By calling them "cages" or "no arms" you're reducing the artist's work/intent. She called them Cells deliberately. And cell has multiple meanings. Prisoners live in cells. But so do monks. This is also one of her cells. It's not a cage.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/08/e8/68/08e86875f8dda563c1e667d0de2b2cc5.jpg

Her concept of a cell, is a collection of pieces that is separate from the museum-goer. With regard to the Cells, you can't walk up to a single bit of sculpture, you had to encounter the whole thing at once. So it becomes like architecture or a theater set. Part of the effect or the meaning or your response is how the items relate to each other.

I didn't forget to link to my proof because I have done that several times on here, but here you go.

She conceived of her first Arch of Hysteria in 1989 two years before Dahmer was arrested. That pose was inspired by a French neurologist who studied hysteria. here's her first sketch of the first Arch. https://www.moma.org/collection_lb/browse_results.php?object_id=70922

This image is from 1824 and depicts, Opisthotonus , a painful spasming of the muscles that victims of tetanus get https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CdWVo4fWAAEMM_4.jpg

Charcot the neurologist who Bourgeois has cited has her inspiration (and who was a teacher of Freud) talked about the arc de cercle that hysterical patients and epileptics sometimes suffered. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Krzysztof_Owczarek/publication/221926258/figure/fig6/AS:305190860279813@1449774579686/Fig-6-The-circular-arc-arc-de-cercle-Paul-Richer-Etudes-cliniques-sur.png

She spoke about and was quite clear about what inspired her Arch of Hysteria. There's no mystery with this one.