gender and crime Flashcards
Parsons- sex role theory
- females carry out the expressive role, meaning that girls grew up to internalise values like caring and empathy
- this makes them less likely to harm others
- their child-caring role also means that they are more attached to their families and wider communities than men, making them less likely to commit crime (according to bonds of attachment theory) because they are more attached to wider society
- traditional female roles also involve being busier than men with the dual burden and triple shift, reducing their opportunities to commit crime
Sutherland 1960
‘boys are taught to be rough and tough’
Cloward and Ohlin 1960 (gender and crime)
proposed that in gangs, younger members learn through contact with older males that traits such as toughness and dominance are necessary for a strong masculine reputation
ALBERT Cohen- gender and crime
boys are more likely to commit crime because of male status frustration making them more likely to act out and the pursuit of status.
Criticisms of Parson’s sex role theory in gender and crime
- les relevant- decline in trade gender roles
- Walkate: just because women are biologically able to have children doesn’t mean they have to fulfill an expressive role or conform to a gender stereotype
Chivalry thesis- Otto Pollack 1950
- there was more in female crime than statistics suggest but the paternalistic attitudes of men meant that female cirme was underrepresented in stats
- police are less likely to record female crimes, judiciary less likely to pass harsh sentences onto females because men were socialised into ‘protecting’ women
- assumptions about women’s crime being inconsequential, like petty theft and prostitution being seen as victimless therefore easier to let off.
Lavinia Woodward could be seen as an example of this because she had a promising career!!!
Evidence for chivalry thesis?
- self report studies suggest that there is little difference between male and female criminality!
- males are charged with 4/5 crimes in the UK despite this
- males are more likely to be seen as career criminals while women are more likely to be seen as having made an error of judgement
Evidence against the chivalry thesis
- Farrington and Morris (1983) study of sentencing, women are not always sentenced more leniently than men are!
- Buckle and Farrington (1984)- twice as many males than females were caught in their observational study of shoplifting
- Home office research (2004)- courts are imposing more severe sentences on women for less serious offences
- Hedderman (2010)- the rate of imprisonment for women has been rising since the start of the 21st century
more criticisms of chivalry thesis
Heidenson and Adler
-Heidenson- courts are unfair, harsh on women who deviate from social norms (double deviance). They have failed as women AND as citizens
-Adler- single mothers find it difficult to have their testimony believed in court, so not all women are treated with chivalry!
-sandra walkate- in rape cases, the victim is ‘on trial’
-pat carlen- when women are jailed it is less for the seriousness of their crimes and more according to the court’s assessments of them as mothers and daughters.
Carlen (1988)- class and gender deal
- class deal: women work hard in exchange for pay which they could then use to pay for consumer goods. comfortable lifestyles= win
- women in prison come from poor backgrounds and leave worse off than before with no employment.
-gender deal: the gender deal was that they should do domestic labour and give love + companionship to their husbands, in exchange for love and financial support= win! - women who conform to gender norms/stereotypes are rewarded with a happy life, emotionally supported and enjoy the benefits of a stable home.
- both of these deals exploit women, rejecting these deals, or having it blocked leads to criminality (not all women have equal access to the deal)
- HOWEVER does this explain why a working mother may commit crime? she has both deals but still rejects them?
masculinity and crime- Connell
(4 types and key terminology)
identified 4 types of masculinity:
1. hegemonic = heterosexual
2. subordinate = homosexual
3. marginalised = crisis of masculinity
4. complicit= societal trends like ‘new man’
key terms:
dominant prestigious: the popular and valued type
patriarchal privelage: the inherent privelage of being a man
James Messerschmidt (1993)- masculinity and crime
- masculinity is a social construct/ accomplishment LEARNED or EARNED
- men constantly have to work on constructing and presenting their masculinity to others
- some men have more resources to draw upno than others such as father figures
- crime and deviance might be a resource used by lower class/ ethnic minority to accopmlish the masculinity of their m/c white counterparts
- men are aiming for the dominant prestigious/ hegemonic type
what 3 key elements result in being labelled with hegemonic masculinity according to Messerschmidt?
- paid work/ type of employment
- subordination of women
- heterosexual
what are the subordinated masculinities according to Messerschmidt?
- gay men
- lower class
- less educated
- ethnic minority
men in these subgroups appear to challenge the hegemonic view and therefore can be scapegoated
criticisms of Messerschmidt
- there are many men who dont fit this mold, don’t have to and don’t want to, why don’t THEY deviate?
- looks at who gets caught rather than who commits
- crime appears in all classes and types of men!
- overused hegemonic masculinity as an explanation but one size DOESNT fit all
- argument is unclear, is masculinity the cause or is this just a description of the offenders?
