The Theories Of Criminality In The 19th And Early 20th Century

Current statistics show that men commit 80% of all crime and women commit only 20%. However there are arguments to suggest that the statistics highlight an under representation of female criminality, and there are many sociological arguments to suggest that female criminals are treated more leniently. On the other hand, some sociologists believe women are treated more harshly when they commit certain types of crime. This essay aims to assess the reasons for gender differences in reported crime rates.

However, the validity of the chivalry thesis is questioned by Box (1981) who reviewed the data from self-report studies in the UK and USA. He concluded that ‘the weight of evidence on women committing serious offences does not give clear support to the view that they receive differential and more favourable treatment’. This claim is supported by Graham and Bowling study which found that females were less likely than men to be involved in the more serious offences. The seriousness of the offence could explain the lower proportions of females among the convicted and cautioned than among self-reported offenders rather than leniency in the criminal justice system.

According to Lilly, Cullen, and Ball (232) Feminist theory has been on the back burner of modern criminology until the late 19th century. As with the other criminology theories there are many thoughts and ideas on why females commit crimes. In the beginning the theories seem to revolve around the victimization of the female gender. Then criminologist took a look at female delinquency, prostitution, and gender inequality in the criminal justice system. Lilly (233) wrote that Lombroso used physiological traits to determine what type of women would commit crime. Lombroso also argued that the women that committed the most crime were more masculine then the women who did not commit crime. He used physiological immobility, and passivity to make the argument. Lilly (235) also wrote that Sigmund Freud believed the reason women committed crime was because they has “penis envy”. Since women were physical different than men, women would become more aggressive trying to act like the male counterpart in order to fit in with the status quo.

38). Furthermore, they claimed that female criminals were “monsters” (as cited in DeKeseredy, 2009, p. 38). These false images painted all female offenders with the same brush and served to dehumanize their characters. Furthermore, these theories negatively impacted the media and the public’s conception of female offenders. As a result female offenders were treated poorly, to say the least. To make matters worse, research in this area was conducted by males, dedicated for males, and served only to benefit males. For example, theoretical authors of this era were men who studied characteristics of males with respect to criminality. Women were thrown into the mixture of the alleged gender-neutral research, when what they needed was gender-sensitive studies. Even though these early theories inspired more accurate research, they served as a double edge sword to the female offender profiles.

Feminists believe that there are clear differences between the crimes that are committed by each gender; although both males and females are prosecuted for sexual offences, they are statistically committing different kinds of crimes (Gundy, 2014). However a weakness of this theory would lie along the lines of being criticized for being too critical and dismissive of all other theories on crime and deviance. (Kriekan et all,

General theories of crime such as Marxist and the labelling theory neglect women for their accounts. The story of women is missing they include males and culture but gender is not included. “Criminological theories have rarely been concerned with the analysis of female criminality.” (Smart, 1977) This indicates only males are criminally analysed.

Men who enter the criminal justice system are depicted by society as violent individuals rather than women who are often depicted as accomplices who are often times unaware of things happening around them. In a study conducted, it was found that “almost 13 percent of men were jailed on murder charges and 13 percent for rape or sexual assault, while 11 percent of female inmates were there on murder charges and 2 percent for rape or sexual assault.” This in many cases is tested to be true since men are more violent than men in nature and due to the fact that

Criminality is still assumed to be a masculine characteristic and women lawbreakers are therefore observed to be either ‘not women’ or ‘not criminals’ (Worrall 1990, p. 31). Female offenders are hallmarked for tireless and inescapable coverage if they fit into the rewarding newsworthy categories of violent or sexual. It is always important to note the reason for overrepresentation of women criminals in the media. “Women who commit serious offences are judged to have transgressed two sets of laws: criminal laws and the laws of nature” (Jewkes 2011, p. 125). Such women are hence “doubly deviant and doubly damned” (Lloyd, 1995). When women commit very serious crimes, such as murder, they attract

To historians, this era had rising sympathetic and humanitarianism sentiments. For instance, during this time there were many people across the social spectrum that refused to prosecute crimes, especially those crimes that could be considered petty (inex). This was done for a couple of reasons. First being, the courts were very expensive. Further, people did not want to be responsible for sending petty criminals to the gallows for crimes so small such as theft and shoplifting.

Despite the general consensus that the number of females involved in crime is continuing to rise, males are still the dominant gender committing crimes, especially for violent offences. This may be why there is a continued lack of research on female offenders using a gender specific approach that accounts for gender differences. Historically, female offenders have been primarily studied using a gender-neutral model comprising mainly male offenders. Although there is support that a gender-neutral model can effectively apply to both male and female offenders (van der Knaap et al. 2012), there has been an ongoing debate on whether the pathways and processes that lead to female offending can be successfully explained and ultimately applied to interventions and preventions by using theories originally created to explain male crime (Steffensmeier & Allan, 1996).

According to Farrington and Morris (1983, P 241-243) the fewer crime rate among women as compared to males significantly influences sentencing decisions. There is a male dominance in major crimes such as murder, drug offences and sexual offences among others. From this fact, women are also likely to get noncustodial sentences as compared to men and

As the nineties began, the general theory of crime became the most prominent criminological theory ever proposed; furthermore, it is empirically recognized as the primary determinant in deviant and criminal behaviors. Known also as the self-control theory, the general theory of crime can most simply be defined as the absence or lack of self-control that an individual possesses, which in turn may lead them to commit unusual and or unlawful deeds. Authored by educator Michael R. Gottfredson and sociologist Travis Hirschi, A General Theory of Crime (1990) essentially “dumbed down” every theory of crime into two words, self-control. The widely accepted book holds that low self-control is the main reason that a person initiates all crimes, ranging from murder and rape to burglary and embezzlement. Gottfredson and Hirschi also highlighted, in A General Theory of Crime (1990), that low self-control correlates with personal impulsivity. This impulsive attitude leads individuals to become insensitive to deviant behaviors such as smoking, drinking, illicit sex, and gambling (p. 90). The extreme simplicity, yet accuracy, of Gottfredson’s and Hirschi’s general theory of crime (self-control theory), make it the most empirically supported theory of criminal conduct, as well as deviant acts.

Before one can begin to make a decision to the question of this assignment, one must first understand what “traditional criminological theories” refers to. Traditional theories primarily focus on breaking down how theorists choose to define criminal behavior for males. The theory goes on to also define the criminal behavior for women, which these theorists believe is a one-dimensional idea and is based on stereotypes that have surrounded women throughout history. Traditional criminologists would originally study both genders equally, while also excluding the gender schemes and the terms that are correlated with them (e.g., that is masculine/feminine). Nonetheless, theorists and those that critiqued found that there was issues when explaining the gendered nature of crime.

Feminist criminology emerged out of the realisation that criminology has from its inception centred on men and the crimes they commit. Although it can be argued female criminality was researched by Lombroso, as far back as 1800’s, female crime, it’s causes and the impact in which it had on society was largely ignored by the criminological futurity. Those Criminologist who did attempt to research female crime such as Thomas and Pollak were not only very damning of women but were also very condescending, choosing to stereotype them as either Madonna or whore (Feinman).

In viewing the information contained in the aforementioned articles, one can immediately understand the underlying reasons that women are committing more crimes than men. Through the mid-1990s, the arrest rates of both genders has increased steadily, with the male rate far exceeding that of females (Gross, 2009, pp. 84). However, in recent years, a shift has been seen, with the numbers of female offenders rising significantly, especially at the juvenile level, which significantly raises the likelihood of re-offending later in life. As such, an understanding of the differences between the sexes in terms of the reasoning behind their offenses has long been researched.