U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

A Message From OJJDP

For many years, female gangs were

regarded simply as satellites of male

gangs and rigorous research to

better understand them was rarely

undertaken. This oversight has

resulted in gaps in our knowledge

about the girls and young women

who are at risk for gang involvement

and juvenile delinquency.

Part of OJJDP’s Youth Gang Series,

this Bulletin represents a step toward

rectifying the deficiencies of prior

research. It summarizes past and

present research and tracks the rise

in the number of female gangs and

the increased public recognition of

female gang involvement as a

significant social problem.

The authors consider the motivations

for female gang membership, assess

the delinquency and criminal activity

of female gang members, examine

the influence of ethnicity and gender

norms on female gang behavior, and

discuss the long-term consequences

of gang membership. Recommendations for future research are also

offered.

Girls and young women who are at

risk for gang involvement deserve

our attention and assistance. This

Bulletin provides a historical and

research context that will enable us

to better understand this serious

societal problem and to determine

its solutions.

March 2001

methodological problems with many reports on female gangs. This Bulletin summarizes both past and current research on

female gangs and draws attention to programmatic and research needs. It considers the underlying reasons for female

gang membership, assesses the delinquency and criminal activity of female

gang members, examines how ethnicity

and gender norms may influence female

gang behavior, and discusses the longterm consequences of gang membership

for females. It concludes with some

proposals for future research.

Early Reports: A

History of Stereotypes

Gangs are studied because they are of

social concern. That concern stems from

typically “masculine” acts of vandalism,

violence, and other serious threats. It

was often assumed that females did not

take part in such behavior, so early

researchers were not interested in the

delinquency of female gang members.2

Researchers and journalists saw gangs as

a quintessentially male phenomenon.

Thus, most early reports focused on

whether female gangs were “real” gangs

or merely satellites of male groups. One

review concluded that in these early

studies, “girls were defined solely in

terms of their . . . relations to male gang

members” (Campbell, 1990, p. 166).

Female Gangs:

A Focus on Research

Joan Moore and John Hagedorn

Much of the research on gangs has ignored females or trivialized female gangs.1

Influential early studies of gangs, which

for years shaped the research agenda,

concentrated almost exclusively on

males. The implicit message of these

studies was that female gangs were unimportant. Even within the past decade an

expert commented: “The notion seems to

be that female gangs and their members

are ‘pale imitations’ of male gangs”

(Spergel, 1995, p. 90).

Given the lack of research, much of what

has been written about female gangs and

then reproduced in textbooks has been

based on the reports of journalists and

social workers and on the statements of

male gang members. With the exception

of a very few early studies, gang researchers did not begin to take female gangs seriously until the 1980’s, when Campbell’s

(1984a) book on New York gangs appeared. Even now, there continue to be

The proliferation of youth gangs since 1980

has fueled the public’s fear and magnified

possible misconceptions about youth gangs.

To address the mounting concern about

youth gangs, the Office of Juvenile Justice

and Delinquency Prevention’s (OJJDP’s)

Youth Gang Series delves into many of the

key issues related to youth gangs. The series

considers issues such as gang migration,

gang growth, female involvement with

gangs, homicide, drugs and violence, and

the needs of communities and youth who

live in the presence of youth gangs.
2

determine how each kind of gang structure affects the members’ behavior (Miller,

2000a). Existing information does indicate,

however, that joining a gang—regardless

of the gang’s structure—is a significant

act for an adolescent female, often with

important consequences later in life.

Number of Female

Gang Members

Both male and female gangs proliferated

in the 1980’s and 1990’s. Although the

percentage of gang members who were

female is difficult to ascertain, all sources

agree the numbers were significant.

Nationwide surveys of law enforcement

agencies provide the most widely used

data, although they have limitations. The

first such survey, conducted in the mid1970’s, estimated that 10 percent of all

gang members were female (Miller, 1975).

Some 20 years later, in 1992, another nationwide survey found that only 3.7 percent of all gang members were female

(Spergel, 1995). A criminologist associated with the latter survey commented

that this low proportion may have resulted because 32 percent of the surveyed jurisdictions did not, “as a matter

of policy,” identify females as gang members (Curry and Decker, 1998, p. 98). Two

other nationwide surveys of law enforcement agencies, conducted in 1996 and

1998, estimated that 11 percent and 8 percent, respectively, of all gang members

were female (Moore and Terrett, 1998;

National Youth Gang Center, 2000).

Other sources provide figures that are

much higher than most law enforcement

estimates. In surveys of youth in a wide

range of cities, for example, the proportion of self-identified gang members who

were female ranged from 8 to 38 percent,

and the proportion of females surveyed

who claimed gang membership ranged

from 9 to 22 percent (Bjerregard and

Smith, 1993; Cohen et al., 1994; Esbensen

and Huizinga, 1993; Esbensen and Deschenes, 1998; Esbensen and Osgood,

1997; Fagan, 1990). Such surveys provide

a valuable supplement to police sources,

despite some limitations (which are discussed on page 4). The high number of

female gang members recorded in selfreport studies may reflect the younger

ages of survey respondents compared

with the ages of youth on police rosters:

females tend to drop out of gang life at

earlier ages than males, often because of

“Sex objects or tomboys”—these are the

images that, until recently, dominated the

literature on female gang members. Individual females were portrayed in terms 

of their sexual activity, with an occasional

mention of their functions as weapon

carriers for male gang members (e.g.,

Spergel, 1964). Even when describing

female gang members as tomboys, researchers emphasized that the females’

motivations were focused on males. Miller

(1973, p. 34), for instance, explained that

“the behavior of the [girls] . . . appeared

to be predicated on the assumption that

the way to get boys to like you was to be

like them rather than [sexually] accessible to them.” Campbell (1984a) points

out that “sex object” and “tomboy” are

both variants of the “bad girl” role. Good

girls are modest and feminine; bad girls

are not.

These studies were conducted before

women entered the labor market in such

large numbers as they do today. It was an

era when most people viewed homemaking as the only acceptable goal for women.

The studies reflected the widespread notion that for males, gang membership

might involve delinquency, but it does not

violate gender-role norms. However, gang

membership for females was more shocking because it involved real deviance and

seriously violated gender-role norms.

The accuracy of early descriptions of female gang members as sex objects and

tomboys is difficult to judge because

there are not enough reliable data in

these reports. Most historical information

about female gangs comes from journalists (e.g., Asbury, 1927; Rice, 1963), who

were likely to emphasize the sensational,

and from social workers (e.g., Hanson,

1964; Welfare Council of New York City,

1950), who were likely to emphasize members’ personal problems. Both sources

fed the “bad girl” stereotype.

However, in retrospect, the early skepticism about whether female gangs were

“real gangs” seems odd. It seems to have

been based on a very narrow view of what

a gang really is. Gangs—male and female

alike—differ greatly from one another.

Those differences affect the behavior of

young members and their chances of maturing into conventional, law-abiding

adults. A female gang may be autonomous

or allied with a male gang, or female gang

members may be part of a fully genderintegrated gang (Miller, 1975). Unfortunately, there is not enough information to

pregnancy (cf. Moore, 1991). Finally, field

research, although its reports are usually

limited to one time and place, can offer

additional insights. For example, in San

Antonio, TX, field research has identified

groups of girls who consistently hang out

with male gangs. Even though they rarely

define themselves as gangs, they may be

seen as “gangs” by outsiders (Valdez and

Cepeda, 1998). In some cities, females

constitute up to one-third of the members

in some gang cliques but are completely

absent in others (Moore, 1991).

Surprisingly, female gangs are somewhat

more likely to be found in small cities and

rural areas than in large cities. Their

ethnicity varies from one region to another, with African American gangs predominant in the Midwest and Northeast

and Latina gangs predominant in the

Southwest (National Youth Gang Center,

2000).

Being in a Gang: 

The Background

Joining a gang is a significant, potentially life-altering, event. The reasons for

any single juvenile’s joining a gang are

complex and personal. Though most

females join gangs for friendship and

self-affirmation (Campbell, 1984a, 1987;

Moore, 1991), recent research has begun

to shed some light on economic and family pressures motivating many young

women to join gangs.

Economic and Ethnic

Forces

Throughout the 20th century, poverty and

economic marginality were associated

with the emergence of youth gangs, but in

the 1980’s and early 1990’s, the loss of

hundreds of thousands of factory jobs

made conditions even worse in America’s

inner cities.3

 Hagedorn’s (1988) study of

gang formation in Milwaukee, WI, a city

then suffering economic decline, shows

that although the parents of most gang

members usually held good jobs, these

jobs had disappeared by the time their

children were grown. It is not surprising

that gangs proliferated rapidly during 

this period, not only in Milwaukee but

throughout the Nation.4

 (See Hagedorn,

1988, 1998; Moore, 1991; Padilla, 1992;

Taylor, 1990, 1993.) An informal economy

flourished. Although much of the work

associated with this economy was legal, a

substantial portion involved drug dealing
3

were more likely than those of male gang

members to include drug users and persons arrested for crimes (Moore, 1991,

1994). Another study found that almost

two-thirds of female gang members interviewed in Hawaii had been sexually

abused at home. Many had run away and

had joined gangs to obtain protection

from abusive families (Joe and ChesneyLind, 1995; Chesney-Lind, Shelden, and

Joe, 1996).5

 A recent report sums up

young women’s reasons for joining a

gang: “[T]he vast majority noted family

problems as contributing factors,” citing

drug addiction and abuse as the most

common problems (Miller, 2000b).

Joining a gang can be an assertion of independence not only from family, but also

from cultural and class constraints. In

joining a gang, young Puerto Rican

women in New York felt that they would

be able to express themselves as assimilated Americans, spending money freely

and standing up for themselves. “[They]

construct . . . an image of the gang that

counterpoints the suffocating futures

they face” (Campbell, 1990, p. 173). In Los

Angeles, Mexican American gangs were

described as “a substitute institution . . .

[providing] meaning and identity”

(Quicker, 1983, p. 28) or “their own system in which they [could] belong,” in the

absence of “clear or satisfactory access

to adult status” (Harris, 1988, p. 166). In

San Francisco, CA, a large, multiethnic

study of female gang members describes

them as “resisting normative forms of

femininity” but also as “devising alternative forms of femininity” (Joe-Laidler and

Hunt, in press).

Sex: Stereotyping and

Victimization

“Sex object” was one of the early stereotypes of female gang members, and the

interest in the sex lives of female gang

members still persists. Early reports

about the easy sexual availability of female gang members came almost exclusively from male gang members (e.g.,

Short and Strodtbeck, 1965). Even some

recent reports present similar male perceptions as fact, with no attempt at

verification (Sanchez-Jankowski, 1991).

However, male gang members may be indulging their own fantasies. In a recent

study, male gang members told researchers that group sex was an initiation ritual

for female gang members, but female gang

members dismissed the idea as ludicrous

(Decker and Van Winkle, 1996).

In Los Angeles, a large random sample of

male and female Mexican American gang

members was asked about the role of

women in the gang (Moore, 1991). Half of

the male members claimed that female

members were “possessions.” This response not only referred to the females’

sexual exploitation but also reflected the

males’ general need to be in charge. The

other half of the male members felt that

female members were respected and

treated like family. (About two-thirds of

the female members vehemently denied

that they were treated like possessions.)

In San Antonio, where there are many

Mexican American gangs but few female

gangs or gang members, most females

who associate with male gang members

are respected. But “hoodrats”—females

involved in “frequent partying, drug

and other illicit activities, and gang members joined in. (See page 5 for a more extensive discussion of the drug-dealing activities of female gang members.) In

Chicago, IL, for example, economically

successful gangs—female and male—

became significant community institutions, sometimes offering resources and

protection to neighbors (Venkatesh, 1996,

1998).

Female gang members have been affected

not only by these economic shifts but by

recent changes in the welfare system.

Welfare has been an important economic

resource for many of them. In Los Angeles, CA, for example, Mexican American

gang members active in the 1950’s and

1970’s became pregnant, on average, at

age 18. They tended to rely on welfare,

combined with work and help from their

families, to survive (Moore and Long,

1987). Similar patterns were found in Milwaukee in the 1990’s (Hagedorn, 1998).

However, welfare reforms introduced in

the mid-1990’s have reduced or eliminated welfare payments. Because female

gang members often face significant barriers to legitimate employment, it is unclear

what they will do to replace welfare 

support.

Ethnic marginality often lies behind economic marginality. In the 1920’s, most

gang members were children of European

immigrants (Thrasher, 1927). By the

1980’s, most were African American and

Latino. In recent years, large-scale immigration from Spanish-speaking countries

and from Asia has changed the ethnic

composition of the United States. Increasingly, gangs tend to be Latino and Asian

(National Youth Gang Center, 2000). Because ethnicity is closely related to gender roles (as discussed on page 6), this

nationwide shift in ethnicity has important implications for female gangs.

Family Pressure

There is one aspect of female gang life

that does not seem to be changing—the

gang as a refuge for young women who

have been victimized at home. The available research consistently shows that

high proportions of female gang members

have experienced sexual abuse at home.

In Los Angeles, for example, 29 percent of

a large representative sample of Mexican

American female gang members had been

sexually abused at home, and their homes
4

using, participation in illegal activities

and multiple sexual encounters”—are not

deemed worthy of respect (Valdez and

Cepeda, 1998, pp. 6–7).

Although male gang members may exaggerate their sexual domination over female members, there are reports from

females that they have been sexually exploited by males within the gang. In San

Francisco, females from an immigrant Salvadoran gang reportedly often were sexually victimized by male gang members,

although this rarely happened in a nearby

Mexican American gang (Brotherton,

1996). Sexual abuse and exploitation by

male gang members were also reported

by some subsets of female gang members

in Columbus, OH (Miller, 1998); Milwaukee (Hagedorn, 1998); Phoenix, AZ

(Portillos, 1999); Chicago (Venkatesh,

1998); and Los Angeles (Moore, 1991).6

Some of these reports may have been

from females who were only marginal to

the gang. In Milwaukee, for example, females controlled admission to their gang

(a female auxiliary to the male gang), but

female “wannabes” seeking to become

members thought that males controlled

admission. The male members tricked

some female wannabes into group sex by

telling them it was an initiation ritual. It

was not, and females who participated in

the group sex did not become members of

the gang (Hagedorn and Devitt, 1999). A

similar situation existed in Phoenix (Portillos, 1999). Evidence of sexual exploitation of female gang members at home and

within their gangs is one reason for considering female gang membership a serious social concern.

Delinquency and

Criminality of Female

Gang Members

Whether female gangs are seen as a

serious problem depends in large part on

the level of their delinquent and criminal

activities and the types of offenses they

commit. Unfortunately, getting definitive

information about these topics is difficult.

It means working through many detailed

studies, often conducted in several cities

that differ in important ways. The findings

of these studies are not easily generalized, but some conclusions can be drawn.

This section reviews three major sources

of information, draws some general conclusions about female gang members’ delinquency and criminality, and then focuses on female gang members’ involvement

in drug dealing.

Sources of Information

About Female Gang

Offending

There are three major sources of information about female gang members’ criminality and delinquency: law enforcement

agency reports, surveys of at-risk youth,

and field studies. These sources supplement each other and offer a basis for

drawing some conclusions about female

gang members’ offending.

Law enforcement agency reports. Law

enforcement reports on arrests of female

gang members have been compiled for

several large cities. They offer the only

information available about female gang

members’ actual involvement with the

justice system. However, because police

have traditionally underarrested females,

these reports may well understate the

involvement of female gang members in

crime (see Chesney-Lind, Shelden, and

Joe, 1996; Taylor, 1993).7

 Only one nationwide survey of law enforcement agencies

(conducted in 1992) asked about the

criminality of female gang members

(Curry, Ball, and Fox, 1994) and, as noted

previously, that survey probably underestimated the problem because, “as a matter of policy,” many jurisdictions did not

count females as gang members (Curry

and Decker, 1998). An additional problem

with law enforcement agency reports as a

source of information is that jurisdictions

often differ in how they identify an offense as “gang related.”8

Surveys of at-risk youth. Surveys of atrisk adolescents (who are usually contacted at a school or social service

agency) provide a different perspective.

Among other questions, these surveys

typically ask about respondents’ gang involvement and about whether and how

often they have committed certain offenses. These surveys are the only source

of information about how the delinquency

of gang youth differs from that of nongang

youth. However, youth answering a questionnaire may be tempted either to conceal or to exaggerate delinquency. Since

most surveys are anonymous, such selfreports are difficult to verify. However, a

study of middle school males in Chicago

found that a little more than half (51.5

percent) of those who self-reported both

delinquency and gang involvement had

also been identified by the police as

delinquent (Curry, in press). Almost all

of the youth whom police identified as

gang members also self-reported gang

membership (Curry, in press). This study’s

finding of a disparity between self-reported

and police-reported delinquency rates

may indicate that respondents exaggerated their delinquency, escaped police

detection, or dropped out of the gang

before the police were able to identify

them.

Field studies. Field studies have a venerable tradition in gang research and continue to be a major source of insight

about gang life. Many of these studies,

however, do not raise the issue of criminality, and most are confined to one time

and one place, making it difficult to generalize from their findings. More important,

since gang females are usually difficult to

reach, researchers often report on very

small and/or seriously unrepresentative

samples of female gang members. Although field research offers a level of

National Youth Gang Center

As part of its comprehensive, coordinated response to America’s gang problem,

the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) funds the

National Youth Gang Center (NYGC). NYGC assists State and local jurisdictions

in the collection, analysis, and exchange of information on gang-related demographics, legislation, literature, research, and promising program strategies.

NYGC coordinates activities of the OJJDP Gang Consortium, a group of Federal

agencies, gang program representatives, and service providers that works to

coordinate gang information and programs. NYGC also provides training and

technical assistance for OJJDP’s Rural Gang, Gang-Free Schools, and Gang-Free

Communities Initiatives. For more information, contact:

National Youth Gang Center

P.O. Box 12729

Tallahassee, FL 32317

800–446–0912

850–386–5356 (fax)

E-mail: nygc@iir.com

Internet: www.iir.com/nygc
5

understanding of individual motivation 

and gang social structure not available

through other sources, findings from such

studies must be approached critically.

Levels of Offending

Many, but not all, female gang members

are involved in some kind of delinquency

or criminality. Youth surveys consistently show that delinquency rates of

female gang members are lower than

those of male gang members but higher

than those of nongang females and even

nongang males (Esbensen and Huizinga,

1993; Bjerregard and Smith, 1993; Fagan,

1990). In Rochester, NY, for example, 66

percent of female gang members and 82

percent of male gang members reported

involvement in at least one serious delinquent act, compared with only 7 percent

of nongang females and 11 percent of

nongang males (Bjerregard and Smith,

1993). By contrast, a survey of youth in

three cities—Chicago, Los Angeles, and

San Diego—classified 40 percent of female

gang members and 15 percent of male

gang members as, at most, “petty delinquents.” The three-city study also found

that although 33 percent of the female

gang members and 43 percent of the males

reported using hard drugs, almost onethird of the females and 25 percent of the

males said they were not using drugs or

alcohol at all (Fagan, 1990).

Types of Offenses

In general, female gang members commit

fewer violent crimes than male gang members and are more inclined to property

crimes and status offenses.9

 These gender

patterns were found in a nationwide 1992

survey of law enforcement agencies and

also in analyses of data on arrests from

Honolulu, HI, and Chicago (Curry, Ball,

and Fox, 1994; Chesney-Lind, Shelden, and

Joe, 1996; Block et al., 1996). In Chicago,

the disparity was very large. Not only

were male gang members more likely than

female gang members to commit serious

crimes, but there were a great many more

male gang members than females (and

police may also have been more likely to

arrest males). Between 1965 and 1994, the

number of arrests of male gang members

was much greater than that for females:

“[t]he ratio of males to females was 15.6:1

for nonlethal violence [and] 39:1 for drug

offenses,” and only 1.1 percent of offenders in gang-related homicides were female

(Block et al., 1996, p. 10).

Some might conclude from these data

that female gang members are not violent enough to be of concern. However,

an 11-city survey of eighth graders undertaken in the mid-1990’s found that

more than 90 percent of both male and

female gang members reported having

engaged in one or more violent acts in

the previous 12 months (Esbensen and

Osgood, 1997). The researchers found

that 78 percent of female gang members

reported being involved in gang fights,

65 percent reported carrying a weapon

for protection, and 39 percent reported

attacking someone with a weapon

(Deschenes and Esbensen, 1999). These

and similar findings prompted the authors of this study to recommend that

gang prevention and intervention efforts

be directed specifically at females.

Drug Dealing

Drug offenses are among the most common offenses committed by female gang

members. In Los Angeles County, an

analysis of lifetime arrest records of female gang members revealed that drug

offenses were the most frequent cause for

arrest (California Department of Justice,

1997). Special tabulations from Chicago

show that between 1993 and 1996, either

drug offenses or violent offenses were the

most common cause for arrest of female

gang members (see table).10

Law enforcement records document but

do not explain these high rates of drug

arrests for female gang members.

Several field studies, however, provide

some related insights into female gang

members’ participation in drug dealing,

perhaps the most important criminal

activity of the 1990’s. In the early 1980’s,

Moore and Mata (1981) interviewed 85

heroin-addicted Mexican American female

gang members about their experiences in

dealing heroin in Los Angeles. Female

dealers, who were often addicts themselves, frequently obtained their stock of

heroin from their own suppliers and occasionally from relatives. A few females began to deal drugs when their dealing husbands went to prison. Most female

dealers were working for someone else,

although there were a few powerful female career dealers.11 The drug-dealing

patterns of these women may be used—

with caution—to illustrate drug-dealing

patterns of other Mexican American

gang members prior to the cocaine/

crack epidemic that began in the

Gang-Related Charges for Female Arrestees in Chicago: 1993–96

Female Arrestees

With Gang-Related Charge (%)

Offense* 1993 1994 1995 1996

Violent (total) 46.9 40.3 34.4 38.5

Homicide 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.1

Simple battery 17.6 16.1 14.1 14.9

Mob action 9.7 5.7 3.8 4.8

All other violent offenses 19.4 18.4 16.5 18.7

Drug (total) 36.4 37.9 44.4 37.7

Cocaine possession 14.3 9.8 8.8 2.6

Crack possession 7.0 11.6 13.9 15.6

All other drug offenses 15.1 16.5 21.7 19.5

Prostitution 0.8 1.5 4.1 9.8

Property 5.1 3.4 4.4 5.1

Weapons 3.7 4.3 2.5 2.8

Liquor 5.6 10.7 7.3 3.5

Other 2.2 1.7 2.7 2.3

Note: Percentages may not total 100 because of rounding. Total number (n) of cases per year: 1993,

n=2,023; 1994, n=2,029; 1995, n=2,021; 1996, n=2,193.

* With the exception of vice offenses (drug, prostitution, and gambling), gang-related offenses are

defined by referring to the motive of the offender. Vice offenses are considered gang-related if they

involve a known gang member. Almost all liquor offenses involve underage drinking.

Source: These data were drawn from special tabulations provided to the authors by the Illinois

Criminal Justice Information Authority (1998).
6

mid-1980’s in most cities. By extrapolating from the Moore and Mata findings, it

can be estimated that 20 percent of all

Mexican American female gang members

in this period may have dealt heroin at

some time during their careers.

A 1990’s study (Moore and Hagedorn,

1996) of African American and Latina

female gang members in Milwaukee

documents a very different situation.

Many more females were dealing drugs,

although they were less likely to do

so than were males. About one-half

of the female gang members and threequarters of the male gang members had

sold cocaine at some time in their lives.

The proportion was higher for Latina

females (72 percent) and Latino males

(81 percent) than for African American

females (31 percent) and males (69 percent). In at least one African American

gang neighborhood, two drug houses

were run independently by females

whose male relatives were in a gang.

These findings indicate that, by the 1990’s,

drug dealing was much more common

among female gang members in Milwaukee than it had been among female gang

members in Los Angeles a decade earlier. A

1990’s study in San Francisco found that

drug dealing in an African American gang

was important enough to cause a rift between male and female gang members. Female members became so dissatisfied with

the income they were receiving from male

dealers that they withdrew from the gang

and went into business for themselves

(Lauterback, Hansen, and Waldorf, 1992).

A later report on this female gang contrasted its complete control over drug dealing with the less extensive or nonexistent

drug-dealing activities of females in two

other gangs: a nearby Mexican American

gang, whose female members were permitted to deal as independent individuals, and

an immigrant Salvadoran gang, whose female members were subservient to the

male members and were not allowed to

deal drugs (Brotherton, 1996). Female gang

members (mostly African American) in Columbus, OH, also reported being explicitly

debarred from selling drugs (Miller, 1998).

Taylor (1993) presents the most extensive

examination to date of drug dealing by

female gang members. He followed up his

study of Detroit’s dangerous “corporate

gangs”—that is, gangs organized for

“financial gain by criminal action” (1993,

p. 19)—with a companion book on female

gangs. Taylor traces the female presence

in Detroit’s gangs back to the 1950’s, but

it was not until the 1970’s, with the growing presence of hard drugs and the emergence of more criminally oriented (“commercial”) gangs, that females began to

play a more active role. By the 1980’s,

corporate gangs dominated Detroit’s

street economy, and by the 1990’s, females were involved in both autonomous

(all-female) and gender-integrated selling

crews. Taylor’s study leaves little doubt

that the position of females in the drugdealing business has changed, contemporaneous with the devastating collapse of

job opportunities in Detroit’s inner city

and the parallel collapse of neighborhood

social structures.12 Taylor’s historical

perspective provides a context for other

studies discussed in this Bulletin. As drug

dealing became more common among

gang members, autonomous female dealers occasionally emerged. There is also

a great deal of local variation, as shown

by the contrasting roles of Latinas in

Los Angeles (Moore and Mata, 1981),

Milwaukee (Moore and Hagedorn, 1996),

and San Francisco (Brotherton, 1996).

Ethnicity and Gender

Roles in the Gang

Most female gangs are either African

American or Latina, although there are

small but increasing numbers of Asian

and white female gangs. Autonomy and

male dominance, which are ongoing issues for all female gangs, tend to vary

with ethnicity. For example, gender expectations in each ethnic group might

suggest that African American and white

female gang members would be more autonomous and Latinas more subordinate

to males. They usually are, but not always. In other words, there is no universal ethnic continuum. Indeed, some factors related to female autonomy and male

dominance affect gang members regardless of ethnicity. Male unemployment and

the incarceration of the many males who

are convicted of illegal economic activities remove males from both Latino and

African American households. As a result,

women must rely on their own resources

to support themselves and their children.

African American and

Latina Gangs

One of the first researchers to investigate

African American female gangs was Laura

Fishman, who was on a team studying an

African American female gang in Chicago

in the early 1960’s. Later, in a reanalysis

of her field notes, Fishman argued that

although the women in this gang were

likely to play subordinate roles, they also

showed elements of autonomy, committing “male crimes” and invading rival gang

territory (Fishman, 1988, 1998). Autonomy was the keynote in a study of African

American female gang members in Philadelphia, PA, in the 1970’s. Most of the

gangs were gender integrated and seemed

to reflect gender equality: “The female is

an intrinsic part of the gang’s group identity who participates in gang activities . . .

rather than just ancillary activities”

(Brown, 1977, p. 226). Taylor, studying

Detroit gangs (1993), concurs. Former female gang members reported that even

though police ignored them, they were

just as involved in gang warfare, drinking,

and sex as the male members of their

gangs. Taylor also found females in all

types of gangs—from rowdy neighborhood groups to corporate, drug-dealing

enterprises.

Further evidence of autonomy among African American female gangs was found

in a substantial field study comparing

African American and Latina (mostly

Puerto Rican) gangs in Milwaukee in the

1990’s. African American females were

more likely than Latinas to feel that they,

not the male gang members, controlled

their gangs. By the time they had reached

their late twenties, most of the African

American and Latina females had ceased

to participate in their gangs. African

Americans were more likely than Latinas

to be employed, less likely to be on welfare, more likely to have moved away

from their old gang neighborhoods, and

less likely to use cocaine (Hagedorn and

Devitt, 1999; Hagedorn, Torres, and Giglio,

1998). The comparison showed that “[f]or

Latinas, . . . gang membership tended to

have a significant influence on their later

lives, but for African American[s] . . . the

gang tended to be an episode” (Moore

and Hagedorn, 1996, p. 210).

Latina gangs (Mexican Americans in the

Southwest and Puerto Ricans in New

York) have been studied more than African American female gangs. Latina gangs

have been continuously present in Los

Angeles since the 1930’s. Interviews with

a large, representative sample of Latina

females and Latino males from Los Angeles gangs active in the 1950’s and 1970’s

revealed considerable change. The earlier

female gangs were more autonomous and,

although they fought rival female gangs,

they did not fight side-by-side with males.

The more recent female gang members
7

roles. She was also one of the first researchers to discuss the importance of

motherhood to female gang members and

to note their desire to maintain a reputation within the gang as good mothers

(Campbell, 1987).

The number of gangs declined sharply in

New York in the 1980’s and early 1990’s.

However, when Puerto Ricans began going to prison in large numbers, new gangs

emerged in prison and on the streets.

These new gangs included the Latin Kings

(Curtis and Hamid, 1997). Preliminary research on the Latin Queens (the female

counterpart to the Latin Kings) corroborates Campbell’s observation that male

domination in Puerto Rican gangs tends

to socially isolate females (Hamid, 1996).

However, in the mid-1990’s, when increasing numbers of Latin Kings were imprisoned, the females’ roles changed dramatically. The Latin Queens who remained in

the neighborhood became leaders,

maintaining communication between

incarcerated Kings and gang members

still on the streets. The street branches

of the Latin Kings became distinct from

the prison branches. As females became

more important, these street branches

became more likely to emphasize community problem solving and to discourage

violence (see also Venkatesh, 1998). By

the late 1990’s, the prison and street

branches were in conflict (Curtis, John

Jay College, personal communication,

1998). The high rates of imprisonment

that have accompanied the Nation’s war

on drugs may have generated similar

changes in gangs elsewhere, but these

changes have not yet been documented.

This is an important area for research.

In Milwaukee, slight differences in perceptions of autonomy were found between

Mexican American and Puerto Rican

members of the major Latina gangs.

(Large samples from eight gangs, including almost all members of the largest

gang, were interviewed in the mid-1990’s.)

Whereas Mexican Americans saw their

gang as a separate, female clique of the

male gang, Puerto Rican females saw

themselves as part of the male gang.

Hagedorn and Devitt (1999) concluded

that the difference might be explained by

the fact that Puerto Rican females were

more likely to have boyfriends or relatives among the male gang’s leadership,

which was predominantly Puerto Rican.

The number of immigrants is increasing

in Latino communities, and immigrant

gangs are forming in a number of cities.

did. They were also more likely to use

hard drugs (see Long, 1990) and to feel

that the gang played an important part in

their lives.13 In both periods, female gang

members were more likely than male

gang members to come from troubled

families and were far more likely to have

run away from home. Another study of

Mexican American gangs in Los Angeles

reported that even though the female

gangs were auxiliaries to male gangs,

they often acted independently and their

cliques held firmly to an egalitarian norm

(Quicker, 1983). Indications of assertiveness were also found in a study of Mexican American female gang members in

Phoenix (Moore, Vigil, and Levy, 1995).

However, another study in Phoenix reported a persistent and pervasive double

standard among Mexican American gang

members—particularly when it came to

sexuality (Portillos, 1999).

New York’s Puerto Rican female gangs

were first analyzed in lengthy biographies

of former members (Campbell, 1984a).14

Within their gangs, females took on different roles—“loose” girls versus “good”

girls or “mother figures” versus “tomboys”—but all were dominated by males.

Campbell (1984b) analyzed 64 fights involving Puerto Rican female gang members and found that most were generated

by domestic conflicts and challenges to

honor rather than by gang issues. Opponents of females in these fights were just

as likely to be male as female. Campbell

argued that female gang members are

deeply conservative regarding gender

A study in San Francisco compared Mexican American, immigrant Salvadoran,

and African American female gangs and,

as discussed on page 6, found distinctly

different patterns of sexual exploitation

by male members and drug dealing activity among females from one gang to another. However, both Latina gangs—but

not the African American gang—were

fighting gangs and were highly territorial

(Brotherton, 1996). This study supports

the argument that communitywide ethnic

patterns of gender relations—in particular, relative degrees of subordination—

are directly reflected in gangs.

Other Ethnic Groups

White female gangs have rarely been studied except for a brief report on an Irish

gang that was active in Boston, MA, in the

early 1970’s (Miller, 1973).15 Members of

the female gang were arrested for truancy,

theft, drinking, and vandalism. According

to the report, these females, known as

“Molls,” wanted to be accepted by their

affiliated male gang and “gloried in” their

dependency on the male gang (Miller,

1973, p. 35).

A student of New York City’s Chinese

gangs remarked that “[w]omen are an essential part of Chinese gangs, although

they are not allowed to be members” and

noted that these women were a major

source of gang conflict (Chin, 1996, p.

173). Unfortunately, the author did not

elaborate on this point. These Chinese

gangs appear to be criminal organizations

rather than traditional youth street gangs.

A Los Angeles newspaper reported that

there were six female Vietnamese gangs

involved in violence in the Orange County

area (Klein, 1995), but as with immigrant

Latino gangs, there have been few studies

on male Asian immigrant gangs in the

mainland United States and none on their

female counterparts.

Long-Term

Consequences

Although joining a gang is only an adolescent episode for some females, for

others it is a turning point and a gateway to a life offering very little chance

for a socially acceptable career. Researchers are divided in their assessment of gang membership for females,

some arguing that it is “liberating” and

some that it causes “social injury”

(see Curry, 1998).
8

Some authors studying Mexican American

gangs in Los Angeles imply that once a

female leaves a gang, the gang’s influence

on her life ends (Quicker, 1983; Harris,

1988), but others disagree (Moore and

Hagedorn, 1996; Moore, 1991). In the

1990’s, most African American female

gang members in Milwaukee regarded

their gang involvement as an adolescent

episode, but for Puerto Ricans in Milwaukee, as for Mexican Americans in Los

Angeles, gang membership had long-term

consequences. In Los Angeles, Mexican

Americans who joined a gang were likely

to be from families that were already stigmatized by conventional community residents. Joining a gang and wearing its conspicuous clothes further labeled them as

unacceptable to the wider community.

Many had joined the gang to escape abusive families, but gang membership actually constricted their futures. Membership virtually ruled out marrying nongang

mates. Most female gang members married male gang members whose careers

often involved repeated imprisonments.

(By contrast, only one-fifth of the male

gang members married females from the

gang.) When they were young, these Mexican Americans, like Puerto Ricans in New

York City, glamorized the gang, but on

mature reflection, most felt that joining a

gang had been a mistake (Moore, 1991).

Regardless of the cultural context, there

is one constant in the later life of most

female gang members: most have children. Most male gang members also have

children, but the consequences are

greater for females. When male gang

members in Los Angeles were asked

about major turning points in their teens

and twenties, they usually talked about

the gang, drugs, or arrests. By contrast,

females referred to motherhood and marriage. Although most males abandoned

responsibility for their children, most females reared their own children (Moore,

1991). In Milwaukee, as gang involvement

in the drug business became riskier,

women with children were more likely to

opt for safer, if less lucrative, means of

support (Hagedorn, 1998).

Taking Female Gangs

Seriously: Areas for

Future Research

The historic lack of research on female

gangs suggests that almost every aspect

of female gang members’ lives requires

further research and analysis. In listing

research needs, therefore, this Bulletin

must be highly selective. The following

proposed areas of research draw specifically on the analyses in this Bulletin:

◆ Female gang formation. As discussed

previously, several studies have shown

that gang formation (for both males

and females) is related to deteriorating

inner-city economic conditions. However, no research has been conducted

in the many cities where economic

conditions improved during the 1990’s

to determine whether there has been a

commensurate decline in gang formation or in the persistence of gang membership into adulthood. General economic conditions influence male and

female gangs alike, but a related issue

applies specifically to women: how

welfare reform and the elimination of

Aid to Families With Dependent Children affect female gang formation and

gang persistence.

◆ Reasons for joining gangs. As most

studies show, friendship, solidarity,

self-affirmation, and a sense of new

possibilities were found to motivate

young inner-city females to join and

remain in gangs. Several studies found

that the female gang may be a refuge

from physical and sexual abuse at

home. Although sexual victimization is

difficult to study, an understanding of

it is relevant to programs designed to

keep adolescent females out of gangs

and programs designed to intervene

with or provide safe havens for female

gang members once they are in gangs.

Additional research that provides a

better understanding of why females

join gangs may help communities develop prevention programs to deter

female gang membership.

◆ Ethnicity. Because it bears so heavily

on gender roles, ethnicity is important

in understanding how female gangs

function and is also relevant to program design. More research is needed

on this topic, particularly with regard

to Latina and Asian immigrant gangs,

white gangs, and multiethnic gangs.

◆ Gender roles in gangs. Additional

research is needed on the roles of

females in drug gangs. Field research

is also needed on female gang members’ involvement in other economic

activities—legal and illegal—and their

participation in violence. This research should focus on the gender

structure of gangs (i.e., whether females form an autonomous gang, a

female auxiliary of a male gang, or

part of a gender-integrated gang).

◆ Delinquency and criminality. More

substantial data on female gang

members’ delinquency and criminality are needed. Two possibilities for

developing such data are described

below:

❖ Continue national surveys of local

law enforcement agencies. Despite

acknowledged problems of police

underreporting and of varying local definitions of what constitutes

a gang or a gang-related offense,

surveys of law enforcement agencies provide a valuable look at

changes over time.

❖ Use existing law enforcement data

sets. Drawing on local reports, two

State agencies have compiled valuable data on female gang members’ offense patterns: the Illinois

Criminal Justice Information Authority analyzed the annual offense patterns of male and female

gang members in Chicago (see

table on page 5) and the California

Department of Justice analyzed

the lifetime arrest records of female gang members in Los Angeles. These data sets could be used

as models for other States with

endemic gang problems.

◆ Later-life consequences of female

gang membership. Studies using systematic samples of former female

gang members could identify factors

associated with their success or failure in later life. Such studies would

be useful for understanding the longterm consequences of female gang

membership. In particular, research is

needed on the incarceration experiences of female gang members and

the role of female gangs in jails and

prisons. More information is also

needed about drug use and access to

drug rehabilitation among female

gang members. It is also important to

know whether certain families have

developed a tradition of gang membership and whether female gang

members are more likely than male

gang members to transmit that tradition to their children. There is no research to date on the children of female gang members.

Conclusion

Many aspects of female gang functioning

and the lives of female gang members

remain a mystery because relatively few

researchers have considered female

gangs worthy of study. In addition,
9

researchers face serious obstacles to the

study of female gangs and, because of

these obstacles, they often settle for

unrepresentative samples. Gangs are

highly suspicious of researchers and

cooperate with them only under unusual

circumstances. Female gang members, in

particular, have been averse to talking

about sexual abuse, whether it occurred

at home or within the gang. Some field

researchers have been able to work effectively with gangs to obtain representative

samples and trustworthy data. Other researchers avoid resistance and what they

perceive to be the danger involved in

direct field studies. These researchers

contact gang members through community agencies, probation and parole

offices, and incarceration facilities, but

each of these strategies entails unknowable biases in sampling and in response

sets (see Hagedorn, 1990).

Unfortunately, female gangs have received

little programmatic attention. The Family

and Youth Services Bureau of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

had a program that explicitly addressed

female gang members, but the program

lasted only 3 years. The 1990’s brought

recognition within the Federal Government that female and male offenders have

different programmatic needs. For example, the 1992 reauthorization of the

Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 specifically mandated

more programmatic focus on female delinquent offenders. Several national programs have made efforts to reach females. Notable among these are programs

created by the Boys & Girls Clubs of

America that are directed at reducing or

eliminating gangs and the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention’s

(OJJDP’s) Comprehensive Communitywide Approach to Gang Prevention, Intervention, and Suppression, which is directed at gang-involved youth and their

communities. OJJDP’s program includes

efforts addressed to females who are or

who have been gang members. Across the

five sites in this demonstration program,

females represent 20 percent of the targeted youth. These programs offer a foundation to build on, but much more work

needs to be done to address the needs of

females involved with gangs.

Endnotes

1. In general, this Bulletin views a gang as an

unsupervised group of youth that defines itself

as a gang and develops its own norms and

criteria for membership. Gang members are

more responsive to peer socialization than

to conventional agents of socialization, and

the gang may become quasi-institutionalized

(i.e., it may develop the capacity for selfperpetuation). This definition excludes hate

groups, motorcycle gangs, and other exclusively adult gangs. The focus of this Bulletin

is on female gangs. This term refers to gangs

containing only female members: some of

these gangs are autonomous and some are

affiliated with male gangs. The term also

refers to gangs that are controlled and dominated by females but that may include male

members. The term “female gang members”

refers both to individuals who are members

of female gangs and to those who are members

of gender-integrated gangs.

2. Although most early reports emphasized

female gang members’ departure from conventional gender-role norms, a recent report from

Chesney-Lind, Shelden, and Joe (1996) observed that the media produced a counterintuitive (and dubious) stereotype of female

gang members as violent and out of control.

In 1990, the Family and Youth Services Bureau (FYSB) of

the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services granted

3 years of funding for gang-prevention programs for adolescent females in Boston, MA; Denver, CO; Hartford, CT; Minneapolis, MN; St. Louis, MO; Seattle, WA; and Stockton, CA.

FYSB hypothesized that female gang members often have

children who join gangs and reasoned that keeping females

out of gangs might have a multigenerational effect. In 1992,

four more programs were funded: two expanded the services offered in Boston and Seattle, and two were established in Washington, DC, and Pueblo, CO. After consultation with researchers and practitioners from those projects

(reported in FYSB’s September 1993 publication Connections), FYSB began to sharpen the focus of those programs.

The 1993 FYSB Annual Report summarized key features

of the programs:

Participants outlined the key features of services that

work: building support groups for at-risk females, promoting cultural awareness, empowering youths to succeed, expanding community awareness, sharing information on conditions that put adolescent females at

risk of gang or criminal involvement, promoting employment opportunities, building spirituality, and providing consistency and support (U.S. Department of

Health and Human Services, 1993, p. 22).

Although these tactics might seem rather broad, they represented a considerable advance over the gender-role-bound

programs of the 1960’s (e.g., Hanson, 1964), which were

largely limited to encouraging females to improve their selfimage through cosmetics, dress, and deportment.

In operation, the programs varied considerably in recruitment

practices, emphasis, and organization. David Curry (1998)

reported on programs in Boston, Pueblo, and Seattle.

Boston’s program, which was situated in a housing project,

included few females with records of delinquency and focused on building self-esteem. Pueblo’s program recruited

broadly and emphasized mentoring, cultural awareness, and

conflict resolution. Seattle’s small program, serving females

referred by juvenile courts, focused on counseling and help

with school and work. According to Curry (1998, p. 26), “All

three programs have been held up as models by their respective communities, and all have received national attention.”

The final evaluation revealed significant reductions in five

types of delinquency for youth in the Pueblo program and a

significant reduction in carrying weapons among youth in the

Seattle program (Williams, Cohen, and Curry, 1999). However, the programs were discontinued in 1995. “The growing

disfavor for non-law-enforcement-based programs in Congress and the non-enthusiastic evaluation results,” Curry argues, led to their demise and also precipitated the termination of other gang prevention projects funded by FYSB. The

11 FYSB programs represent the most important Federal efforts to date to provide programs specifically for female gang

members.

Family and Youth Services Bureau Programs for Female Gang Members
10

3. The long-term effects of economic restructuring are summed up in the title of W.J.

Wilson’s 1997 book When Work Disappears.

Industrial jobs were replaced by part-time or

temporary work, with salaries that were often

insufficient to support families. Under such

conditions, the transition from adolescence to

self-supporting adulthood became even more

difficult for poorly educated young people

than before.

4. One study of city characteristics found that

the decline in manufacturing employment was

strongly correlated with a rise in urban crime

rates and number of gangs (Jackson, 1995).

5. This study offers a rare analysis of Asian

female gangs. Most of the 13 female gang members in the study were either Hawaiian, Samoan, or Filipina. The authors indicated that

ethnicity was a major organizing principle of

the gangs (Joe and Chesney-Lind, 1995).

6. All of these studies involved African American, Mexican American, and Puerto Rican

females.

7. A female gang member in Detroit, MI, commented that “the boys would get all the blame”

for whatever the girls did (Taylor, 1993, p. 33).

8. Many jurisdictions count an offense as “gang

related” if it is committed by a gang member. A

few jurisdictions, like Chicago (see table, page

5), require a gang-related motive.

9. Status offenses include underage drinking,

truancy, curfew violations, incorrigibility, and

running away. These offenses would not be

defined as offenses if committed by adults.

10. Neither the Los Angeles nor the Chicago

source includes data on male gang arrestees.

However, Block and colleagues (1996) found

that in Chicago, between 1965 and 1994, 

drug offenses accounted for approximately

30 percent of arrests of both male and

female gang members.

11. In these Mexican American gangs, heroin

dealing was not an activity of the gang as a

whole. Instead, individuals or pairs would go

into business, and many hired fellow gang

members.

12. Some researchers feel that Taylor’s portrayal of the changing role of female gang members in Detroit is offensive, arguing that it revives a stereotype of the “liberated female

crook” dating from the mid-1970’s (ChesneyLind, Shelden, and Joe, 1996). At that time,

Adler (1975) contended that female criminality

showed a new pattern of masculine-style violence and attributed this pattern to the egalitarian ideology of the women’s movement.

However, later analysis showed that the

premise underlying the idea (i.e., that violent

offenses had increased among females) was

erroneous (Steffensmeier, 1980). Unfortunately,

the anecdotal nature of Taylor’s report makes

it difficult to resolve this issue.

13. Another study of Mexican American gangs

in Los Angeles also acknowledged the female

gang’s deviant behavior, its drug culture, and

its violence, arguing that females emulated the

males (Harris, 1988). See also Hunt, Joe-Laidler,

and MacKenzie (2000) for the importance of

drinking (alcohol) in the daily lives of female

gang members.

14. A social worker’s memoir of a year spent

with a 12-member Puerto Rican female gang

appeared earlier. Hanson (1964) reported both

fighting and histories of early molestation, neglect, and abuse from family members and

male gang members alike.

15. Other ethnic groups include white, Asian,

and multiethnic gangs; all have been increasing.

Surveys of law enforcement agencies in 1996

and 1998 showed more whites in gangs than

before—14 and 12 percent (Moore and Terrett,

1998; National Youth Gang Center, 2000)—and a

survey of eighth graders in 11 cities showed

that 25 percent of all gang members were white

(Esbensen and Osgood, 1997). The 1996 survey

also reported that almost half of all gangs were

multiethnic (Moore and Terrett, 1998), and the

1998 survey reported that 6 percent were Asian.

References

Adler, F. 1975. Sisters in Crime. New York, NY:

McGraw-Hill.

Asbury, H. 1927. The Gangs of New York. New

York, NY: Blue Ribbon.

Bjerregard, B., and Smith, C. 1993. Gender differences in gang participation, delinquency,

and substance abuse. Journal of Quantitative

Criminology 9:329–355.

Block, C.R., Christakos, A., Jacob, A., and

Przybylski, R. 1996. Street Gangs and Crime:

Patterns and Trends in Chicago. Research Bulletin. Chicago, IL: Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority.

Brotherton, D. 1996. “Smartness,” “Toughness,”

and “Autonomy:” Drug use in the context of

gang female delinquency. Journal of Drug Issues

26:261–277.

Brown, W.K. 1977. Black female gangs in Philadelphia. International Journal of Offender

Therapy and Comparative Criminology 21:221–

228.

California Department of Justice. 1997. Female

Gang Members—Arrest Records Reviewed. Sacramento, CA: Office of the Attorney General.

Campbell, A. 1984a. The Girls in the Gang. Oxford, England: Basil Blackwell.

Campbell, A. 1984b. Girls’ talk: The social representation of aggression by female gang members. Criminal Justice and Behavior 11:139–156.

Campbell, A. 1987. Self definition by rejection.

Social Problems 34:451–466.

Campbell, A. 1990. Female participation in

gangs. In Gangs in America, edited by C.R. Huff.

Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Chesney-Lind, M., Shelden, R., and Joe, K. 1996.

Girls, delinquency, and gang membership. In

Gangs in America, 2d ed., edited by C.R. Huff.

Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Chin, K. 1996. Gang violence in Chinatown. In

Gangs in America, 2d ed., edited by C.R. Huff.

Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Cohen, M.I., Williams, K., Bekelman, A.M., and

Crosse, S. 1994. Evaluation of the National

Youth Gang Drug Prevention Program. Report to

the Administration on Children, Youth and

Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human

Services. Washington, DC: U.S. Government

Printing Office.

Curry, D. 1998. Responding to female gang involvement. In Female Gangs in America, edited

by J. Hagedorn and M. Chesney-Lind. Chicago,

IL: Lakeview Press.

Curry, D. n.d. Research note: Self-reported

gang involvement and officially recorded delinquency. Criminology, in press.

Curry, D., Ball, R.A., and Fox, R.J. 1994. Gang

Crime and Law Enforcement Recordkeeping.

Research in Brief. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs,

National Institute of Justice.

Curry, D., and Decker, S. 1998. Confronting

Gangs. Los Angeles, CA: Roxbury.

Curtis, R., and Hamid, A. 1997. State sponsored

violence in New York City and indigenous attempts to contain it: The mediating role of the

third crown (sgt. at arms) of the Latin Kings.

Unpublished paper. New York, NY: John Jay

College.

Decker, S., and Van Winkle, B. 1996. Life in the

Gang. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Deschenes, E.P., and Esbensen, F. 1999. Violence in gangs: Gender differences in perceptions and behavior. Journal of Quantitative

Criminology 15:63–96.

Esbensen, F., and Deschenes, E.P. 1998. A

multisite examination of youth gang membership: Does gender matter? Criminology 36:799–

827.

Esbensen, F., and Huizinga, D. 1993. Gangs,

drugs and delinquency in a survey of urban

youth. Criminology 31:565–589.

Esbensen, F., and Osgood, D.W. 1997. National

Evaluation of G.R.E.A.T. Research in Brief.

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice,

Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of

Justice.

Fagan, J. 1990. Social processes of delinquency

and drug use among urban gangs. In Gangs in

America, edited by C.R. Huff. Newbury Park,

CA: Sage Publications.
11

Fishman, L. 1988. The Vice Queens: An ethnographic study of black female gang behavior.

Paper presented at the American Society of

Criminology Meetings, Chicago, IL.

Fishman, L. 1998. Black female gang behavior:

An historical and ethnographic perspective. 

In Female Gangs in America, edited by M.

Chesney-Lind and J. Hagedorn. Chicago, IL:

Lakeview Press.

Hagedorn, J. 1988. People and Folks. Chicago,

IL: Lakeview Press.

Hagedorn, J. 1990. Back in the field again. In

Gangs in America, edited by C.R. Huff. Newbury

Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Hagedorn, J. 1998. People and Folks. 2d ed.

Chicago, IL: Lakeview Press.

Hagedorn, J., and Devitt, M. 1999. Fighting females: The social construction of the female

gang. In Female Gangs in America, edited by M.

Chesney-Lind and J. Hagedorn. Chicago, IL:

Lakeview Press.

Hagedorn, J., Torres, J., and Giglio, G. 1998.

Cocaine, kicks and strain: Patterns of substance abuse in Milwaukee gangs. Contemporary Drug Problems 15:133–145.

Hamid, A. 1996. Resurgence of drugs/gangs/

violence in New York City. Unpublished manuscript. New York, NY: John Jay College.

Hanson, K. 1964. Rebels in the Streets.

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Harris, M. 1988. Cholas: Latino Girls and Gangs.

New York, NY: AMS Press.

Hunt, G., Joe-Laidler, K., and MacKenzie, K.

2000. “Chillin’, being dogged and getting

buzzed”: Alcohol in the lives of female gang

members. Drugs: Education, Prevention, and

Policy 7(4):331–354.

Jackson, P. 1995. Crime, youth gangs, and urban transition: The social dislocations of

postindustrial economic development. Justice

Quarterly 8:379–387.

Joe, K., and Chesney-Lind, M. 1995. “Just Every

Mother’s Angel”: An analysis of gender and

ethnic variations in youth gang membership.

Gender & Society 9:408–431.

Joe-Laidler, K., and Hunt, G. n.d. Accomplishing

femininity among the girls in the gang. British

Journal of Criminology, in press.

Klein, M. 1995. The American Street Gang. New

York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Lauterback, D., Hansen, J., and Waldorf, D.

1992. “Sisters Are Doin’ It for Themselves”: A

black female gang in San Francisco. The Gang

Journal 1:57–72.

Long, J. 1990. Drug use patterns in two Los

Angeles barrio gangs. In Drugs in Hispanic Communities, edited by R. Glick and J. Moore. New

Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Miller, J. 1998. Gender and victimization risk

among young women in youth gangs. Journal of

Research in Crime and Delinquency 35:429–453.

Miller, J. 2000a. Gender dynamics in youth

gangs: A comparison of males’ and females’

accounts. Justice Quarterly 17(3):419–448.

Miller, J. 2000b. One of the Guys? Girls, Gangs

and Gender. New York, NY: Oxford University

Press.

Miller, W. 1973. The Molls. Society 11:32–33.

Miller, W. 1975. Violence by Youth Gangs and

Youth Groups as a Problem in Major American

Cities. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, National Institute for Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention.

Moore, J.W. 1991. Going Down to the Barrio.

Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.

Moore, J.W. 1994. The chola life course: Chicana

heroin users and the barrio gang. International

Journal of the Addictions 29:1115–1126.

Moore, J.W., and Hagedorn, J. 1996. What happens to girls in the gang? In Gangs in America,

2d ed., edited by C.R. Huff. Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage Publications.

Moore, J.W., and Long, J. 1987. Final Report:

Youth Culture vs. Individual Factors in Adult

Drug Use. Los Angeles, CA: Community Systems Research, Inc.

Moore, J.W., and Mata, A. 1981. Women and

Heroin in Chicano Communities. Final Report

for the National Institute on Drug Abuse. Los

Angeles, CA: Chicano Pinto Research Project.

Moore, J.W., Vigil, J.D., and Levy, J. 1995. Huisas

of the street. Latino Studies Journal 6:27–48.

Moore, J., and Terrett, C. 1998. Highlights of the

1996 National Youth Gang Survey. Tallahassee,

FL: National Youth Gang Center.

National Youth Gang Center. 1997. 1995 National Youth Gang Survey. Washington, DC: U.S.

Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

National Youth Gang Center. 2000. 1998 National Youth Gang Survey. Washington, DC: U.S.

Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

Padilla, F. 1992. The Gang as an American

Enterprise. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers

University Press.

Portillos, E.L. 1999. Women, men and gangs:

The social construction of gender in the barrio.

In Female Gangs in America, edited by M.

Chesney-Lind and J. Hagedorn. Chicago, IL:

Lakeview Press.

Quicker, J. 1983. Homegirls: Characterizing

Chicana Gangs. San Pedro, CA: International

Universities Press.

Rice, R. 1963. A reporter at large: The Persian

Queens. New Yorker 39(October 19):153–187.

Sanchez-Jankowski, M. 1991. Islands in the

Street. Berkeley, CA: University of California

Press.

Short, J., and Strodtbeck, F. 1965. Group Processes and Gang Delinquency. Chicago, IL:

University of Chicago Press.

Spergel, I. 1964. Racketvill, Slumtown, Haulberg.

Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Spergel, I. 1995. The Youth Gang Problem. New

York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Steffensmeier, D. 1980. Sex differences in patterns of adult crime: 1965–1977: A review and

assessment. Social Forces 58:1080–1108.

Taylor, C. 1990. Dangerous Society. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press.

Taylor, C. 1993. Girls, Gangs, Women and Drugs.

East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University

Press.

Thrasher, F. 1927. The Gang. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 1993. Report to the Congress on the Youth

Gang Drug Prevention Program: Fiscal Year

1993. Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department

of Health and Human Services, Administration

for Children and Families, Family and Youth

Services Bureau.

Valdez, A., and Cepeda, A. 1998. Homegirls,

chicks, and kicking it: Females associated with

Mexican American male gangs. Unpublished

paper. San Antonio, TX: University of Texas at

San Antonio.

Venkatesh, S.A. 1996. The gang in the community. In Gangs in America, 2d ed., edited by C.R.

Huff. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Venkatesh, S.A. 1998. Gender and outlaw capitalism: A historical account of the Black Sisters

United “girl gang.” Signs 23:683–709.

Welfare Council of New York City. 1950. Working With Teenage Groups: A Report on the Central Harlem Project. New York, NY: Welfare

Council of New York City.

Williams, K., Cohen, M.I., and Curry, G.D. 1999.

Evaluation of Youth Gang Drug Intervention/

Prevention Programs for Female Adolescents.

Final Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department

of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National

Institute of Justice.

Wilson, W.J. 1997. When Work Disappears.

Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
PRESORTED STANDARD

POSTAGE & FEES PAID

DOJ/OJJDP

PERMIT NO. G–91

Bulletin NCJ 186159

U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

Washington, DC 20531

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300

This Bulletin was prepared under grant

number 95–JD–MU–KOO1 from the Office of

Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention,

U.S. Department of Justice.

Points of view or opinions expressed in this

document are those of the authors and do not

necessarily represent the official position or

policies of OJJDP or the U.S. Department of

Justice.

The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention is a component of the Office of Justice Programs, which also includes

the Bureau of Justice Assistance, the Bureau

of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of

Justice, and the Office for Victims of Crime.

Acknowledgments

Joan Moore is Distinguished Professor Emerita of Sociology at the University of

Wisconsin—Milwaukee. John Hagedorn is Associate Professor of Criminal Justice

at the University of Illinois—Chicago.

Photographs on pages 3 and 7 copyright © 1997–99 Photodisc, Inc.

Share With Your Colleagues

Unless otherwise noted, OJJDP publications are not copyright protected. We

encourage you to reproduce this document, share it with your colleagues, and

reprint it in your newsletter or journal. However, if you reprint, please cite OJJDP

and the authors of this Bulletin. We are also interested in your feedback, such as

how you received a copy, how you intend to use the information, and how OJJDP

materials meet your individual or agency needs. Please direct your comments and

questions to:

Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse

Publication Reprint/Feedback

P.O. Box 6000

Rockville, MD 20849–6000

800–638–8736

301–519–5600 (fax)

E-mail: tellncjrs@ncjrs.org