Review of Deborah Jump's 'The Criminology of Boxing, Violence and Desistance - round 2 (introduction)

Leaving James’s auto-picaresque tales we come to Deborah’s introduction and an update from ringside. Deb has tweeted me that she played rugby and trained to black belt in wushu kung fu. Given more space this might have featured in the ethnography chapters on Frank, Eric and Leroy.  I think more space should be made for reflexivity in criminology generally and am disappointed it doesn’t get to feature here.

Glad to see she emphasises the violence of boxing and the need to ‘challenge masculine discourses in present within the gym’ that, ‘can compound violent attitudes and male domination’ (p1). Specifically she argues, ‘that the enclave of the gym and the majority of its members are actually compatible with violent criminogenic attitudes’ (p2). She sets out her intention to outline boxing and gyms as a suitable site for sociological research. Her theoretical base is in psychosocial approaches to desistance in which boxing is the ‘hook for change’ (Giordano et al, 2002).

The motor projects I studied tended to assume the benefits (homeopathic?) of giving access to cars to those convicted of, or ‘at risk’ of, car crime offending. Theories of change evaluation was underdeveloped then and I handed out Home Office Probation Service Division grants on accounts, rough throughput figures, claims of reduced offending and occasional visits. Specific worked out theories of change seem to go beyond mere ‘hooking’ and we’ll see if these get mentioned explicitly later. They seem to be implicit in her argument so far. Thus she argues, ‘it is easy to fill boxing gyms with recalcitrant youth and walk away, hoping for for a more disciplined and respectful one to walk out’ (p2). Or again, she suggests, ‘we look more closely at the mechanisms’ (p3). I’d probably want to quote  some Nick Tilley here. How do we test the idea that diluted violence can cure violence?

She talks rightly of the ‘Emperor’s new clothes’ (p3) but I know from my HO days (late ’80 to mid ‘90s) handing out grants of the pressure on organisations to have a good narrative and celebrity backers that may shade any proper evaluation. Moreover that might then have to be turned on its head if the grant regime changes. I had a budget to spend I admit I sometimes gave them hints.