Liberation PDF

Preview

Summary

Female Criminality and Women's Liberation Hypothesis...

Description

Page1

Women’s Liberation Hypothesis

Unit code:

CCJ215 Gender, Crime and Justice

Unit tutor:

Dr Sharon Hayes

Assignment:

Essay Assignment 2

Word count:

2397

Page2 Over recent years the media has over emphasised the rate of female violent crime, often portraying an epidemic in female criminality. This essay aims to look at female crime more closely and determine whether the Women’s Liberation Hypothesis has resulted in increased female crime-especially aggressive violent crime to levels similar to that of men. Firstly, this essay will discuss the origins of the women’s liberation hypothesis, and the argument of increased female criminality. Secondly, the literature will discuss the increase of property and drug offences for females and whether statistics support the women’s liberation hypothesis. Finally alternative explanations will be discussed into the role of female offending. This essay will therefore argue that the women’s liberation hypothesis is unjustified in stating that female violent crimes are increasing.

Female criminality during the second wave of feminism was merely as its infancy, with little discussion of the role of women involved in crime (Swartz & Steffensmeier, 2015). Crime during this period was generally sighted as predominantly male, with little scholarly attention brought to the aforementioned ‘female offender’ (Swartz & Steffensmeier, 2015). It wasn’t until the 1970’s when increased publications of female crime became to surface, one being Freda Adler’s (1975) publication, Sisters in Crime, which suggested that crime was no longer a male preserve-women were no longer taking on the subservient, passive roles in traditional homemaking-women were ultimately closing the gaps in social and criminal inequality. Adler’s (1975) predominant argument suggested that as women gained increased economic and social opportunities from being ‘emancipated’, female criminality will resemble male crime rates-in particular violent crime. This argument later became known as the Women’s Liberation (Emancipation) Hypothesis (Naffine, 2016). Adler (1975) asserted that the new ‘breed’ of female criminal rests on two important aspects, one being that the emancipation and freedom of women has brought female competitiveness instincts to the forefront, the second being that women have now become more assertive, aggressive and masculine in how they perceive themselves (Adler, 1975). Furthermore, it was further argued that as women became increasingly liberated in their day to day activities, structural opportunities would open up new ways for women to offend- in particular within the workplace (Naffine, 2016). Adler (1977) posits “When we consider that the barriers which once protected male prerogatives are breaking down and socially defined gender roles are looking increasingly alike, it should come as no surprise that once women are armed with male opportunities they would endeavour to gain status criminal as well as civil” (p102). In other words, as women strive for equality through legitimate means, they are also emulating men through illegitimate means (major crime) (Adler, 1975).

Similar to that of Adler, Simon (1975) contends that a major by-product of women’s liberation within the workplace, would presumably result in higher rates of crime. Simon’s position is ho-

Page3 mogenous with Adler, in that various property crimes will be increasing, including white collar crime, however she contends that violent crime will not increase, whereas Adler takes the opposite view (Naffine, 2016). The reasoning why violent crimes are not expected to increase according to Simon (1975), is primarily due women turing to violent crime, purely out of frustration and dependancy that is characterised within the traditional female role. Women who kill, do so at a point where they can no longer contain their frustrations on someone close to them whether that be a partner, child or a close friend, and act out once feeling threatened (Simon, 1975). Furthermore, as women’s educational and employment opportunities increase, feelings of being exploited, harassed and victimised will decrease, thus alleviating the motivation to kill (Simon, 1975).

It is rare that ideas and theories brought forth within criminological literature do not spark at least some form of scholarly debate, however one of the few notions that can be agreed upon is that males commit crime at a higher rate than that of females (Roth & King, 2019). A phenomenon referred to by Heimer (2000) as the gender gap in crime. Researchers have noted that over the past few decades, the gender gap in female offending has narrowed, this lead Heimer (2000) to examine the role of female offending from 1960-1997 using Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) obtained from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Through analysis it was determined that there was a steady increase in female property crime (theft, larceny, forgery) as well as an increase in certain white-collar crimes such as embezzlement (Heimer, 2000). However, violent crime, such as murder has been on a consistent downward trend since the early 1960’s (Heimer, 2000). More recently, UCR statistics from the United States, from 2009-2018, show major increases in motor vehicle theft, stolen property and drug abuse violations (U.S Department of Justice , 2018). For example, where women in 2009 accounted for 8,601 arrests for motor vehicle theft, this number jumped to 12,465 female arrests in 2018, an almost 45% increase (U.S Department of Justice , 2018) The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS, 2018) reported in 2016-2017, the female offender rate rose 2% nationally since 2015-2016, whereas male offenders decreased 2% in 2016-2017. From the period of 2008-2017, ABS (2018) found that while female violent crimes remained relatively stable over the years, property crime increased from 23, 139 theft offences in 2008-2009, to 26, 687 offences in 2016-17. Homicide, robbery and assault remained stable over the nine year period, with males dominating the majority of violent crimes especially for assault related crimes ((m) 61,607 offences vs (f) 16,120 offences 2016-17) (ABS, 2018). However, a substantial increase in female drug offences emerged from 10,100 offences in 2008-2009 to an incredible 19, 448 offences in 2016-17 (ABS, 2018). Harmon and O’Brien (2011) found a similar pattern in the narrowing of the gender gap for females incarcerated for drug offences. Between 1965-2008 drug offences in the United States rose from 11% in 1979, to 32% in 2002, compared to males to reached a total of 21% of drug convic-

Page4 tions (Harmon & O’Brien, 2011). While males still represent the majority of drug related offences, women are now making up the fastest growing sub-group of individuals incarcerated for illicit drug offences (Harmon & O’Brien, 2011). Fox and Fridel (2017) examined trends in homicide and manslaughter between males and females between the years of 1976-2015 using the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Reports (SHR) through gendered differences in age, race, weapon circumstances and victim-offender relationships. The results of the study indicated that 90% of perpetrators of homicide are male, with female offenders exhibiting stable patterns of violent offending and still declining since the 1970’s, while their male counterparts have been fluctuating substantial rates over the course of 40 years (Fox & Fridel, 2017). Furthermore, the authors found that females were less likely to commit violent offences than males, and only do so as a defence mechanism or as a last resort (Fox & Fridel, 2017). Rennison (2009) took a different approach to examining whether female rates of violence are increasing by using data obtained from the National Crime Victim Survey from 1992-2001, instead of using common arrest data from the UCR. The reason for using victim surveys according to Rennison (2009) is that police records (arrest records) can be limited in terms generalisability, often excluding important individual level characteristics. The use of victimisation data on the other hand, use nationally generalisable data-allowing for the simultaneous consideration for offenders age, race and gender (Rennison , 2009). Findings from the study determine that female offender violence compared to male offender violence is not the growing epidemic the media makes it appear (Rennison, 2009). The relationship between gender and violent offending is still best described as relatively stable across comparisons. Moreover, violent offending for females appears to be low, with a lack of evidence supporting an appeared increase in violence, regardless of race and age (Rennison, 2009). It can therefore be determined that females are less likely to be violent than males, with the majority of their offences property, economic and drug related (Chesney-Lind & Pasko, 2004).The evidence presented determines that female crime is increasing but only in certain property and drug related offences and therefore does not support Adler’s (1975) liberation hypothesis that female crime-particularly aggressive crime is increasing due to gained social and economic independence from men.

While Sisters in Crime (Adler, 1975) received national and international attention and prominence on explanations of female criminality, it also received significant criticism and debate on the topic (Hartman & Sundt, 2011). Critics argued that Adler’s work was merely short sighted, incomplete and contradictory (Hartman & Sundt, 2011). Criticisms brought forth by Steffensmeier (1978, 1993, Steffensmeier, Painter-Davis & Ulmer, 2017) argue that women are not committing more violent crimes, while arrest rates for females have been slightly increasing over time, it is in no way similar to that of men’s offending. Moreover, due to females historically having lower rates of arrest than

Page5 their male counterparts, any minor increase in female crime rates will show up in data sources as a relatively high percentage rate (Steffensmeier, 1978). Naffine (2016) challenges Adler’s methodology by asserting that her argument is largely unfounded and meagre of her evidence towards a female crime wave. Furthermore, the ‘female offender’ has complex and rational motives towards committing crime, therefore women do not see the need to catch up to male offending rates (Naffine, 2016). What can be agreed upon however, is the argument presented by Simon (1975) that minor property and white collar crimes have increased with more arrests of women for theft, fraud and forgery (Steffensmeier, 1993). Conversely, Steffensmeier (1993) argues that the link between increased employment opportunities for females and increased crime is relatively insufficient. Watson (1993) examined 600 arrests for female minor property and economic crimes in Pennsylvania for three randomly selected months between 1989-1990. The author found that there was no occupational (work related) crimes committed in 1989, but four occupational arrests in 1990 for two females and two males (Watson ,1993). It was ultimately determined in the study that employee theft or other work related crimes were relatively rare, with males committing the majority of occupational crimes (Watson, 1993., Steffensmeier, 1993., U.S Department of Justice, 2018). Steffensmeier (1993) further challenges the liberation hypothesis by claiming that arrest rates were greater prior to the second wave of feminism in the 1970’s, which disputes Adler’s (1975) and Simon’s (1975) prediction that female rates of crime increased as women gained greater liberation opportunities through the workforce. Furthermore, any indication of substantial increases in female criminality should be taken into careful consideration due to female crime being relatively small compared to male criminality (Steffensmeier, 1993).

Alternative explanations into the rise of minor crime for females can be argued with two compelling hypothesises from economic marginalisation (Heimer, 2000) and net-widening policies (Wang & Stamatel, 2019). The Economic Marginalisation Hypothesis proposes that increased financial hardship of women including unemployment and poverty lead to female criminality (Heimer, 2000). The hypothesis asserts that economic circumstances and crime are positively correlated, as female marginalisation increases this leads to a narrowing of the gender gap in crime (Heimer, 2000). Parker and Hefner (2015) investigated how the role of race, gender and disadvantage influences rates of homicide for African-American and White women over an extended period of time. Their macro-level analysis examined cities with a population of 100, 000 or more in 1990, then reexamining these changes in 2000 using Supplemental Homicide Reports from The UCR (Parker & Hefner, 2015). The results from the study found support for resource deprivation and the link to female crime (Parker & Hefner, 2015). African-American females generally experienced higher of depriva-

Page6 tion than White females, for example 50% deprivation for African Americans and 23% for White women respectively (Parker & Hefner, 2015). Similarly, Reckdenwald and Parker (2008) explored the role of economic marginalisation and crime and found support for females who were living in deprivation and the link to drug sales and robbery. Moreover, economic marginalisation was not only linked to economically motivated offences but also played a role in female-perpetrated Intimate Partner Homicide (IPH) (Reckdenwald & Parker, 2008). Schwartz and Steffensmeier (2008) argue that changing rates of female crime over the course of four decades can be the result of netwidening policies, which assumes that minor female crime rates have increased due to the changing attitudes within the criminal justice system. Net-widening theory suggests that female crime is rising due to changes in societal attitudes in citizens and the criminal justice system that have gone from sympathetic to more punitive changes in the punishment of females (Wang & Stamatel, 2019). Heimer (2000) argued that increases in female offending may be attributed to law enforcement being less ‘chivalrous’ towards females who break the law, and more likely to punish formally hidden female criminals to the full extent. Schwartz (2013) analysed six developing countries to determine whether female offending has increased, and if there is any causal link to female behaviour and changes to treatment of women in the criminal justice system over time. Her conclusions determined that net-widening policies were positively associated to changing attitudes towards females in the criminal justice system (Schwartz, 2013). Similar findings were also found by Wang and Stamatel (2019) which found support for net-widening for females cross-nationally, in instances where certain countries had more formal social control and discretion were more likely to be represented in the criminal justice system. The following perspectives argue that alternate explanations into female criminality have more validity than the women’s liberation hypothesis.

In conclusion, the women’s liberation hypothesis shows some merit for the increases in female property and economic crimes, however the argument that female crimes are becoming increasingly aggressive and violent, similar to that of men is largely unfounded. Minor property, economic and drug offences have been steadily increasing over the years for females, yet serious female violent crimes have been declining since the 1970’s. The evidence presented determines that females are in no way near as violent as males, with males comprising the majority of violent crimes. Criticisms of the theory have determined it’s weak methodology, therefore alternate explanations into female crime, such as the economic marginalisation hypothesis and net-widening policies have been thoroughly discussed. Therefore it can be said that, economic and social liberation from men has not increased violent crimes as the women’s liberation hypothesis suggests.

Page7

Reference List

Adler, F. (1975). Sisters in Crime: The Rise of the new Female Criminal. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.

Adler, F. (1977) The interaction between women’s emancipation and female criminality: A Crosscultural perspective. International Journal of Criminology and Penology, 5, 101-112.

Australian Bureau of Statistics (2018) Recorded Crime-Offenders 2016-2017, Australia, 2018 (Catalogue No. 4519.0) Retrieved from https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/Lookup/by %20Subject/4519.0~2016-17~Main%20Features~Offenders,%20Australia~3

Page8

Chesney-Lind, M. & Pasko, L. (2004). The Female Offender: Girls, Women and Crime. (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Fox, J. A., & Fridel, E. E. (2017). Gender differences in patterns and trends in U.S. Homicide, 1976–2015. Violence and Gender, 4(2), 37-43. doi:10.1089/vio.2017.0016

Harmon, M. G., & O'Brien, R. M. (2011). Gendered arrests or gendered sentencing: Explaining the narrowing of the gender gap in imprisonment over time: 1970–2008. Sociological Perspectives, 54(4), 641-664. doi:10.1525/sop.2011.54.4.641

Hartman, J. L., & Sundt, J. L. (2011) The Rise of Feminist Criminology: Freda Adler. In F.T Cullen., C. L Jonson., A. J. Myer., & F. Adler (Eds.) The Origins in American Criminology: Advances in Criminological Theory Volume 16. (p 205-223). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

Heimer, K. (2000). Changes in the Gender Gap in Crime and Women's Economic Marginalisation. Criminal Justice 1, 427-483. Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/criminal_justice2000/vol_1/02i.pdf

Naffine. N. (2016) Female Crime: The Construction of Women in Criminology (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.

Parker, K. F., & Hefner, M. K. (2015). Intersections of race, gender, disadvantage, and violence: Applying intersectionality to the macro-level study of female homicide. Justice Quarterly, 32(2), 223-254. doi:10.1080/07418825.2012.761719

Reckdenwald, A., & Parker, K. F. (2008). The influence of gender inequality and marginalisation on types of female offending. Homicide Studies, 12(2), 208-226. doi:10.1177/1088767908314270

Rennison, C. M. (2009). A new look at the gender gap in offending. Women & Criminal Justice, 19(3), 171-190. doi:10.1080/08974450903001461

Page9

Roth, J. J., & King, L. L. (2019). Sex-based predictors of male and female property crime arrest rates: Disadvantage and drug use. Women & Criminal Justice, 29(2), 112-127. doi:10.1080/08974454.2018.1502724

Schwartz, J. (2013). A ‘new’ female offender or increasing social control of women’s behaviour? Cross-national evidence. Feminist Studies, 39(3), 790–821. Retrieved from https://www-jstor-org.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/stable/23719437?pq-origsite=summon&seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents

Schwartz, J. & Steffensmeier, D. (2008) The Nature of Female Offending: Patterns and Explanations. In R. T. Zaplin (Ed.) Female Offenders: Critical Perspectives and Effective Interventions. (2nd ed.). (p 43-77). Boston, MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.

Schwartz, J & Steffensmeier D. (2015). Can the Gender Gap in Offending be explained? In F. T Cullen., P. Wilcox., J.L. Lux & C. L. Jonson (Eds.). Sisters in Crime Revisited: Bringing Gender into Criminology. (p 229-260). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Simon, R. J. (1975) Women in Crime. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

Steffensmeier, D. J. (1978). Crime and the contemporary woman: An analysis of changing levels of female property crime, 1960-75. Social Forces, 57(2), (p 566-584). doi:10.1093/sf/57.2.566

Steffensmeier, D. (1993). National trends in female arrests, 1960–1990: Assessment and recommendations for research. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 9(4), (p 411-441). doi:10.1007/BF01064111

Steffensmeier, D., Painter-Davis, N., & Ulmer, J. (2017). Intersectionality of race, ethnicity, gender, and age on criminal punishmen...