Gender Issues In Criminology

This essay will critically discuss the statement that “criminology is a male stream discipline which overlooks the significance of female offenders” and with reference to feminist criminology, it will explore society’s stereotypical view of the gender role. In addition to this essay it will explore into female/male offending by comparing what type of offences are committed by both genders and why this might be and will investigate case studies referring to female serial killers and how this could impact the view on them being more significant then thought so.

According to Braithwaite (1989), crime is committed disproportionately by males indeed, the Home Office (2001) states that only 19 percent of known offenders cautioned or found guilty by the criminal justice system were women, a statistic that has been stable for the following 10 years and could suggest that as a result, crimes committed by males are held at a greater importance than crimes committed by women (Walklate, 2004). It could be argued that this may due to the stereotypical view on gender roles that are taught by families, schools and society during childhood, functioning a self-fulfilling prophecy of gender role expectations. For example at a certain period in a boy and girls life they would have internalised certain roles such as girls being bought dolls and boys being bought action figures, this would have a huge significance with the way both genders interact with these toys to then act out this in the real world.

A cause why criminology may overlook the significance of female offenders is because we tend to find that some crimes are dominated by males rather than females. For example males are likely to be convicted of violent and sexual offences, whereas females tend to be involved in property and theft crimes more than other types of criminal activity, This could be attributed to ‘the feminization of poverty’. This is where a high proportion of female offenders steal in order to put food on the table for their children, and may also be the case for some male offenders who engage in burglary and theft (Walklate, 2004). Though, the reason why poverty has this consequence for women more than it does for men is still yet to be explained. As well as the stereotypical views placed on gender it makes it likely for a female to be more understood than a male for committing the same crime, because females are perceived to be ‘innocent’ and are therefore treated more leniently. When they commit an offence, they are not viewed as a bad person but rather someone who has just made a wrong decision – this is not usually the case for males. The fact that males are associated with violent crimes and females are associated with non-violent crimes explains why males are deemed more dangerous to society.

Brown (1986) outlined one of the dangers if the focus was solely on the ‘woman and crime’, He implies that the more the woman is questioned as being separate within criminology, the more that mainstream (male stream) criminology is left to its own devices, which will be untouched by the criticism of feminism and will have a presumption that when talking about (male) crime to be accurate (Walklate 1995). This is an issue for criminology because females’ behaviour is most likely measured against some masculine norm which may not provide an adequate framework for explaining crime for men, for women or either

Overall, this proposes that just because criminology has neglected or lacked failure to be able to explain female crime sufficiently, it doesn’t mean that it has performed better in relation to men, what this is suggesting is that even though female crime has been overlooked it does not mean that male crime has more validity in terms of been able to make clear of it. This will question that criminology being a male stream discipline could be a form of biased thinking because it’s neither had the time to put its focus exclusively on explaining female crimes (Walklate 1995, p.13).

Case studies on female offences lead us to believe that criminology should not be a male stream discipline as women have the ability to commit serious offences just the same as men. One example is the case of Myra Hindley, who was sentenced to life imprisonment for the death of five children. In an attempt to understand her behaviour, her upbringing with her violent father and her submissive love for her partner at the time were stated as key explanations for this offence. Another key case is Joanna Dennehey, who was also sentenced to life imprisonment but for the murder of three men. These two cases are very significant when discussing the concept of criminology being a male stream discipline as it contradicts the idea that females are innocent, sensitive, nurturing and weak. These cases highlight the fact that females can be just as dangerous as males.

This is linked with the viewpoints of feminist criminologists, which was proposed in the mid-1970s, until the 1970s the study of crime and deviance was very much a male province. There are three major contributions of the feminist approach, firstly “as a critique of existing male stream criminology- showing how women have been neglected, how they been misrepresented and how they may be brought back into existing theories”, secondly “as a perspective to suggest new areas of study” and, Thirdly “a way of bringing gender to the forefront and especially the role of men and masculinity in crime” (Carrabine et al 2009, p.106). This growing visibility of women and as professional criminologist and the object of criminological study is largely the result of the feminist movement that emerged in the twentieth century. Feminist criminology made its first contribution which was making a critique of the male basis inherent in theories, not only were the theorist’s men they only wrote solely on men and when looking at women offenders it was a very sexist view.

Conversely, feminist criminology has been heavily critical of the mainstream criminological theorising and Heidenshohn (1996: 111) put it frankly when she observed ‘criminology, mainstream and tributary, has almost nothing to say of interest or importance about women’ (Newburn 2017, p.308). This implies even though criminology has ignored the female offender within society, on the other hand feminist criminology has come into place to be able to tackle this impression of a male stream criminology, and use research and studies to explain the female offender and the treatment of women in the criminal justice context.

Lombroso’s work on the female criminal concluded that there were fewer ‘born female criminals’ than males. The reason for why women committed less crimes was argued that they are less developed than the male, they are more primitive and this consequence was that they have less scope of degeneration. And the most common form of regression for the woman Lombroso argued, was prosituiton (Newburn 2017, p.309). In contrast Otto Pollak proposed that “women are in fact more criminal than men. It is just they are also more devious and cunning and hence can cover up their crimes better” (Carrabine et al 2009, p.107). This infers that because theorist have diverse opinions towards the female offender towards criminal offences, it could indicate that because there is not a clear interpretation on the female offender, it lacks sufficiency and validity within itself which makes it much harder to analyse and becomes less significant to research on within criminology.

Feminist criminologist have had a growing interest in the ways women are handled differently to men by the police, courts and prisons often what is called a code of chivalry. Women coming before the courts experience is what is known as the ‘double deviance’ and ‘double jeopardy’, and this is argued as the result of the fact that women’s crime rates are so low and this has significant effects because women who offend are seen to have transgressed not only social norms but also gender norms, they are seen as both rule-breakers and role defiant and are often treated accordingly (Carrabine et al 2009).This proposes ever since feminist criminology has come about criminology has been a widespread notion not just focusing on male offending but has used theory to make us understand that female offending do have significance within the criminal justice system.

To conclude this essay, Criminology is a predominantly male stream discipline because research has shown that males are associated with serious crimes that are considered highly important by the criminal justice system. Whereas females are associated with non-violent, less serious crimes that are not considered harmful to society. However, case studies suggest that females can be just as violent as males and that this shouldn’t be ignored because of gender, and that female crimes rates have increased over the last years.

References

1. Carrabine, E. et al (2014). Criminology: A Sociological Introduction, Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
2. Candace, K. (2013). ‘Gender and Crime’ Annual Review of Sociology, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 291-308.
3. Newburn, T. (2013). Criminology. 2nd ed. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
4. Walklate, S. (2004). Gender, crime and criminal justice. 2nd ed. Devon: Willan Publishing.
5. Walklate, S. (2007). Understanding Criminology. 2nd ed. Buckingham. Philadelphia: Open University Press.
6. Walklate, S. (1995). Gender and crime. London: Prentice Hall.