Historically, views of women as being weak or unreasonable, sex bias in the law of self-defense, and myths and misconceptions concerning battered women have operated to prevent these women from justifying acts of homicide or assault against batterers as reasonable self-defense. Judicial perceptions of battered women have problematic consequences for their defense, the critical problem in representing battered women who kill and assert self-defense being how to explain their actions as reasonable. The admissibility of expert testimony depends on a judicial finding that testimony is relevant to the issue at hand, either self-defense or some other issue. Most appellate courts, in ruling on a trial court's exclusion of expert testimony, have determined that such testimony on the battered woman syndrome is relevant to a claim of self-defense. Expert testimony on the syndrome has commonly been understood by lawyers and judges as the primary way to solve the problem of sex bias in the trial process for battered women. A case is described in which the New Jersey Supreme Court held that expert testimony concerning the battered woman syndrome is admissible and relevant under the State's standard of self-defense. Dilemmas posed by expert testimony for feminist legal theory are examined, along with the theme of victimization in the women's movement. 192 references.