Assess sociological explanations for gender differences in crime and deviance

When examining crime and deviance through the gender lens there can be seen stark differences in both the amount and types of crimes committed by either sex, for instance males have generally committed more crime and statistics are higher for males however whether official statistics are a true reflection of crime could be questioned as many crimes go unreported, such as domestic violence, or perhaps unrecorded.  However, female crime has risen 173% in just 10 years bringing females back into the sociology of crime spectrum. Many sociologists believe biology plays a part in the differences between genders, suggesting females natural desire to nurture and care prevents them from committing murders, however women do commit violent crimes and many women choose to be deviant, in a time of rising equality and self-expression females are no longer in the private sphere. Males testosterone hormones have been blamed for their acts of aggression however some sociologists suggest male primary socialisation to be masculine and powerful may be the origin of male crime. Whilst genders are both physically different, the increase in female crime has narrowed the gap between genders in regards to crime and deviance with equality in both the job market and the prison on the horizon.

The Chivalry thesis explains differences in gender in crime and deviance by suggesting women are misrepresented in statistics as they often receive less harsh punishments, for example whilst a male may get a speeding ticket a woman may simply get a caution going unrecorded on crime statistics yet having committed the same offence. This is because of the chivalry factor, male police officers and male judges feel they should be chivalrous towards women seeing them as vulnerable rather than a threat. The Criminal Justice System may also reflect unequal punishments as many women enter rehabilitation centres instead of prison to prevent family break up as society constructs women as part of the family and home. This inequality in punishment and statistics could be argued by Liberal Feminists as a step backwards in female progress as it continues inequality. Controversially it has been suggested that “women are equal until prosecuted for committing a crime, then they become a vulnerable infant victimised by their husband or a male” suggesting that females use the chivalry factor to their advantage when being prosecuted, playing on their socially constructed gender role of vulnerability to avoid harsh sentences, painting females as cunning and perhaps more of a threat than first thought. Norman Brennan suggests judges and magistrates already “bend over backwards” to not send women to prison, maybe due to the chivalry factor or perhaps to avoid family break up. Perhaps statistics of crime is unequally balanced, not due to males committing more crime but due to female crime going unrecognised or not taken seriously, creating the gender gap in crime and deviance through selective policing.

When males dominated the job market and women stayed at home in a 1930’s Britain, women lacked opportunity to commit crime, theft was not available to them as they were not outside of their home, the majority of crimes tended to be poisoning husbands, perhaps out of frustration at a lack of freedom. Much like the social control theory, if someones opportunity to commit crime is taken away they will not commit the crime, males had opportunity both blue and white collar to commit crime in the workplace and outside. Marxist feminists saw this as patriarchal oppression, keeping women out of the public sphere and therefore unable to express themselves, however an eruption of female crime and surge of female deviance came when women began to penetrate the job market, a wealth of criminal opportunity was opened. Adler suggests the liberation thesis, with womens liberation and emergence into the workplace will come increased female crime as opportunity is available. She proposed women will develop criminal careers and begin to level the statistics of male crime. However as aforementioned, the chivalry factor may prevent such levels of crime being recorded and this suggests all females are criminals just waiting for the opportunity.

Deviance is straying from the norms and values socially accepted in society such as Gothicism or gang culture. Gender, it could be argued is a social construct and therefore what is expected or the norm for each gender is based on society not the individual. For females, deviance is often stigmatised more harshly than men, for example if a female is seen to deviate from her role as a mother she is condemned more than a father who may leave his family. Frances Heidensohn suggested the difference in crime and deviance for genders is due to the sex-role theory, from childhood we are socialised to adopt our gender roles. Female roles contain elements of caring, passivity and domesticity, whereas male roles have toughness, aggressiveness and sexual conquest. Females generally lack values associated with delinquency and therefore actually commit less crime than males. Female deviance and crime in some parts of the world including Britain such as prostitution can even be seen as conforming to gender roles as the female uses prostitution to fund providing for her family, this was evidenced by the study of female gangs in San Francisco where women would participate in sexual deviance and prostitution to afford to feed their children.  Feminists also suggest that if females are deviating from societal norms and gender roles they are seen as doubly deviant for breaking both the law and social values, actually receiving harsher punishment and condemnation than males, counteracting the chivalry thesis. Attitudes towards male deviance is often “boys will be boys”, men tend to get away with acts of thrill seeking and vandalism because it is more accepted within their gender role than it is women.

Male crime is often characterised as violent and aggressive, Messerschmidt suggested this was due to  a need for masculinity, he stated criminal behaviour is really a resource for asserting masculinity when other resources are unavailable. He suggested that middle class white boys have access to educational success and sporting powers, i.e hegemonic masculinity but at a price, independence and control are given up in school as boys are subservient to teachers, school is emasculating so outside of school these repressed masculinity characteristics result in criminal and deviant behaviour such as vandalism and drinking. Whilst working class boys, also experience school as emasculating but they have less chance of academic success, therefore they can only construct their masculinity around physical violence or aggression. This is why males commit crimes and acts of deviance as they need to re-exert their masculinity, however this can have a more sinister side with the rising equality of women. As male masculinity is lost in the workplace they may turn to domestic violence to retain their masculinity, Messerschmidt says “powerless men use wife beating, rape and murder to reassert control when their masculinity is threatened by women”. This suggests the difference in types of crimes males and females commit, whilst females commit mainly theft males in a crisis of masculinity turn to violence. It could be argued this is why women are under-represented in criminal statistics as they do not have the need for masculinity or to exert power giving them less need to commit violent crimes. However, the laddette culture promoted in the 90’s has lead to many women adopting masculine qualities and exhibiting aggression, many females have been involved in violence without any involvement of men thus further narrowing the gender gap.

Whilst female crime has undoubtedly risen in statistical data, it may not be a true reflection on crime differences in gender through the years as the chivalry thesis may have reduced the amount of recorded female crimes. However in an ever increasing strive for equality from feminism groups, equality in the work place and liberation has lead to an increase in criminal opportunity for females and perhaps will eventually create equality in the criminal justice system. The majority of crimes against women are committed by men suggesting males are more likely to commit more crimes as this equality takes place and the crisis of masculinity heightens. It has been argued that 50% of females in prison state they committed their crime because of a male, whether it be abuse or accomplice to a male for example Myra Hindley or Rose West, suggesting that males may even influence female crime suggesting statistics cannot reveal the true motives or reasoning behind crimes.  Whether gender is a social construct or biology, both genders do and will commit various types of crime despite differing amounts, motives and punishments.