about street gangs developing in the early and mid-century years of the nineteenth century in New York City, and parts of his story were used in the movie, ‘‘Gangs of New York’’ (Scorsese, DiCaprio, et al., 2002), which received several Academy Award nominations. During the Depression, gangs of bank robbers and bootleggers captured the public’s attention and earned 260 M. Lauderdale and M. Burman notoriety. A popular Broadway play in the early 1960s, ‘‘West Side Story,’’ looked at youth involved in ethnic and territorial conflicts in Manhattan; another movie, ‘‘Blackboard Jungle,’’ had as part of its theme gang activity in New York public schools, and Marlon Brando’s ‘‘The Wild One’’ established the concept of the motorcycle gang. One constant in all of these were settings where persons were mobile and moving into new settings. Throughout these popular and historical accounts of gangs, females, if present, usually played auxiliary roles. There may be an exception now and again, such as the purported equivalence of Bonnie Parker to Clyde Barrow in the mobile, bank-robbing gang of the Great Depression, but usually the female was an accompaniment, not a leader or major initiator of plans and activity. The female consoled the male, hid the weapons, and drove the car. They did not form gangs, either as mixed-gender gangs or exclusively female, and were not leaders of gangs.

ACADEMIC STUDIES OF GANGS

The academic research examination of gangs began with the School of Sociology at the University of Chicago (Park & Burgess, 1969; Park, Burgess, et al., 1925; Shaw, Zorbaugh, et al., 1929; Zorbaugh, 1957). Direct obser- vations of street gangs were made as were interviews of gang members in new neighborhoods populated by migrants and in the same settings by researchers, as early social workers were engaged in creating settlement homes to address the conditions of need and anomie among poverty residents. Among the prominent findings for our purposes here was that gangs appear in the interstitial areas of society. Youth who are not in school or have little extracurricular involvement in the school or community-sanctioned organizations, including employment, are those most likely to be involved in gangs. The second finding is that girls were rarely noted as being gang members or no reference at all was made of all-girl gangs. From the 1920s until the 1990s, the findings were that there were exceedingly few female gangs and that the usual presence of females in gangs was as auxiliaries to males. Specifically, Thrasher in his 1920s study of more than 1,000 gangs reports only six gangs and perhaps only two as true all-girl gangs. Girls were seen in gangs but only in certain roles, and the usual role for girls was carrying weapons for the boys or perhaps driving a car and providing sexual favors. Other researchers arrived at similar conclusions (Mann, 1984; Miller, Harvard Law School Center for Criminal Justice, et al., 1975; Miller & United States Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 2001; Short & Strodtbeck, 1965).

The Social Psychology of Gangs in the Fifties and Sixties One aspect of the study of gangs is the fact that gang numbers and public and scientific attention to gangs is episodic. There are substantial reports Female Gangs in Correctional Settings 261 of gangs in New York City in the mid- and early 1800s, as the city grew rapidly, swelled by millions of immigrants coming from Europe. There were many reports of gangs in the American West after the Civil War, with its disruption of community life in the South and the great westward migration. In the early 1910s and 1920s, as America urbanized and industrialized, gangs became especially evident in the newly appearing cities such as Chicago. In the depths of the Great Depression, with male unemployment running in the 20% range, gangs were a great concern, and Whyte’s (1958) study of street life in Boston for low-income youth presented participation in gangs as part of the standard coming-to-adult passage of American culture. Gangs were understood by academic researchers and professionals such as neighborhood social workers, police, and correctional personnel as somewhat episodic and as a common theme in certain situations. Coinciding with popular attention devoted to gangs after World War II again in newly developing communities with population migration was the scientific study of group formation that had important implications for understandings of gangs. The works of Bales (1955); Hare (1962); Sherif and Sherif (1964); and Sherif et al. (1965) supported the notion that people, males and females, naturally formed groups. If there were no social structure, including norms and roles, people in interaction soon formed them, and the distinction between groups and gangs was one of whether the norms of the groups were in accord with or violated social norms. Such findings supported the notion that females as much as males readily form social groupings, and thus, one should expect to find female gangs and substantial participation of females in mixed male and female gangs. Yet most of the empirical studies of the 1960s and 1970s found, as did earlier researchers, few examples of girl gangs and only in the same roles as found previously (Short and Strodtbeck, 1965). The relative lack of female participation is a puzzle. Clearly females do form gangs and experience the same pressures as males that lead to formation (Chesney-Lind and Hagedorn, 1999). Does gender control whether one is likely to participate in social groups or in social groups that deviate from norms? Do females participate but are less visible in their participation, as their actions may draw less attention from authorities (Miller & United States Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 2001)? Does society fail to see the reality of female participation in gangs? These are some of the important questions.

Deviant Behavior and the Methodological Challenge Any phenomenon, under study, is influenced by the act of being studied. This has been a vexing but very important theoretical concern in most fields involving human behavior and even in other areas of science, such as physics, for many decades. Essentially, observation changes what is being 262 M. Lauderdale and M. Burman observed. If true for physics, this realization is more than doubly true for persons involved in gangs. Seeing gangs as they exist rather than as the media suggest is a challenge. Securing scientific access to behavior that is contrary to social norms and is criminal is particularly elusive. Even how one’s culture views gangs may condition one’s ability to see gangs. To some extent, we may suspect that the lack of reports of female gangs is simply because of the popular notion that girls do not form gangs. The recently popular movie, ‘‘Mean Girls’’ (Waters, Michaels, & Shimkin, 2004), received a number of reviews that expressed relief, by parents and school personnel, to increased public awareness of the aggressive and often de- structive acts of girl cliques in public schools. The important recognition from the responses to such a movie is that often female gang activity is not seen but rather labeled as just the actions of individuals. Additionally, often what for males would be called gangs for females may be termed cliques or sets. Our understanding of gangs comes from professionals who see and must work with gangs. Teachers, police officers, street-outreach workers, and correctional officials encounter gangs and hear of the activities and influence of gangs from individuals either as members of gangs or influenced by gangs. Such professional relations provide part of the reality of gang formation, gang activity, and the influence upon individuals in gangs. A second understanding of gangs comes from the statements of persons who are or were involved as members of gangs. To understand females in gangs, the available methodology is the same to address questions of professionals who come into contact with gangs and to interview persons who have been or are gang members.

THIS STUDY

This study is based upon the perceptions of persons who work in female correctional settings concerning the existence and role of gangs. Data are drawn from several facilities, some long-term prisons, and some short-term lockups or jails.

Demand Conditions of the Street and the Correctional Setting There is substantial pressure to join gangs in many social situations. In neighborhoodplaygrounds and school rooms, children and adolescents form groups readily. For males, incarceration produces great pressures to affiliate with gangs. The common statement to the fish, as the new inmate is called, is ‘‘Who are you riding with?’’ Female Gangs in Correctional Settings 263

In some neighborhoods and in many correctional settings, the gang is a family structure. One must join for social support and for protection. This is true for males and for females. In correctional settings, race and ethnicity are important factors in sorting out which gang a new inmate will join. Some gangs in prisons are continuous with gangs on the outside. This is particularly true for Mexican American gangs such as the Texas Syndicate or the Mexican Mafia. Even the specific ethnic label or category is important. Some prefer the term Hispanic, yet there are often distinctive characteristics and rivalries among gangs composed of Mexican Americans, Mexican Nationals, Salvadorians, and the like. Inside or outside membership for Hispanics is often continuous. This is less true for blacks and Anglos. For persons entering correctional facilities in Texas who are Hispanic, gang-involved, and refuse to join an established prison gang for protection, the pattern is to associate with gangs from one’s hometown, or in Spanish prison slang, one’s tango. Membership in a tango is more fluid than in an identified security threat group, or prison gang, as members maintain their street gang influence without the commitment to the prison gang upon release back to the community. We have detected a similar pattern for Mexicans nationals who may align in prison as paisas, which is a shortened version of the Spanish paisano, or countryman.1 Our data suggest that in neighborhoods and public schools, female involvement in gangs remains only somewhat as previous research has sug- gested. Gangs are on the increase, and exclusively female gangs are not as numerous as male gangs. However, they do exist and are visible to professionals. They do not reach the size or pervasiveness of male-dominated gangs. Females continue also in specialized roles in male-directed gangs (Miller & United States Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 2001). Correctional settings provide a compelling setting to determine what frequency and roles characterize females in settings where few males exist. In male correctional settings, gangs are omnipresent and an important part of the reality that correctional professionals must address. Gang intelligence must be maintained by correctional authoritiesto ensure control of the setting and, in many facilities when gang membership is established, inmates are separated from other gang members and often housed in solitary or semi- solitary conditions to control gang activity. Gangs act as social controls and may directly contend with formal authority in male facilities. Such negative sanctions may cause authorities to underestimate the numbers and power of gangs, in correctional settings and on the outside. This is likely true for males and females. This article examines the degree to which visible gang activity occurs in female correctional settings. Does the same overt pressure to affiliate with gangs occur in female facilities? Do gangs form? How do they affect female inmates and correctional officers? 264 M. Lauderdale and M. Burman

Contemporary Information

GANG BEHAVIOR AMONG ADULT FEMALES IN JAIL AND PRISON SETTINGS Misconceptions about female gangs in the correctional setting center on their perceived inactivity and nonexistence, at least when compared to the more overt activity of their male counterparts. Because female offenders are reportedly less physically violent and disruptive in confinement, they do not invite unwarranted attention from correctional staff. However, what does female gang activity within jails and prisons look like? Will we know it when we see it? More important, will we know how to effectively deal with it when we do? This study addresses the current state of female participation in street and prison gangs and how this activity manifests itself in the correctional setting, focusing on the prevalence, incidence, and characteristics of female gangs. Using an opportunity or availability sample, the researchers solicited information from correctional officers and investigators who have spent considerable time supervising female offenders, collecting related gang intelligence, and investigating gang activity within jails and prisons. The seven participating officers were professional colleagues of one of the authors, with one referred by a lieutenant in a major metropolitan police department on the East coast and another by an associate warden in a male prison in one of the nation’s largest state prison systems. Three participants were selected from the Texas prison system, including one sergeant who recently retired after more than 25 years of service, the majority of those years spent supervising female offenders and identifying and investigating gang-related activity; another STG sergeant with 23 years’ experience working in female facilities; and a prison administrator with 18 years’ experience in dealing with prison gangs in various capacities. A sheriff’s deputy from an urban area in Texas also participated; this officer has 15 years’ experience in law enforcement, having spent the first 6 years of his career working in the municipal jail and the last 9 years at the county’s correctional facility, where he assumes responsibility for investigating both male and female gang activity. Two respondents represented the California prison system, including an officer who has spent the past 2 years as a gang investigator in a female prison and is responsible for completing the paperwork necessary to validate female gang members; and another recently retired gang intelligence investigator whose tenure spanned 30 years with the department. Although he was never assigned to a female prison, he was responsible for gang management and investigations throughout the system. The final participant is an investigator in the nation’s largest jail system; the officer has 15 years’ experience conducting gang interviews of both male and female gang members. Data were collected primarily from Texas, California, and New York, with more extensive data from Texas. Each respondent was selected based Female Gangs in Correctional Settings 265 on his or her substantial experience investigating female gang activity, in- terviewing female gang members within prisons and county jails, and/or directly supervising female inmates. Interviews were conducted via telephone, E-mail and, whenever possible, in person at the participant’s place of employment. Prior to the interview, a list of tentative questions was provided to the respondents via E-mail, along with a consent form describing the nature of the study and informing them that they could refuse to answer any question or end the interview at any time. The fluid and open-ended nature of the interview granted each participant an opportunity to address tangential topics, topics that later figured into the analysis and might have been missed otherwise. For purposes of this study, the term female gang member was edited to ‘‘females who are gang-involved’’ or ‘‘involved in gang-type activity’’ at the suggestion of one of the respondents. The rationale was simple: Because not every agency identifies or documents females as gang members, ‘‘if you ask about gang activity, the answer will generally be that we don’t have female gang members[;] therefore, we have no female gang activity’’ (S. H., personal communication, October 22, 2006). To avoid this potential stalemate, the suggestion was incorporated into the interview questions.

THE EXTENT OF THE PROBLEM The question of the existence of female gangs is a problematic one. Within the jail or prison, it is beyond a simple yes or no answer. Perhaps the question is better posed another way: Do correctional administrators know what their staff are tasked with uncovering,and do they have the resources— policies, manpower, and training—to unequivocally answer the question? When asked whether a female gang problem existed behind the prison walls, one sergeant with more than 20 years’ experience supervising female offenders in Texas facilities qualified his response: ‘‘Depend[s] on what you’re looking for. If you’re looking for [intelligence information], female gang members have [intelligence information]. If you’re looking for personal involvement, females have little involvement with gangs’’ (N. S., personal communication, November 15, 2006). Another recently retired prison official from California elaborated on the problem: ‘‘Unfortunately, staff tends to ignore gang activity of female offenders in custody’’ (S. H., personal communication, November 13, 2006).

DOCUMENTING FEMALE OFFENDERS AS GANG MEMBERS: IF WE IGNORE THEM, WILL THEY GO AWAY? An STG, or prison gang, is generally defined as ‘‘‘an organization which operates within the prison system as a self-perpetuating criminally oriented entity,’’’ according to Lyman (as cited in Fleisher and Decker). They may be hierarchically structured, often along paramilitary lines, and members 266 M. Lauderdale and M. Burman subscribe to a set of rules outlined in an adopted constitution.2 To classify as an STG, offenders often must work in concert to further the gang’s goals and activities. Although definitions may vary, creating a working definition of an STG is less complicated than determining how many offendersclaim an affiliation. Calculating the number of active prison gang members and associates within the nation’s prison systems is an unenviable task. Little uniformity exists in validating prison gang members across agencies. The percentages of the prison population classified as belonging to an STG vary, and the data are suspect, as not all departments document affiliation or use consistent criteria to identify membership. A survey of 44 correctional systems in the United States revealed a wide discrepancy in the percentage of gang members in the inmate population, and prison systems in California and Illinois, two states synonymous with the rebirth of modern gangs, did not respond to the survey (‘‘Gangs: Survey summary’’, 2004). However, a recently released gang threat assessment, compiled by the National Alliance of Gang Investigators Associations, reports that 11.7% of inmates in the Federal Bureau of Prisons have engaged in gang-related activity, with 13.4% and 15.6% of offenders in state prisons and jails, respectively, involved in gangs (National Alliance of Gang Investigators Associations, 2005).3 Fleisher and Decker, citing Fong and Buentello, consider the ‘‘secretive’’ nature of prison gangs as another barrier to providing a true estimate of the number of inmates who are active—for the gang-involved offender, being a participant in a research study is not of paramount importance, and, for the correctional agency, being protective of acquired gang intelligence is (as cited in Fleisher & Decker, 2001, p. 3). Additionally, female offenders are typically excluded from the STG um- brella and, as such, their numbers are not factored into the prison gang picture. More systematic documentation will undoubtedly catch those who have flown under the radar but, according to one prison official in Texas, even if females are formally identified as street and prison gang members, ‘‘the numbers : : : won’t be extravagant’’ (L. G., personal communication, November 20, 2006). Another sergeant with more than 20 years’ experience working with female offendersagreed that under his agency’s definition of an STG, the inmate must pose a ‘‘threat to the physical safety’’ of other offenders, staff, or the public. Females simply do not have the numbers to pose a threat comparable to their male counterparts; thus, females are not classified as STG or prison gang members (N. S., personal communication, November 15, 2006). This sergeant elaborated that although he has identified a handful of street gang members, primarily Bloods and Crips, sprinkled throughout the female units and had seen a few female members with confirming prison gang tattoos, he simply has not seen large numbers of female STG members in custody (N. S., personal communication, November 15, 2006). Although all officers interviewed stated they document prison and street gang tattoos on new admissions, documentation of possible gang affiliation Female Gangs in Correctional Settings 267 appears to be an inexact science when applied to female offenders. Docu- mentation is an informal game of ‘‘hit or miss’’ (W. C., personal communication, November 16, 2006) that often ‘‘misses’’ owing to a lack of agency- wide training on gang identification, the belief that females neither engage in gang-related activity in prison or jail nor pose a physical threat to warrant closer scrutiny, or a lack of female staff on each shift to conduct thorough searches at booking or admission. At times, identification or confirmation of gang status is a result of further investigation initiated by an officer— other than one assigned specifically to deal with and monitor gang activity— who notices a tattoo or a drawing that invites questions (W. C., personal communication, November 16, 2006). One respondent noted the circuitous— and often fortuitous—route information may take before it finally reaches the gang officer. This sergeant recounted a phone call from a concerned relative who had information on a reported ‘‘hit’’ on a current offender who presented no gang affiliation or involvement upon admission; until this conversation, prison staff was unaware of any gang association. In another case, the officer similarly was made aware of threats against a female offender by known gang members. After tracking down the original police report, which had not been available upon admission, the officer was surprised to read that the offender associated with confirmed prison gang members, yet this escaped documentation at the county jail level and subsequently remained hidden when the offender arrived at prison (N. S., personal communication, November 15, 2006). Although another gang intelligence officer in one of the largest urban jails emphasized that every ‘‘attempt is made to track cliques, sets and tribes within organizations’’ in order to establish associations between inmates and street or prison gang members (F. F., personal communication, November 16, 2006), state prison gang investigators are often at the mercy of county jails that do not identify or investigate females as gang members upon booking after arrest or during their detention before transferring to prison (B. P., personal communication, November 13, 2006).

GANG ACTIVITY IN THE CORRECTIONAL SETTING: ACTIVITY IN REMISSION AND THE PROPENSITY FOR STASIS For the most part, the female gang experience within jails and prisons, at least as depicted by those respondents in California and Texas, is one of little show and even less tell. Females are able to ‘‘put [gang membership] on hold—[essentially] it goes into remission : : : or stasis’’ once in prison, and they can resume membership upon release (B. P., personal communication, November 13, 2006). Although many females tend to distance themselves from gang involvement while incarcerated,

this does not mean that they have quit the group, but tend to withdraw or deny any activity. They feel that they will be segregated as the males are 268 M. Lauderdale and M. Burman

[according to departmental policy], and would not be able to visit with immediate family (children) members. During the incarceration many ‘wannabes’ tend to become more prevalent than : : : actual member[s]. (B. P., personal communication, November 13, 2006)

A retired California investigator agreed that the female offender is somewhat able to bury her association while incarcerated but offered the caveat that ‘‘female gang members in custody may not be AS active as while they are on the streets, but they certainly still maintain their allegiance to the gang’’ (S. H., personal communication, November 13, 2006). Allegiance and affiliation may remain internalized for the duration of the sentence, yet complete disassociation from the gang lifestyle, if that is even desired, is a more complex task. Though female gang members may lie low on individual units and dorms, self-segregation does occur under certain circumstances. One investigator on the West Coast reports that female members are ‘‘segregating themselves in the [prison] yard like the men do,’’ with rival gangs claiming distinct and separate areas (S. R., personal communication, November 16, 2006). Despite this newest development, rival gang members still mingle together on individual units and cause few problems for one another and correctional staff. However, all units assemble in the yard for recreation, and the need to claim territory and assert their identity becomes apparent.

GANG INVOLVEMENT BY RACE AND ETHNICITY Although the general consensus among respondents leans toward ‘‘remission,’’ not all females suspend their activity while incarcerated. Though overt and physically violent female gang activity in the jails and prisons appears to be, for the most part, virtually nonexistent, the degree of activity and involvement may hinge on the offender’s race and ethnicity, as the behavior of Hispanic, black and Aryan-based gangs manifests itself differently in the correctional setting. An officer in an urban jail in Texas explained that black females are not exhibiting signs of gang affiliation, adding,‘‘I don’t even think they’re there.’’ However, ‘‘female white gangs, especially Aryan-affiliated females, [are] more prominent’’ and their gang identifiers and activity are more visible (W. C., personal communication, November 16, 2006). The degree of involvement in the gang, and how the female member is ultimately used by the gang, may be dictated by her status as a female in a particular culture. For example, according to an investigator in California, An- glo females can be ‘‘full-fledged members’’ of Aryan-based gangs, but black females are not granted the same equality in their respective male-dominated gangs, as they are only ‘‘considered associates of the gang.’’ This officer further notes that Hispanic females are ‘‘not really allowed to be full-fledged members,’’ perhaps because of the perception that ‘‘females talk too much’’ Female Gangs in Correctional Settings 269

(personal communication, November 16, 2006) and would divulge confi- dential information about the gang’s illegal activities. Another respondent in Texas elaborated that ‘‘it is not part of Hispanic culture to view women as ‘equals’ to men,’’ so Hispanic females will be less directly involved as full-fledged members (L. G., personal communication, November 20, 2006). This prison official added that ‘‘traditional Hispanic [Security Threat Groups] do not mention women in their constitutions,’’ while Aryan-based groups do, which creates the potential for greater female involvement beyond the periphery in Aryan-based gangs (personal communication, November 20, 2006).

GANG ACTIVITY AND AGE: WHO FEELS THE NEED TO REPRESENT? Respondents also report differences in posturing on the units based on the age and, ultimately, maturity of the female offender. According to one retired sergeant, younger members who transfer from or have served time in the state’s juvenile prison system often present themselves—perhaps to protect their image and body while learning to navigate the adult system— as larger than life, as if claiming, ‘‘I’m god’’ (B. P., personal communication, November 13, 2006). Once other inmates ignore the all-bark-and-no-bite self- preservation tactic, the gangster persona erodes, and the young offender becomes just another female prisoner who may or may not hold onto her gang identity while serving her sentence. This parallels the male experience that demands self-protection and presentation of self as the ‘‘biggest and baddest’’ to fend off potential assailants. However, while the young female offender can shed this image and lose the bravado without fear of immediate physical assault, the male offender cannot. The female experience in the correctional setting remains vastly different from the male reality of incarceration. A couple respondents also identified age differences in gang affiliation according to race and ethnicity. According to one prison sergeant and an officer employed in an urban jail, Aryan-based gang members tend to be older—in their mid-twenties to mid-thirties—than Hispanic and black gang members (B. P., personal communication, November 13, 2006; W. C., personal communication, November 16, 2006). Hispanic and black members may join street gangs when they are younger, as membership offers cama- raderie, a sense of belonging and protection, but Aryan-based gangs offer an ideological appeal, a quasi-religious bent that shapes their world view beyond a typical street gang’s drinking and youthful partying.

REASONS FOR JOINING A STREET OR PRISON GANG Although individuals join gangs—eitherin confinement or in the free world— for myriad reasons, among them status, fame, and family influence and legacy, incarcerated males and females place a different emphasis on moti- vation. Male offenders typically ‘‘unite for protection[, and] females for social 270 M. Lauderdale and M. Burman cliques, families, [and] the sense of belonging’’ (Men, too, want that sense of belonging, but for females, it is ‘‘more so’’; N. S., personal communication, November 15, 2006.) One prison administrator who has worked in various gang intelligence positions for one of the largest prison systems elaborated that the male inmate ‘‘needs to tell other males he’s in a gang for self- protection, [but] females don’t need to do this’’ (L. G., personal communication, November 20, 2006). Another jail investigator commented that females may join street gangs for the ‘‘strength’’ in numbers and to ‘‘[commit] criminal acts,’’ but they join prison gangs in an ‘‘[attempt] to control institutional programs’’ (F. F., personal communication, November 16, 2006). The multigenerational influence of membership, however, cannot be overlooked, especially as it relates to female gang members and how this shapes their role within the group. Women offenders may have family, including their ‘‘old man,’’ already involved in the gang (W. C., personal communication, November 16, 2006), thus predisposing them to association. Often they wish to ‘‘support : : : their boyfriends and husbands’’ (S. H., personal communication, November 13, 2006). Others may be attracted to the gang for the lure and ‘‘promise’’ that membership will elevate their status. Membership has its perceived privileges; she may be ‘‘lavished with money and entertainment (luxury and drugs),’’ but this honeymoon phase ends when the group directs the female to engage in criminal activity, such as prostitution or the manufacture of drugs, to further the gang (B. P., personal communication, November 13, 2006). Additionally, having a gang member father a child may also be viewed as a ‘‘status symbol’’ among female gang members, according to one retired prison sergeant (B. P., personal communication, November 13, 2006). However, does their first foray into the gang culture coincide with incarceration? According to one respondent, many female offenders were ‘‘already exposed’’ before they even donned a prison or jail uniform, with gang identity already ‘‘built in’’ (L. G., personal communication, November 20, 2006). Does their familiarity and prior association make them more or less susceptible to being recruited for the duration of their sentence?

RECRUITMENT BEHIND AND BEYOND THE WALLS Respondents in California and Texas report little, if any, active gang recruitment among females in custody. Women in prison are not being recruited with the same deliberateness and intensity as are the men. Though men are targeted and often pressured by other inmates to seek protection while incarcerated, female inmates typically are not subject to this. The physical assaults and intimidation characteristic of male recruitment are not, in general, an issue for the female offender. Recruitment for females, it appears, extends beyond the stereotypical image of the physical act; that is, they do not go out and get, but rather they educate to maintain and ensure loyalty. Female Gangs in Correctional Settings 271

An officer in California illustrated this simply: ‘‘Some older members are dedicated to teaching the youngsters on the [gang’s] by-laws’’ (S. R., personal communication, November 16, 2006). Similarly, an officer in a large urban jail notes that females are expected to ‘‘read [the gang’s] history and know the rules [and] regulations’’ (F. F., personal communication, November 16, 2006). Variability in recruitment among race and ethnicity has also been reported, and this complements earlier findings on the levels of involvement based on the group’s racial composition. The recruitment efforts of black gangs in both Texas and California prisons appear weak; one inmate who admitted to being a Crip, reported to the prison gang investigator that she had served time in several of the women’s facilities and recruitment was virtually non-existent (N. S., personal communication, November 15, 2006). Hispanic females, however, concentrate their recruitment efforts via written communication and telephone, according to a California gang investigator (S. R., personal communication, November 16, 2006). One gang officer who works in an urban jail in Texas also denied seeing or being informed of any recruitment in the county jail among black and Hispanic offenders, but he pointed out that female associates of an Aryan-based prison gang have ‘‘[tried] to fish and find out information for their guys [and were] writing to other female inmates to join up’’ (W. C., personal communication, November 16, 2006). Another Texas prison official remarked on how the Aryan male gang member angles for the female offender’s attention, questioning how he can ‘‘use or take advantage of her’’ to benefit the gang. In turn, many of these females ‘‘develop a groupie-type attitude’’ toward the males (L. G., personal communication, November 20, 2006), who use the extremist and racist ideology of the group to manipulate ‘‘vulnerable’’ female offenders.

ROLES OF INCARCERATED FEMALES IN GANGS Female gang members assume a variety of roles within the gang, all largely dependent upon and inextricably linked to their status as females in the broader culture. Respondents identified several roles that exist on a contin- uum of the level of permitted involvement in the gang, including the female as gang ‘‘property’’ (she may ‘‘be removed [by] a male member and become property of the group and used as needed,’’ perhaps for prostitution, narcotics trafficking, or transportation [B. P., personal communication, Novem- ber 13, 2006]); as an associate through family or other personal relationships, such as wife or girlfriend (N. S., personal communication, November 15, 2006); or as an ‘‘equal participating member’’ (B. P., personal communication, November 13, 2006). The female’s role is malleable and is usually ‘‘dictated by the leaders of the gang’’ (B. P., personal communication, November 13, 2006). For example, when the male gang member is ‘‘‘unavailable,’ [his] wife/girlfriend will give ‘his’ directions, which usually are followed as if 272 M. Lauderdale and M. Burman given by the gang member’’ (S. H., personal communication, October 22, 2006). Moore and Hagedorn (2001), in their research brief on female gangs, also chronicled the changing role of female gang members and included an example of the shift among Latin Queens in New York in the 1990s. As more and more Latin Kings were sent to prison, the Latin Queens assumed a more dominant role in the gang’s activities; they ‘‘became leaders, maintaining communication between incarcerated Kings and gang members still on the streets’’ (p. 7). Supporting this trend, one recently retired sergeant in Texas acknowledged that with the male member’s absence via incarceration, the ‘‘female gains entry into the group hierarchy more readily’’ (B. P., personal communication, November 13, 2006). The female gang member’s role within the gang also intersects with her cultural belief system. Aryan-based gangs reportedly use females and their own families more than Hispanic and black gangs (B. P., personal communication, November 13, 2006; W.C., personal communication, November 16, 2006; L. G., personal communication, November 20, 2006), with Hispanic and black gangs using females ‘‘to do money laundering,[and act as] runners or go-fers’’ (S. R., personal communication, November 16, 2006). Women in these Aryan-based gangs are more likely to be used by male members to relay information, participate in extortion (e.g., through Internet prison pen pal Web sites), and provide for third-party mail drops (L. G., personal communication, November 20, 2006). She is seen as a ‘‘viable asset to the group but : : : rarely views herself as a true member, but [rather] as a soldier’’ (B. P., personal communication, November 13, 2006). Although Aryan-based gangs position their female members and associates as messengers, some respondents noted subtle differences in how Hispanic gangs treat their female members. A retired California prison gang investigator commented that Hispanic gangs ‘‘tend to have the most ‘formal’ support from ‘their’ females. Both the Mexican Mafia and the Nuestra Familia have had incidents wherein female associates of both gangs are caught conducting gang business on behalf of male gang members’’ (S. H., personal communication, November 13, 2006). Still other Hispanic gangs have used members’ daughters and nieces to informally gather information during visitation to pass along to those in the free world (L. G., personal communication, November 20, 2006). The Hispanic female’s power stems from her cultural status as ‘‘Daddy’s little girl’’; and if she believes a particular member has been disloyal to the group, she can relay that information to Daddy, who can ensure the gang will ‘‘take care of business.’’

Connection to the Street and Free World: Communication and the Importance of Continued Contact In an effort to curb wayward communication and decrease the violence associated with gang-related activity, some correctional agencies have mod- Female Gangs in Correctional Settings 273 ified their rules for written correspondence, restricting offender-to-offender correspondence. This change, however, is not without an unintended conse- quence—the increasing likelihood of family members becoming involved in the gang’s business, whether they are informed participants or not. Constitu- tions generally prohibit individuals outside the gang itself from involvement but, as mentioned, relatives now may be used to forward messages from one incarcerated member to another. Have these policies affected the prevalence and degree of female gang involvement by unwittingly creating a new niche for them? In Texas, one sergeant admitted his staff have seen more family and female associates writing to and corresponding with male offenders (N. S., personal communication, November 15, 2006), whereas another retired sergeant who had worked in the same state system added that females ‘‘tended to be utilized to relay information for the male gang members [who] were confined’’ (B. P., personal communication, November 13, 2006). Both males and females, whether incarcerated or in the free world, are able to circumvent agency rules and regulations to further the goals of the criminal organization. Females, according to one investigator in California,

can still communicate with males on the street. They can write through family members and friends[, and] can get approval to correspond to and write to other inmates:::: [The] connection to the street is stronger for females than for males because no one [within the prison] stopped the letters [or watched the correspondence for gang-related information]. (S. R., personal communication, November 16, 2006)

The belief that female offendersare less inclined to participate in gang activity allows them to act as conduits, relaying messages and remaining undetected and often ignored. Though the potential for increased female involvement and communication on behalf of the gang exists, one sergeant in a female prison in Texas challenged the notion. He believes the prohibition of inmate-to-inmate correspondence ‘‘decreased female involvement [because] it took away [gang- related] drawings [on envelopes for incoming and outgoing mail] that had information.’’ However, he contends that although the overt identification may have decreased, the nature of the communication has changed and has not disappeared completely: ‘‘[Females] are sneakier now. [For instance,] they use gang-style writing on commissary bags : : : ’’ (B. P., personal communication, November 13, 2006).

Criminal Activity While Doing Time Incarceration alone does not deter crime, even for those experiencing it firsthand. Female criminal activity, while different from male activity, is still a reality in prisons and jails; however, the types of gang-related offenses 274 M. Lauderdale and M. Burman committed differ. Certainly female gang members do engage in the more traditional and lucrative crimes that are equal opportunity offenses and non- gender-specific, such as the ‘‘control of contraband in the prison up to and including narcotics trafficked into the prisons’’ (S. H., personal communication, November 13, 2006). However, overall, what types of crimes do gang- involved females commit while incarcerated, and are these done for reasons similar to their male counterparts? Unlike male prison gang activity, which is done to further the goals of the criminal organization, female gang activity does not adhere to this basic tenet. Several respondents commented that the crimes are typically isolated incidents, personal and idiosyncratic in nature, and would not be classified as gang-related under their departmental policies. A crime committed by a female gang member is not considered to be a gang-related offense if it was not done to further the gang’s goals. One Texas prison official recounted an incident where female offenders engaged in extortion, but it was not deemed a ‘‘gang issue, [but rather] more of a clique issue with younger girls into it.’’ Extortion was generally done against another inmate and not for benefit of the gang, ‘‘but it had a definite purpose: to take care of one issue at one time [and it was not ongoing]. And then [the offenders would] go their own way’’ (L. G., personal communication, November 20, 2006). Relationships, or more specifically relationships gone bad, also precip- itate criminal activity on the unit. In California, a few assaults have been documented against rivals from northern and southern California; however, these fights are generally attributed to individual battles ‘‘for drugs and girlfriends’’ (S. R., personal communication, November 16, 2006) and have little to do with organized criminal activity. When asked whether identified female gang members cause problems in his jail, a deputy in Texas explained that most conflicts arise over race and relationships, but they are ‘‘usually over personal stuff’’ wholly unrelated to gangs (W. C., personal communication, November 16, 2006). However, does the gang violence characteristic of the street ever bleed into the female correctional setting, as it does for the males? According to the deputy, the behavior of female gang members does not manifest itself through fists or knives but rather through words and overall attitude: ‘‘They are manipulative toward staff : : : often whiners [who] write grievances all day long. You know, complaints about uniform exchange, [they] don’t have the proper necessities or hygiene products, [or they] can’t be in the same house as another offender : : : ’’ (W. C., personal communication, November 16, 2006). However, one female gang member interviewed by a sergeant in a Texas prison contends that female inmates have been known to ‘‘cut or slice [other inmates] to make them ugly,’’ but this has nothing to do with gang involvement and everything to do with the female experience in prison (N. S., personal communication, November 15, 2006). For female gang members, the gang becomes secondary. The female prison experience Female Gangs in Correctional Settings 275 is so vastly different from the male experience that gang involvement and association do not motivate their behavior on the unit.

Relationships and ‘‘Jailhouse Romance’’: Rivalries on Hold Relationships among females are central to the female offender’s experience in prison. Females group together more as social cliques, and historical street rivals will associate with one another on the unit, according to several respondents. Officers in California and Texas report that rival gang members can peacefully coexist, casting aside their street animosity while incarcerated. For example, Bloods and Crips may establish ‘‘jailhouse romances,’’ even though the code of the street demands bitter hatred (B. P., personal communication, November 13, 2006). Similarly, even rivals from northern and southern California may ‘‘hook up’’ as girlfriends in prison. One inmate explained away the new-found tolerance and romance among rivals by stating that ‘‘[the relationship] doesn’t count in prison,’’ whereas an older gang member admonished, ‘‘It’s a no-no’’ (S. R., personal communication, November 16, 2006). The officer clarified that this position depended upon the age and maturity of the gang member, adding, ‘‘Some who have been schooled the ‘right’ way know better. The youngsters hook up with females from other gangs[, but] you don’t see this from the older gangsters.’’ When conflicts do arise, they are typically attributed to problematic relationships among offenders, as one deputy explained (W. C., personal communication, November 16, 2006). As one offender informed prison staff, females do not like to be ‘‘disrespected,’’ and if a female offender is seen talking to another female with whom she does not have a relationship, this act may be a perceived slight to her prison ‘‘girlfriend’’ (N. S., personal communication, November 15, 2006). The disrespect and jealousy manifest themselves differently than they do for the male offender, but when perception is reality, this affront is sufficient to incite hostility among the women. Even if rival gang members are involved, the conflict has little to do with gangs and everything to do with the dynamics of an interpersonal relationship among female offenders behind the walls.

Validating Females as Gang Members or Associates: Consequences of Doing and Not Doing As mentioned, correctional facilities apply gang status differently for male and female offenders in their custody. Because female inmates do not have the numbers to support the ‘‘threat to physical safety’’ that an STG definition requires (N. S., personal communication, November 15, 2006), they are excluded from being formally recognized by prison officials as prison gang members. Does this exclusion engender different responses from incarcerated gang-involved females? Are they able to ‘‘do time’’ differently because 276 M. Lauderdale and M. Burman of this, and if so, does this make it less difficult for them to renounce the gang life with fewer repercussions than male members would experience? Validating females is a proactive effort signaling a department’s ac- knowledgement of the existence of gang-involved females as either full- fledged members or associates. One gang investigator in a women’s prison considers herself ‘‘lucky’’ that her department confirms female gang members as ‘‘associates’’:

In the past the prison did not want to acknowledge female gangs were a problem. I pushed the issue that they should be validated[, as female offenders were blatantly throwing signs and showing colors]. The Special Service Unit [the gang management and investigative arm for the entire prison system] now validates and signs off on them. (S. R., personal communication, November 16, 2006)

Correctional officials may have to modify existing male-oriented policies to address how they handle female prison gang members. If female members are treated in the same manner as the males are, and if policy dictates all STG members must be segregated or placed in solitary confinement, will female members suffer greater consequences? Because females are social creatures who recreate the family structure within prison and experience prison differently than male offenders, would female prison gang members be afforded gender-specific STG ‘‘treatment’’ that takes into account their socialization and developmental needs? However, if females are handled similarly, correctional administrators must find the balance between recognition and ‘‘sensationalism’’ to avoid the self-fulfilling prophecy: ‘‘If you don’t give them the attention [that we give the males], or recognize them as gangsters[,] they don’t have to live up to the hype’’ of being intimidating and feared, lest their prison gang status become ‘‘sensationalized [as it has for some male members]’’ (N. S., personal communication, November 15, 2006). Though the prison system may not officially acknowledge their affiliation, the street does and does not forget. One female member who informally renounced her affiliation while incarcerated in Texas expressed ambivalence when the sergeant asked whether she planned to resume her gang lifestyle upon release: ‘‘‘People remember what you were and what you did last [even if you’ve been gone for years]. No one wants to know what [it is] you’ve become’’’ (N. S., personal communication, November 15, 2006). Prison may have been the catalyst for her to choose renunciation (and a convenient excuse for those females wanting to save face and not disassociate from the gang while still in the free world), allowing her to change while incarcerated. However, being released back to the community may be more problematic, as information flows freely from prison to the neighborhood, and the streets do not adhere to the same rules. Remission, at least in the free world, may be impossible to achieve. Female Gangs in Correctional Settings 277

Education and Training The paucity of data and information on gang-involved females in correctional settings may be indicative of the general state of gendered research. For example, the 2005 National Gang Threat Assessment4 notes that female gangs and gang-related activity are relegated to the back burner because law enforcement does not know what to do with them and maintains archaic beliefs that females are less likely to be involved than their male counterparts and are not as violent or have the propensity toward violence as males (National Alliance of Gang Investigators Associations, p. 11). To challenge these beliefs, education and training are vital. However, at least within the correctional setting, training seems to be lacking. One deputy responsible for gang investigations in a county correctional facility characterized gang identification as ‘‘hit or miss,’’ adding that ‘‘male officers are more inclined to check on male offenders [for tattoos and other indicators of involvement], but female officers are not inclined to look’’ (W. C., personal communication, November 16, 2006). A California gang investigator indicated that her agency, either through her individual persistence and/or the agency’s realization that out-of-sight, out-of-mind has the potential to backfire, now validates females as associates (S. R., personal communication, November 16, 2006). She also provides ongoing training for other correctional officers less familiar with gang-involved female offenders. Education and in-house training should address not only basic gang identification but also the agency’s willingness to admit female gangs exist, even if the problems they cause do not come near the magnitude of the male gang problem. A prison administrator in Texas remarked that when addressing the status of female gangs, an agency ‘‘might be afraid of what [it] might find. At least train the staff and let them do their job and not lock [female gang members] all up [in segregation]’’ (L. G., personal communication, November 20, 2006). Although the majority of respondents have acknowledged that the female gang problem in no way rivals that of their incarcerated male counterparts (one prison officer warned, ‘‘Female gangs are not as bad a problem yet as male gang problems’’; S. R., personal communication, November 16, 2006), only time will tell whether the problem remains undetected because it does not exist, because staff are not looking, or because agency policy does not mandate they look. One retired prison employee simply stated, ‘‘I feel like there are MANY female gang members or associates in custody in our prisons. Unfortunately it seems (to me) that our agency has taken an attitude that if they don’t address the situation, they don’t have a situation’’ (S. H., personal communication, November 13, 2006). Even if female offenders do not disrupt the daily routine of prison life, the connections they maintain to other gang members on the street and in local jails and prisons pose a serious threat if not addressed. If training is made a priority and officers remain vigilant, will they recognize a previously unseen 278 M. Lauderdale and M. Burman problem as it really exists, or will they manufacture a problem to meet their new expectations?

SUMMARY

Females and males form gangs for similar reasons; they form simply as a result of human interaction. When faced with new situations, persons interact to create norms, roles, and statuses. Street gangs have many attributes of legitimate associations such as fraternities and sororities. They have activities that set members apart, provide some sense of identity, and fill time with what members view as worthwhile activities. However, because of poverty and marginalization, gangs often serve to secure resources and provide protection for their members. If legitimate avenues for income do not exist or are unavailable, dealing in illegal drugs, extortion, and resorting to prostitution may become means of support. If faced with physical or verbal threats, gangs will respond with violence to neutralize those threats. Our primary finding among females in correctional settings is that loose associations are formed—with many existing prior to incarceration—but they often are not recognized as gangs by correctional staff. As this study has revealed, female offenders are indeed involved in gang-related activity, but the manner in which their behavior manifests itself behind the walls differs from male gang members. The functions of gangs for female members do not have the territorial and violent dimensions that are characteristic of male activity within prisons. Female gangs, like their male counterparts, serve to provide structure and support for their members but do so in ways different from some male gangs. As a general rule, female gangs are less violent. Conflict within the gang and with other gangs tends to be more verbal and less physical and, within the correctional setting, often the result of failed relationships or ‘‘jailhouse romances.’’ The attraction and influence of gang membership is as pronounced in females as males. Race and ethnicity play a role in determining not only the membership of female gangs in prison but also the characteristics of the gangs. Anglo females affiliated with Aryan-based gangs may be more prominent and visible than Hispanic and black female gang members. This may be a reflection of the relatively greater equality of males and females among Anglos or of some of the norms of Aryan-based associations with which Anglo female gang members affiliate. Correctional staff and agency policies parallel what is typically found in information about street gangs or in the public school. There are strong social expectations to deny that females will form gangs. This reality and the fact that gangs exist pose important training needs for persons working in correctional settings. Our general impression is that the number of females associated with gangs in correctional settings is increasing. Exact estimates Female Gangs in Correctional Settings 279 are elusive for two reasons. One is cultural and institutional bias against recognizing females in gangs; the second is that gangs are perceived as negative associations, and gang members are often effective in covering these associations.

NOTES

1. Mexican Nationals may also align as a protective group against other predatory groups within the institution. Often referred to as paisas in the federal prison system, they may label themselves differently in different institutions (i.e., Mexicles in Texas). For a brief history of paisas, including recruitment and criminal activities within the Nevada prison system, see Allen, J. (2003, December 11). Cover story: Now hiring. Las Vegas Mer- cury. Retrieved October 18, 2006, from www.lasvegasmercury.com/2003/MERC-Dec-11- Thu-2003/22734385.html 2. For an example of Texas Syndicate and Texas Mexican Mafia constitutions, see Fong, R. (1990). The organizational structure of prison gangs: A Texas case study. Federal Probation, 54(1), 36–43. 3. According to the report by the National Alliance of Gang Investigators Associations, 455 local, state and federal law enforcement agencies throughout the United States were surveyed. The report acknowledges that its findings are ‘‘not representative of the nation as a whole, nor [are they] based on a statistically valid sample’’ (p. 1). 4. The 2005 National Gang Threat Assessment is a federally-funded, national survey of law enforcement agencies that examines the gang problem.

REFERENCES

Allen, J. (2003, December 11). Cover story: Now hiring. Las Vegas Mercury. Re- trieved October 18, 2006, from www.lasvegasmercury.com/2003/MERC-Dec-11- Thu-2003/22734385.html Bales, R. F. (1955). How people interact in conferences. Scientific American, 192(3), 31–35. Chesney-Lind, M., & Hagedorn, J. (1999). Female gangs in America: Essays on girls, gangs, and gender. Chicago: Lake View Press. Fleisher, M., & Decker, S. (2001). An overview of the challenge of prison gangs. Corrections Management Quarterly, 5(1), 2. Gangs: Survey summary. (2004, January/February). Corrections Compendium, 29(1), 8–23. Retrieved November 23, 2006, from http://pdfserve.galegroup.com. content.lib.utexas.edu:2048/pdfserve/get_item/1/S8fb0abw3_2/SB875_02.pdf Hare, A. P. (1962). Handbook of small group research. New York: The Free Press. Mann, C. R. (1984). Female crime and delinquency. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press. Miller, W. B., & Harvard Law School, Center for Criminal Justice, et al. (1975). Vio- lence by youth gangs and youth groups as a crime problem in major American cities. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Miller, W. B., & United States Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. (2001). The growth of youth gang problems in the United States, 1970–98: 280 M. Lauderdale and M. Burman

Report. Washington, DC: U. S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Moore, J., & Hagedorn, J. (2001, March). Female gangs: A focus on research. Wash- ington, DC: U. S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juve- nile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Retrieved November 21, 2006, from http://www.ncjrs.gov/html/ojjdp/jjbul2001_3_3/contents.html National Alliance of Gang Investigators Associations. (2005). 2005 national gang threat assessment. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Assistance. Retrieved November 20, 2006, from http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA/what/2005_threat_ assesment.pdf Park, R. E., & Burgess, E. W. (1969). Introduction to the science of sociology, including the original index to basic sociological concepts. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Park, R. E., Burgess, E. W., et al. (1925). The city. Chicago: University of Chicago press. Renaud, J. A. (2002). Behind the walls: A guide for families and friends of Texas prison inmates. Denton, TX: University of North Texas Press. Scorsese, M., DiCaprio, L., et al. (2002). Gangs of New York [Motion picture]: Making the movie: Interviews of Martin Scorsese, Leonardo di Caprio, Daniel Day-Lewis, Cameron Diaz. New York: Talk Miramax. Shaw, C. R., Zorbaugh, F. M., et al. (1929). Delinquency areas: A study of the geo- graphic distribution of school truants, juvenile delinquents, and adult offenders in Chicago. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Sherif, M., & Sherif, C. W. (1964). Reference groups: Exploration into conformity and deviation of adolescents. New York: Harper and Row. Sherif, M., Sherif, C. W., et al. (1965). Problems of youth: Transition to adulthood in a changing world. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Co. Short, J. F., & Strodtbeck, F. L. (1965). Group process and gang delinquency. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Waters, M. (Director), Michaels, L. (Producer), & Shimkin, T. (Producer) (2004). Mean girls [Motion picture]. Hollywood: Paramount Pictures. Whyte, W. F. (1958). Street corner society: The social structure of an Italian slum. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Zorbaugh, H. W. (1957). The gold coast and slum: A sociological study of Chicago’s near North side. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Copyright of Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.