Gender
Understanding offending rates
There is a significant difference between male and female offending
rates.
With males committing for more crime than females. Usually there is a
difference in the type of crime being committed when looking at female
offending.
Traditionally, females have been disregarded in criminology due to it
being male dominated. This is due to the belief that their behaviours
needed less controlling and found them to commit less crime.
Many writers focus on male criminality and the links between
masculinity and committing crime.
Patterns in offending
Men commit most recorded crime, making gender one of the most significant factors
in offending (Heidensohn & Silvestri, 2012). In England and Wales, 75% of convicted
offenders are male, and by age 40, 32% of men have a conviction compared to 9%
of women.
Men are more often convicted of violent or sexual offences, while women are more
likely to commit property crimes (excluding burglary). Males also tend to be repeat
and more serious offenders — they’re around 15 times more likely to be convicted of
homicide.
These patterns raise three key questions:
1. Do women really commit fewer crimes, or are statistics misleading?
2. Why do some women offend?
3. Why do men commit more crime?
Some sociologists argue official statistics underestimate female offending,
because:
Women’s crimes (e.g. shoplifting, prostitution) are less likely to be reported.
When detected, women are less likely to be prosecuted or receive harsh
punishments.
The chivalry thesis
The chivalry thesis (Pollak, 1950) argues that most criminal justice agents (police,
judges, magistrates) are men, who are socialised to act chivalrously towards women.
This means they treat female offenders more leniently, leading to
underrepresentation of women in official crime statistics.
Evidence supporting the chivalry thesis
, Pollak (1950): Men have a protective attitude towards women and dislike
accusing, arresting, or convicting them.
Self-report studies:
o Graham & Bowling (1995): Men were 2.33 times more likely to admit
offending, compared to 4 times in official stats → suggests women’s
offending is underreported.
o Flood-Page et al. (2000): Only 1 in 11 self-reported female offenders
were cautioned or prosecuted, compared to 1 in 7 males.
Official statistics:
o Women more likely to receive bail, fines, or community sentences, and
shorter prison terms.
o Hood (1992): Women were one-third less likely to be jailed in similar
cases.
Evidence against the chivalry thesis
Farrington & Morris (1983): No leniency for women in 408 theft cases.
Box (1981): Serious female offenders not treated more favourably.
Buckle & Farrington (1984): Twice as many males shoplifting (observed),
despite equal stats → women may be more likely prosecuted.
Hales et al. (2009): Men more likely to engage in binge drinking, drug use,
and disorderly conduct — the gender gap widens with more serious crimes.
Other issues:
Many male crimes against women (e.g. sexual assault, domestic violence) go
unreported.
o Only 8% of serious sexual assaults reported (2012).
o Yearnshire (1997): Women experience 35 assaults before reporting
domestic abuse.
Women’s offences may simply be less serious or they may show more
remorse, explaining lighter sentences.
The feminist critique – bias against women
Feminists argue the justice system is patriarchal and often harsher on women who
deviate from gender norms.
Heidensohn (1996): Courts punish women more for breaking gender
expectations.
o Double standards: Girls punished for sexual activity; boys are not
(Sharpe, 2009).
o Stereotypes: Women judged by traditional roles (Stewart, 2006).
Carlen (1997): Women’s sentences depend on their perceived roles as wives
and mothers — e.g. women with children in care judged more harshly.
Rape cases:
o Smart (1989): Quotes sexist judicial comments blaming victims.
o Walklate (1998): In rape trials, the victim is effectively put on trial.
Understanding offending rates
There is a significant difference between male and female offending
rates.
With males committing for more crime than females. Usually there is a
difference in the type of crime being committed when looking at female
offending.
Traditionally, females have been disregarded in criminology due to it
being male dominated. This is due to the belief that their behaviours
needed less controlling and found them to commit less crime.
Many writers focus on male criminality and the links between
masculinity and committing crime.
Patterns in offending
Men commit most recorded crime, making gender one of the most significant factors
in offending (Heidensohn & Silvestri, 2012). In England and Wales, 75% of convicted
offenders are male, and by age 40, 32% of men have a conviction compared to 9%
of women.
Men are more often convicted of violent or sexual offences, while women are more
likely to commit property crimes (excluding burglary). Males also tend to be repeat
and more serious offenders — they’re around 15 times more likely to be convicted of
homicide.
These patterns raise three key questions:
1. Do women really commit fewer crimes, or are statistics misleading?
2. Why do some women offend?
3. Why do men commit more crime?
Some sociologists argue official statistics underestimate female offending,
because:
Women’s crimes (e.g. shoplifting, prostitution) are less likely to be reported.
When detected, women are less likely to be prosecuted or receive harsh
punishments.
The chivalry thesis
The chivalry thesis (Pollak, 1950) argues that most criminal justice agents (police,
judges, magistrates) are men, who are socialised to act chivalrously towards women.
This means they treat female offenders more leniently, leading to
underrepresentation of women in official crime statistics.
Evidence supporting the chivalry thesis
, Pollak (1950): Men have a protective attitude towards women and dislike
accusing, arresting, or convicting them.
Self-report studies:
o Graham & Bowling (1995): Men were 2.33 times more likely to admit
offending, compared to 4 times in official stats → suggests women’s
offending is underreported.
o Flood-Page et al. (2000): Only 1 in 11 self-reported female offenders
were cautioned or prosecuted, compared to 1 in 7 males.
Official statistics:
o Women more likely to receive bail, fines, or community sentences, and
shorter prison terms.
o Hood (1992): Women were one-third less likely to be jailed in similar
cases.
Evidence against the chivalry thesis
Farrington & Morris (1983): No leniency for women in 408 theft cases.
Box (1981): Serious female offenders not treated more favourably.
Buckle & Farrington (1984): Twice as many males shoplifting (observed),
despite equal stats → women may be more likely prosecuted.
Hales et al. (2009): Men more likely to engage in binge drinking, drug use,
and disorderly conduct — the gender gap widens with more serious crimes.
Other issues:
Many male crimes against women (e.g. sexual assault, domestic violence) go
unreported.
o Only 8% of serious sexual assaults reported (2012).
o Yearnshire (1997): Women experience 35 assaults before reporting
domestic abuse.
Women’s offences may simply be less serious or they may show more
remorse, explaining lighter sentences.
The feminist critique – bias against women
Feminists argue the justice system is patriarchal and often harsher on women who
deviate from gender norms.
Heidensohn (1996): Courts punish women more for breaking gender
expectations.
o Double standards: Girls punished for sexual activity; boys are not
(Sharpe, 2009).
o Stereotypes: Women judged by traditional roles (Stewart, 2006).
Carlen (1997): Women’s sentences depend on their perceived roles as wives
and mothers — e.g. women with children in care judged more harshly.
Rape cases:
o Smart (1989): Quotes sexist judicial comments blaming victims.
o Walklate (1998): In rape trials, the victim is effectively put on trial.
