Feminist Perspectives on Crime and Deviance

Feminist Views on Crime and Deviance

Feminist perspectives on crime and deviance encompass a range of theories united by the idea that society is structured around male dominance (patriarchy).

Feminist sociologists challenge traditional sociological thinking, arguing that it is 'malestream' (biased towards male perspectives).
In crime studies, there's a pattern of lower conviction rates for women and less involvement in violent crimes, but higher rates of victimization in personal crimes like domestic abuse.

Explaining Gendered Crime Patterns

Two possible explanations exist for the observed gender patterns in crime:

Women commit crimes as often as men, but are treated more leniently by the criminal justice system.
Women commit fewer crimes than men; male behavior and masculinity are a social problem.

Self-report studies suggest men commit more crimes, but the ratio isn't as high as conviction rates suggest.
This implies women may be better at concealing crimes or receive preferential treatment.
However, self-report studies might suffer from validity issues.

The Chivalry Thesis

The chivalry thesis suggests men protect women in our culture.

Pollak (1950, 1961) argued women are accustomed to lying to men and men are socialized to protect women.
Therefore, male police officers and magistrates might be less likely to charge or prosecute women.
The core argument is whether women commit as much crime as men but avoid punishment.

Strengths of the Chivalry Thesis

It highlights how gender roles and expectations influence treatment within the criminal justice system.

Weaknesses of the Chivalry Thesis

Doesn't account for other factors like race, class, etc., that can influence treatment.
Feminists argue it ignores the reality of male violence against women and the justice system's failure to hold men accountable.

Double Standard

Smart (1976) suggests a double standard exists in courts.

Women convicted of offenses are seen as unfeminine and treated harshly ('doubly deviant').
Example: Women who commit partner murder in domestic abuse cases receive long sentences, while men often argue provocation.

Critical Views of the Chivalry Thesis

Heidensohn (1985) argues the chivalry thesis perpetuates gender stereotypes and ignores differences in the types/seriousness of crimes.

Walklate (2008) notes that in rape cases, the victim is often on trial, needing to prove her respectability.
The legal system and juries often perceive that the victim 'asked for it'.

Female Crime and Feminism

Adler (1970s) suggested a dramatic upsurge in female crime due to feminism.

As women seek equal opportunities in the workplace, female criminals demand equal opportunities to commit white-collar crime.

Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) data.

From Lancaster University led by Walby in 2015, the data was reported.

Violent crime is estimated to be 60% higher than official statistics due to a rule limiting victims to five registered violent crimes.
When the rule was ingnored, violent crime increased by 70% for women and 50% for men.
Violent crimes by acquaintances and relations increased by 100% for women and 70% for men.
Walby, Francis, and Towers noted the CSEW doesn't separate violence by gender or domestic relationship, underestimating domestic violence.
CSEW authors claim many incidents from a few victims would affect data quality if all were registered.

Risk Behaviors among Young Women

Denscombe (2001) reported an increase in risk behaviors among young women adopting male behaviors and sexual attitudes.

Drinking and violence have led to more arrests.
Young women adopt aggressive, masculine behaviors to react against gender stereotypes and social control - termed 'ladette culture'.
Slack (2009) reported girls under 18 were responsible for 58,000 crimes, a 50% rise in four years.
However, data reliability/validity is questioned if the chivalry thesis holds true.

Heidensohn's Argument

Heidensohn argues women commit fewer crimes due to patriarchal control limiting opportunities and incentives.

Domestic control: Women have less freedom at home due to housework duties and restrictions on going out at night.
Control in public spaces: Women fear sexual violence or being seen as unrespectable, which limits their access to public spaces and male-dominated environments.
Employment control: Women are less likely to hold high positions, so their work is overseen, limiting opportunities for middle-class crimes like fraud.

Strengths of Heidensohn's View

Challenges gender stereotypes and assumptions about crime/deviance.
Shows women are active agents in shaping their crime experiences, not just passive victims.

Criticisms of Heidensohn's View

May overemphasize gender's role and neglect class, race, age, etc.
Difficult to apply practically; challenging to identify/address gender-based biases/inequalities.

Carlen's Argument

Carlen (1986) argued women generally don't commit crime because they accept rewards from conforming to social norms:

The gender deal: Seeking respectability to gain benefits like support from a husband.
The class deal: Expecting to earn a good living from a job.
Carlen's study showed many offending women were also victims of abuse and hadn't benefited from these deals.
Some women actively choose crime as a rational solution to poverty and powerlessness when lacking family financial support.
If caught, these women are doubly victimized by their circumstances and the CJS.
Example: Women convicted of sexual offences were groomed for prostitution by people they believed were boyfriends.
Female gang members are controlled by males and used to carry drugs/guns because they are less likely to be searched.

Strengths of Carlen's Concept of the Gender Deal

Challenges gender stereotypes and assumptions about crime/deviance.

By highlighting how gender shapes interactions in the CJS, it promotes equality and fairness.

Weaknesses of Carlen's Concept of the Gender Deal

Difficult to apply practically; it's hard to identify/address underlying gender-based expectations/behaviors.

Traditional Theories vs. Feminist Theories

Most traditional crime theories focus on why men/boys commit crime; functionalism and Marxism offer little insight into female crime.

There are issues of whether male crime theories apply to women's different social spheres.
Feminism addresses this gap.
Feminists highlight that male behavior is a problem for society due to disproportionate male involvement in crime/violence.
Feminist theories focus on female offending patterns and experiences in the CJS, offering insight into women's criminal careers.

Limitations of Feminist Theories

Feminist theories may overlook issues of class and ethnicity.
By viewing women as victims, feminism may excuse some female crime based on gender and victimization.

Arrests for Domestic Violence in America.

Police statistics in America show a percentage of arrests

Arrests for domestic violence are of women, around 16-25% (Miller 2005).

The Role of Masculinity and Criminality

Feminist perspectives have triggered explorations of masculinity and criminality, particularly regarding patriarchy and capitalism (Messerschmidt, 1993; Connell, 2014).

Many young men desire to conform to ideals of masculinity that promote wealth, sexism, and female subordination but can't achieve these ideals legally.