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.
No comments:
Post a Comment