The Gender Gap in Rate of Offending Is Closing - Essay Example

THE GENDER GAP IN RATE OF OFFENDING IS CLOSING Introduction The rate of offending among women has not been taken seriously in many countries. There is lack of proper documentation hence the inability to weigh whether or not the numbers have been increasing. According to analyst however the reasons or motives that drive women to crime are far much different from those that drive men (Steffensmeier and Schwartz, 2004). The society also is structured in such a way to discourage women from participating in crime. Again most serious crime calls for aggressiveness, strength and gang membership (Archer, 2000). These characteristics are predominant among men. It is therefore easy to note a difference in the rate of offending between genders. Further it has been suggested that as a result of liberation of women, crimes that were mostly perpetrated by men are now committed by women (Rennison, 2009). This observation is said to be true in urban areas as opposed to rural; developed countries as opposed to developing countries and in races where the level of equality between men and women is high (Chesney-Lind, 2004). In countries such as England statistics show fewer female offending (Office for National Statistics, 2004). There are various theories advanced to explain this phenomenon. To a greater extend the reasons fit traditional theories on crime. Nevertheless, due to relationships, background and upbringing women find themselves in criminal activities. For example a girl who has a boyfriend trafficking drugs or in violent crime may find herself in the same situation (Chesney-Lind, 2002). It also applies to a wife who husband is a gang member. The former may get involved in crime for emotional and relational reasons (Chesney-Lind, 2004). In addition women in abusive relationships are more likely to commit violent crimes. Most cases of homicide originate from abusive relationships (Miller, 2001). “Crimes of a passion” are no different. These among other similar crimes are committed in developed countries where there is greater accessibility to weapons. The issue of whether or not the gap is closing is debatable. However according to official statistics the rate of female offending has increased in minor crimes (Merolla, 2008). Men however continue to dominate in all serious crimes (Steffensmeier D., et al., 2006). Traditional Theories According to traditional theories the level of offence is less in women compared to men due to a number of reasons. First, learning theories allege that females are not so much exposed to the dictates of their peers (Barry, 2007). They are rarely influenced by delinquent peers unlike males. To some extent therefore the social learning theory holds some water. Again, females are less pressured by material success (Chesney-Lind, 2004). In most cultures it is males with the responsibility to accumulate wealth. Secondly, according to social control females are more supervised and are strongly bonded to society (Chesney-Lind, 2004). As a result females have little time and space to get involved in suspicious deals and other criminal activities. Finally in cultural transmission it is less than likely for females to be members of gangs. Gangs require strong leadership and members have to share similar characteristics. Females have less of such traits and unable to carryout functions of a gang (Steffensmeier, et al., 2006). All genders are affected in a similar way with factors such as learning, perceptions and magnitude of risk, control by parents and so forth (Broidy and Agnew, 1997). The findings however are less inclined to explain serious offending (Chesney-Lind, 2004). According to critics the method is even less inclined to address the differences in offending patterns between the genders (Steffensmeier and Allan, 1996). As much as these theories are important in accounting for female offending, they are limited to minor offenses. Traditional theories cannot explain reasons for different paths to crime taken by males and females. Further these theories rely so much on male samples as opposed to female samples (Steffensmeier and Allan, 1996). There is less female data in serious crimes. Yet the greatest differences between genders are in serious offences (Broidy and Agnew 1997). Due to these limitations criminologists are in need of a thorough approach. Shortcomings of Traditional Theories Apart from the fact that traditional theory sheds some light on patterns of crime between the genders, there are shortcomings. To some extent it gives an explanation why the rate of offending among females is less compared to males. Nevertheless there are other differences which cannot be explained by the theories. For instance, it does not address reasons for low level of female offending in serious crimes against persons or property (Steffensmeier and Allan, 1996). Further there is no clarification as to why the rate of female participation in serious crimes is far much less compared to males. There is also less likelihood for females to lead or participate in a group of criminals. Alternatively they are inclined to solo acts of crime or be members of an impermanent criminal group (Steffensmeier and Allan, 1996). Again, when females collaborate with males in crime, they tend to play a passive role. It is men that do the organizing and execution of the main activities (Steffensmeier and Schwartz, 2004). The amount of provocation needed for male and females to indulge in serious crimes also defers greatly. Females require greater provocation than males to get into serious crimes. In most cases they must have suffered as victims, either as adults or children (Steffensmeier, et al., 2006). Records of abnormalities such as neurological or psychological are predominant among female offenders (Steffensmeier and Allan, 1996). Nevertheless despite earlier abuse females tend to show greater educational commitment, responsibility for family and to pursue legitimate income sources. The majority cases of female offending revolve around relationships. Difficult situations in relations put pressure on females to commit serious crimes. There is a tendency to try and protect any threat to a treasured relationship. “Crimes of passion” have been overplayed much a reason in most serious crimes involving women. Research also indicates men are influential in setting off women in crime (Broidy and Agnew, 1997). These risks are undertaken by women to protect relationships and not necessarily turning a deaf ear to the law (Steffensmeier and Allan, 1996). Equality between Genders According to psychologists, sociological explanations to female offending overrun biological factors (Archer, 2000). The reason being rates of offending between genders varies with space and time. On the other hand if it were for biological factors then there would be no such variation. The hypothesis asserts that differences in gender equality best explain gender gap in crime (Rennison, 2009). This is to mean in societies where females are liberated there level of crime is higher. It is also true with power-control theory. Females brought up in egalitarian families are said to have a minimized gender gap in “common delinquency” (Steffensmeier and Allan, 1996). In these egalitarian families, mothers hold equal authority or greater position compared to fathers or alternatively the families have women as heads. Female crime is assumed to be higher with greater equality between genders. The liberation of women has seen to their greater participation in the public domain. They are drivers; go for shopping, work, bank thus seeing to an increase in their rate of arrest (Chesney-Lind, 2004). The most common crimes include fraud, forgery, petty theft and larceny. Nevertheless some group of feminists is opposed to gender equality as a reason for women participation in crime. In fact they argue that inequality is the main cause for crime and poverty among women (Steffensmeier and Allan, 1996). The need for survival, victimization by patriarchal society and economic marginalization all act as a push factor to crime (Miller, 2001). Explanation to Gendered Crime Patterns There are various theories to explain the rise in girls offending. Some of the theories are the same as those used to explain male participation in crime. These are especially those to do with sociological background. The most common is social status, educational background and whether or not one is employed. Criminal activities are predominant in low status, uneducated, unemployed or the under-employed (Merolla, 2008). The levels are also higher in minority groups which may arise from the above stated reasons. Nevertheless females have specific push factors such as young dependants. In most cases females are most likely to be driven into crime as a means to provide for dependant children more than men (Steffensmeier and Schwartz, 2004). Crime Trends According to official statistics at no time has the level of female offending come any closer to that of men (Office for National Statistics, 2004). In England and Wales generally more crimes are committed by men. This applies in all major categories of crime (Office for National Statistics, 2004). Approximately 90 per cent of those guilty of robbery, criminal damage, drug offences or burglary are male. The trend shows a little variation in theft cases with 57 per cent females compared to 34 per cent male (Office for National Statistics, 2004). Violent crime has more male victims compared to females. Less than 3 per cent of females over 16 years of age were reported to be victims of violent crime in 2001(Office for National Statistics, 2004). This cannot be compared to males who had more than 5 per cent victimization in the same year. However, women faced higher risks in domestic violence (Office for National Statistics, 2004). Again vulnerability to stranger violence is higher in men compared to women. In the United State since early 1980s and mid 1990s the level of crime has been relatively stable. However, the rate of crime committed by juveniles in the same period increased (Chesney-Lind, 2004). Statistics in the mid nineties show an increase in crime among adolescents. This caught the public eye hence concerns were raised about the emerging trend. Statistics pointed to about 70 per cent increase in the number of youth arrested for violent crimes. From 1983 the rates of youth arrested for homicide increased by approximately 300 per cent (Chesney-Lind, 2004). According to criminologists the trend could be explained in a number of ways. The explanation applied mostly on boys as opposed to the girls. First, there were new crack markets introduced in the inner-cities (Barry, 2007). Secondly, guns become more accessible to juveniles. Finally gangs become involved in gun markets and the crack. The problem therefore originated from gangs but soon conflicts among youth could not be solved without use of guns. The victims of violence were mostly young men of color and boys hence prompting the media to focus of boys (Chesney-Lind, 2004). All along drivers of violent arrest statistics were boys. This continued up to mid-nineties where there was a sharp decline in boys’ arrests (Chesney-Lind, 2004). On the contrary statistics on girls did not show any decline. In fact in a duration of about a decade (1992- 2003) saw a 6.4 per cent increase in girls arrest, compared to an astonishing 16.4 per cent decline in the boys’ arrest (Chesney-Lind, 2004). During this period the rate of crime among boys and girls decreased on a number of violent crimes. Despite this girls had a 7 per cent increase in arrest for aggravated assault compared to a 29.1 per cent decrease among boys for the same crime (Chesney-Lind, 2004). Similarly, arrest for assault increased by approximately 50 per cent among girls. The same was recorded at 4.3 per cent for boys (Chesney-Lind, 2004). Again between the years 1990 and 1999, girls’ delinquency cases increased. This was by a staggering 59 per cent compared to boys’ 19 per cent increase (Chesney-Lind, 2004). There were more girls being referred to juvenile courts. These cases were being sourced from school officials, police and parents. It was therefore observed that in all categories of offence, the growth involving females outpaced the growth involving males. However, cases in simple assault recorded the highest increase compared to any other offence (Steffensmeier and Schwartz 2004). Even in this females had an upper hand with 136 per cent increase compared to 80 per cent increase in males (Chesney-Lind, 2004). Most importantly is the fact that there has been an increase in girls’ detention. This follows a close focus on deinstitutionalization in the past few decades. The percentage increase in the number of girls being detained was higher 56 per cent compared to a 20 per cent increase recorded among boys (Chesney-Lind, 2004). In these years 1989- 1998 the sharp growth was a result of increase in delinquency cases involving women. It is therefore clear that more girls were being arrested in the last decade for non-traditional crimes. Reasons for the alleged Increase in Female Offending Criminologists have noted the level of violent behavior among girls has not increased over time. There must be therefore an explanation to the increase in rates of arrest for females in the last few decades. There are three possible suggestions to these trends; upcriming, relabelling and rediscovery of female offences (Chesney-Lind, 2004). Relabelling of crimes can be the most obvious and likely to affect and influence statistics on crime. In the recent past violent offences have come to include behaviors that were once categorized under status offences. It is not new for offences which were termed non-criminal such as “runaway” to find new labels (Chesney-Lind, 2004). The practices of police officers in regard to domestic violence have also been changing over the years. Domestic violence has increased the rate of female arrests in a number of States. For instance in California between 1988 and 1998, the rate of female arrests for domestic violence increased by 16.5 per cent up from 6 per cent (Chesney-Lind, 2004). Most of the assaults reported involve non serious offences such as confrontations with parents, mutual combat etc. There are instances when it becomes apparent that the child is the victim and not the parent as reported (Luritsen and Heimer, 2008). Most of the girls find themselves abused in their entire childhood. Once they grow up they attempt to revenge only to be arrested (Chesney-Lind, 2002). The real character of the females has been stereotyped over the years. Females were perceived as passive and weak. The truth is that girls are more violent, likely to carry weapons and engage in fights. In the past aggression by females was not criminalized as most people perceived it as trivial (Chesney-Lind, 2004). Parents, teachers and authorities were more concerned about sexuality of girls as opposed violence. This is changing thus rising arrests by female offenders. Similarly, it is now more likely for females to be arrested for crimes that were earlier ignored. This comes as a result of changes in policy for instance “zero tolerance policy”. Indiscipline cases such as bullying, fights at school were once addressed by school administration and parents (Chesney-Lind, 2004). This has changed over the years as school principals involve police in such assaults. There are cases where no one is injured but arrests are still made by the police. Interdependence of Rates of Crime between the Genders There are studies to show a close dependence between the rate of crime of both male and female. In times when the male rate of crime increases the same also occurs in females. Similarly if the rate of crime reduces among males it also does the same among females. This shows criminal activities are mostly control by certain sociological or legal factors that cut across the board (Steffensmeier and Allan, 1996). In societies where the rate of crime among males is high the same applies to women. The response of both males and females to the surrounding environment is therefore similar. The environment can either work in favor or otherwise to participation in crime. In such a case individual characteristics can be important in explaining involvement in crime. There should therefore be as many approaches as possible to explain the offending between the genders. Is it in-born characteristic among males to commit violent crimes? or the manner of upbringing has a say in their behavior. Once criminologists are able to answer this question then it would be possible to determine and explain the gap in offending. Conclusion It is beyond no doubt that the gender gap in offending is lessening. Criminologists try to bring into perspectives a numbers of reasons and theories to explain this phenomenon. First, the changing nature of the society accounts for some of the reasons for an increase in offending among females. A few decades ago society was structured in such a way that females took a passive role in almost everything in the public domain. It was not only shameful but unacceptable for females to participate in crime. Similarly there were few statistics and data on female offending in most countries. The reason for this reluctance is that offences by females were not taken seriously. However, recent trends show lack of tolerance to crime. It matters little the degree or the doer of the crime. Young men and women are arrested for offenses that were earlier ignored or left for school authorities. Again, parents and school principals readily report fights and assaults to police. This reporting has been noted to raise statistics on female offending. Nevertheless most crimes committed by females are minor thus a shortcoming of traditional theories. The low level of participation of females in serious crimes is not explained. Males compared to females are more inclined to serious crimes. Males are able to form and be leaders of gangs. The magnitude and sophistication of crimes undertaken by males is quiet high. On the other hand females rarely form gangs and or become leaders of gangs. If they are to join gangs they play a passive role. As much as gender gap seem to be closing in a number of minor offences still male dominate in serious offences. The crimes committed by females are normally relational and tend to involve men. Females are in most cases pushed into offending out of serious provocation, revenge or poverty. There are those who are victims of abuse in their childhood or as adults. Most of them end up on the streets thus find themselves in the wrong hands of the law. It is therefore true to say the gap has lessened but the reason is not necessarily an increase in violent nature of females. References Archer, J., 2000. Sex differences in aggression between heterosexual partners: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 12, pp. 651-680. Barry, M., 2007. Youth Offending in Transition: The Search for Social Recognition. British Journal of Criminology, Vol. 47(4) pp. 707-709 Broidy, L & Agnew, R., 1997. Gender and Crime: A general strain theory perspective. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, Vol. 34(3), pp 275-306 Chesney-Lind, M., 2002. Criminalizing victimization: The unintended consequences of pro-arrest politics for girls and women. Criminology & Public Policy, Vol. 2, pp 81-90 Chesney-Lind, M., 2004. Girls and Violence: Is the Gender Gap Closing? Harrisburg PA: VAWnet, a project of National Resource Centre on Violence against Women. Retrieved on 30 November 2009 from http://www.vawnet.org Luritsen L. J. & Heimer K., 2008. The Gender Gap in Violent Victimization, 1973-2004. Journal of Quantitative Criminology Vol. 24(2) pp 255-147 Merolla D., 2008. The War on Drugs and the Gender Gap in Arrests: A Critical Perspective. Critical Sociology Vol. 34(2) pp 255-270 Miller L. S. (2001). The Paradox of Women Arrested in Domestic Violence. Violence Against Women, Vol. 7(12) pp.1339-1376 Office for National Statistics, 2004. Focus on Gender. Criminal Statistics, England and Wales 2001. Retrieved on 1 December 2009 from http://www.statistics.gov.uk/CCI/nugget.asp?ID=442 Rennison, M.C., 2009. A New Look at the Gender Gap in Offending. Women and Criminal Justice. Vol. 19 (3). pp 179-190 Steffensmeier, D & Allan, E., 1996. Gender and Crime: Toward a Gendered theory of female offending. Annual Sociological Review 22; 459-87 Steffensmeier, D., & Schwartz, J., 2004. Trends in Female Crime: Is crime still a man’s world? In B. Price & N. Sokoloff (Eds.), The criminal justice system and women: Offenders, victims and workers pp 96- 127. New York: Mc Graw-Hill Steffensmeier D., et al., 2006. Gender Gap Trends in Violent Crimes, 1980-2003. Feminist Criminology, Vol. 1(1) pp. 72-98 Read More