Lecture 17: Law and Gender Con't and Social Control Flashcards
chivalry as a bargain
- Police offer leniency to women in exchange for traditionally feminine behaviour (ex. Apologetic, submissive, non-aggressive)
- If women deviate from this, the bargain is broken
feminist legal critique of chivalry
- Scholars like Chesney-Lind argue this “chivalry” is not kindness: it’s paternalism and a form of control
- It upholds patriarchal norms and punishes women who resist them
Visher’s Study: Gender Differences in Arrest
methods and data
- Data collected in 1977 in three U.S. cities.
- Observed 785 suspect-police encounters (643 male, 142 female).
- Excluded traffic and prostitution cases.
Visher’s Study: overall arrest rate findings
- Males: 20%
- Females: 16%
- The difference is not statistically significant, but when we dig deeper, gender matters a lot
Visher’s Study: What protects female suspects? findings
- Women are less likely to be arrested if they’re white, older, and submissive in demeaner
- Visher calls this the chivalry effect, but it only applies to women who perform traditional femininity
Visher’s Study: Who loses chivalry? findings
- Young, Black, or hostile women are treated more harshly
- Black women’s arrest rate: 21.8%
- White women’s arrest rate: 7.8%
- Hostile demeanor nullifies chivalry
- Police treat hostile women no differently than hostile men
- Aggression is seen as a gender role violation
chivalry and race
- Black women don’t receive chivalry
- Possibly because of cultural stereotypes that see Black women as stronger, less deferential, and more masculine
chivalry and age
- Younger women are treated more harshly -> “protective partenralism logic”
- Older women are seen as less threatening and more respectable
chivalry and demeanor
- Antagonism = arrest
- “Respectability politics” at play
Kruttschnitt Article (2013)
- A review of feminist criminological developments since 1996.
- Moves away from just looking at “more or less crime” by gender.
- Focuses on how and why gender matters.
2 traditional sociology of law problems when studying female offenders
- the gender gap
- the generalizability problem
the gender gap
- Men commit more crimes than women
- But, official arrest data says women are catching up
- Self-report and victimization data says women aren’t catching up
the generalizability problem
- Can the same theories explain both male and female offending?
- Mixed evidence: some mechanisms are gender-neutral (ex. Low self-control, strain), but emotions, context, and opportunities are gendered
Kathleen Daly’s (1992) five female pathways
- Street women: survival-based, trauma
- Harmed and harming: chaos and abuse
- Drug-connected: linked to family or partners
- Battered women: reacting to abuse
- Other women: economic desperation
cultural hegemony
the domination of a culturally diverse society by the ruling class, who manipulate the culture so that their value become the “common sense” of the public
Gramsci on power
- Power is not just coercive; it’s consensual
- Hegemony makes inequality seem natural and inevitable
R. W. Connell
- Australian sociologist best known for her work on gender theory, masculinities, and power structures
- In 1987, Connell published the influential book Gender and Power: Society, the Person, and Sexual Policies, where she introduced the concept of hegemonic masculinity
Hegemonic masculinity
The culturally idealized form of masculinity that legitimizes men’s dominant position in society and justifies the subordination of women—and of men who don’t fit the ideal
Core traits of hegemonic masculinity
- Authority
- Control
- Heterosexuality
- Toughness
- Emotional restraint
how does hegemonic masculinity appear in the legal system?
- Police: Emphasis on control, authority, toughness
- Courts: Value rationality, emotional detachment → aligned with masculine norms
- Sentencing: Women seen as either weak victims or failed women (when violent)
subordinate masculinities and deviance
- Not all men benefit equally from hegemonic masculinity
- Subordinate masculinities (ex. Queer, poor, racialized) men are seen as lesser, more heavily policed, and often criminalized ot maintain the gender hierarchy
- Gramsci: consent + coercion are both used to keep hegemonic norms intact
origins of social control perspectives in the late-19th century
- Defined in terms of institutions maintaining social order in modern societies
- Linked to rising individualism and diversity
key early social control thinkers
- Edward A. Ross (1926) – institutional view of social control.
- George H. Mead (1934) – micro-level, interactionist approach.
shift in social control over time
- From broad social order → to norm violation control.
- Includes both informal norms (small settings) and formal norms (laws, institutions).
contemporary uses of social control
- “Social control” = multiple meanings today.
- Broad: maintaining social order
- Specific: within theories of deviance and crime
focus of the current volume of social control
- Emphasizes social control in relation to deviance and/or crime
- But still connects to broader social and sociological concepts
Travis Hirschi & Ernest Goffman (1960s)
- Hirschi studied at UC Berkeley; took a deviance course with Goffman
- Goffman traced the decline of “social control” as a concept to its overuse
- Goffman blamed the broadness and vagueness of the concept on early formulations by Edward A. Ross
Edward A. Ross
- Foundational thinker
- Published early works on social control starting in 1896.
- First book: Social Control: A Survey of the Foundations of Order (1901).
- Viewed social control as diffuse and flowing from multiple sources of prestige and power.
Talcott Parsons: Functionalism and Social Control
- Brought Durkheim and Weber’s work to English-speaking sociology
- Authored The Social System (1951) and Toward a General Theory of Action (1952)
- Developed the AGIL schema
- Saw social control as embedded in broader systems theory
AGIL schema
- Adaptation
- Goal-attainment
- Integration
- Latent pattern maintenance
social control in functionalism
- Parsons did not create a specific theory of social control
- But control is implied in his structural-functional model
- Parsons viewed deviance as any disturbance to system stability
- Social control = mechanisms that restore or maintain equilibrium
function of social control example (AGIL framework)
- Adaptation → Medical control
Illness limits capacity to meet system demands - Goal-attainment → Legal control
Law steers behavior toward defined societal goals - Integration → Informal control
- Social bonding and solidarity maintain shared norms
- Latent Pattern Maintenance → Religious control
Religion sustains value systems and ultimate meanings
social control as law
- Ross defined social control as shaping the individual to meet group needs
- Called law the most specialized and highly finished engine of social control
- Law is a specialized part of the social control system
- Its justification lies in the justification of social control itself
- Agencies and sanctions of law are formalized versions of social regulation
four dichotomies of Ross’ social control
- conflict vs. order
- influence vs. institution
- punishment vs. restoration
- deviance vs. social interaction
conflict vs. order
Law not just for managing conflict but maintaining social order
influence vs. institution
Social influence is informal and spontaneous, institutions are formal and rule-based
punishment vs. restoration
Law includes reparation and social repair, not just punitive responses
deviance vs. social interaction
Law helps enable everyday interaction and cooperation, not just countering deviance
law as specialized but not supreme
- Ross describes law as a highly advanced engine of social control
- But law is only one part of a larger process of social regulation
- Often used as a last resort
- Law is not central by itself but should be studied in relation to the full system of social control and other mechanisms like religion media education
- Law works best when aligned with institutions like religion and media
- Mutual cooperation between control agencies enhances effectiveness
three main goals of legal social control
- solidarity
- continuiy
- conformity
solidarity
- Settles disputes
- Maintains collective order and cohesion
continuity
- Standardizes life
- Sustains social and institutional routines
- Law helps maintain the ongoing transmission of civilization
- Ensures that social organization persists across generations
- Parsons calls it “a going concern”
- Legal control: preserving the flow of norms, rules, and expectations
conformity
- Inhibits deviance
- Encourages socially acceptable behaviour
- Law supports behavioural consistency with societal norms
- Legal social control ensures people conform rules and roles
- Associations and pattered interactions guide individuals toward conformity
- Ross: conformity = purity and health, nonconformity= decay and deviance
how are the three main goals of legal soial control achieved?
- Retribution (punishment)
- Reparation (restoration)
two ways law promotes continuity
- subjective influence: subtle, internalized norms that shape behaviour and identity
- Formal institution: structured systems of rules enforced by the state and legal actors
how law encourages conformity
- Counters deviance through norms, deterrence, and repressive law
- Facilitates interaction by shaping mutual expectations
- Motivates behaviour through legal rights and obligation
- Reinforces social relationships through consistency and duty
