Gelsthorpe (1990) argued that women are discriminated against areas such as crime because of their sex and this sexism influences the sentencing, punishment and incarceration of women. She indicts many police, welfare institutions and judges among others as assuming ‘sweeping generalisations’ about crime as something men are likely to do, because they are men’ (Gelsthorpe, 1990:149). Women are not expected to be criminals and if they are, they may be described as ‘mad not bad’ (Lloyd, 1995).
Lombroso and Ferrero (1885) are one of the earliest criminologists who looked at female criminals in the biological context. Their work included assessing skulls of offenders and studying their appearance from photographs. Within their observation they were looking for signs of ‘degeneration or atavism’ (Burke, R. H. 2001). Their work concluded that women offenders had fewer signs of deterioration as they were seen to evolve much less than men. Lombroso argued that females were either born as criminals, these females, were believed to be atavistic, or throwbacks to primitive genetic traits. Natural attributes in their personality were seen to deprive women from breaking the law. Those women, who were seen to be criminal, were regarded to be cruel and evil like. They are seen as unnatural, masculine and ‘an inversion of all the qualities, which specially distinguish the normal woman; namely reverse, docility and sexual apathy’ (Lombroso and Ferrero, 1885 in Burke, R. H. 2001:162).
Thomas (1907) similar to Ferrero and Lombroso put a lot of emphasis within the passive nature of women, he argued that women are very emotional and have the need to give and receive this ultimately leads them into crime such as prostitution. Klein (1976) argues that Thomas is ignorant of economic hardships in his denial of economic factors in delinquency. Klein had recognised that there are needs to understand traditional views of female criminality but after we must break away from them (Klein, 1976 in Heidensohn, F. 1996).
Looking at these early traditional views on women’s criminality we can argue that it assumes women are controlled by their biology and they cannot fend for themselves and quite incapable for rational thinking. Early feminists reject the biological theories and argue that the work of Lombroso lacks methodological adequacy, his sample is not seen to be reliable within his theory of atavism and criminal behaviour.
Psychological theories of women’s criminality is very much linked within the works of Freud. Freud (1927) argued that females are biologically inferior to males (White, R. D. 2000). He believed defective qualities in females were a result of a ‘masculinity complex’ or even ‘penis envy’. His theory uncovered that females are seen to be unable to overcome theory of Oedipal conflict, thus making them morally inferior, in turn confusing them to become morally weak and unable to control their impulses. Freud’s theories is seen to be open to many criticisms and are not always seen as valid within the study of female criminality. It is believed that inferiority in females is not due to Oedipal conflict, but simply because of the unnatural relationship of male dominance that exists between the sexes.
Socio-economic theorists have also looked at female criminality and they reject the claim, that it is the masculinisation of the female that is the cause of female crime, but rather an ‘illegitimate’ expression of the role of expectations. Females are seen here more likely to engage in criminal behaviour, when legitimate avenues for reaching social goals are closed to them, but illegitimate left open. Concluding they argue that female criminality is related to their socialisation, and opportunities or even lack of these factors. Studies within this branch indicate that women are more likely to be economically disadvantaged and therefore more likely to conform to crime.
Second wave feminism started in the late 1960’s and was called the ‘women’s liberation movement’, devoted to greater social, political, and economic equality. It focused on the liberation of women and moderate correctives to the role of women in society. Looking at liberal feminism, we get to realise the importance of the subordination of women within our social structure. Liberal feminists argue that women are constantly undermined within research and that any empirical investigation should include women in the sample (Gelsthorpe, L 2002 in Maguire, M. et al. (ed) 2002). Liberal feminists work within women and crime may not have been radical, but they had looked at the sexual differences of women who commit crime. Liberal feminists identify the work of Pollack (1950) as being a study of discriminatory practice as well as being a study, which looks at the influence of chivalry which plays in the under-documenting of women’s criminality (Walklate, S. 1998). Feminists within this branch identify the fact that there are family issues, personal issues and other factors, which may influence women to offend ().
In contrast to liberal feminism, radical feminism concentrates more on men’s oppression of women rather than on other social conditions that might result in women’s subordination. Radical feminists place great emphasis within the branch of ‘victim studies’. Radical feminists however, are seen to place greater emphasis on the term ‘survivor’ rather than ‘victim’. Since that term implies a more positive and active role for women in their daily routine lives. In the last decade male violence towards women has become a central focus of feminist politics and a contentious social issues in all the countries where women’s liberation has emerged in any strength.
Radical feminists are criticised for their ‘biological determinism’ (Burke, R. H. 2001). Another criticism would be that it sees patriarchy as an all-pervasive collective idea which, works the same in all directions, subsequently it fails to look at differences in the experiences of women across time and liberty which also takes account of class and ethnic differences (Jagger, 1983 in Burke, R. H. 2001).
Now looking at socialist feminism we get to see the works of Messerschmidt being very influential. He had identified two key ideas. Firstly to grasp criminality by looking at patriarchy and capitalism. Secondly the concept of power to understand serious forms of criminality (Walklate, S. 1998). It was seen that the powerful are the ones who commit the most offences and damage our society. Carlen (1990) recognises the importance of feminism as a politics rather than as a guarantor of theoretical or empirical truth. She argues that that focus on women’s behaviour assumes that women break the law for different reasons than men do. Carlen’s work on women and prison found that those whom are imprisoned, their criminalisation are over determined by the threefold effect of racism, sexism and classism. Socialist feminists have been seen to bring together the diverse accounts of assorted feminist methods however it has been open to criticism by black feminists for the inclination to deny the diversity of experiences that different women have.
Post-modern feminism is seen to have little impact upon criminology but yet its seen to be very influential. This branch of feminism is concerned to address the positive side of being the ‘other’ that is, outside mainstream thinking and concerns. This ‘otherness’ shows openness, plurality, diversity and difference, and it is an importance which portrays problematic any uncritical or universalising use of the term ‘women’ or ‘men’ to denote all women or all men. Post modernism tries to give voice to those silenced by the discourses of modernism (Walklate, S. 1998). Young (1992) argued that females are always criminal and deviant, and the behaviour is very normal (Walklate, S. 1998). Post modern feminism substitutes language production for economic production and studies how discourse and male-dominated thinking is used to set women apart.
Black feminism and postmodern feminism provide both critiques of other feminist accounts and also their own perspectives that recognise the different ‘experiences of women and of their subordination’ (Burke, R. H. 2001:161). Black feminists give critical perspectives and educate people alongside within the study of female criminality.
One of the main influential studies conducted by feminist criminologists is the crime committed by men to women. This is rape and domestic violence. Feminists wanted women to be protected but Adler (1982) accounted that very few women are protected from these crimes. This has enabled the police to set up special suites where the victims can be looked at and helped (Burke, R. H. 2001). Looking at domestic violence we can agree that it is seen a lot more seriously than it had been in the past. Firstly there are now legal provisions established in order to protect women and children from this behaviour. Secondly it has led to an increased reporting of the offence. Feminist theory is seen to take to pieces the long-standing ‘dichotomy of the devilish and daring criminal man’ (Naffine, 1987 in Walklate, S. 1998). Different feminists pose different questions for criminology and genders criminology in different ways. More recently criminology has attempted to place men and masculinity more directly on criminological agenda.
To conclude we will find that feminist studies have ultimately urged writers within this branch to develop new theories that engaged in negative and/or reactive ventures and/or criticised social, theoretical, and political relations, thereby challenging theories that currently existed. Feminist criminologists have clearly challenged the male-centeredness, political and ontology of the field of criminology and its expansion of crime and justice system practice. This is not always in forms that make the theoretical roots apparent, but in forceful and unmistakable ways that question the theory of knowledge and methodological processes of criminology. Gender issues have been seen to broadened the field of criminology analysis, opening up opportunities for the examination of female criminality but at the same time the possibility of an assessment of masculinity, male power and violence drawing up on broader feminist debates. Smart (1976) argued that studies of women’s criminality will enable one to understand its effect on the moral, political, economic and sexual spheres which influences their position in society. Feminist criminology will allow women to be understood more coherently and effectively and find how they can transform existing social practices.
This essay has shown the importance of feminism for criminology as it challenges the mainstream or the so-called male-stream criminology and also attempts to eradicate sexist concepts from early criminologists as they are criticised for failing to explain the criminal behaviour of women. Feminist criminologists point out the fact that traditional criminology theories have failed to address the different ways women were treated by the criminal justice system. Feminist criminology highlights how men and women differ in their experiences within the criminal justice system and how they should be seen within criminology.
Bibliography
Burke, H. R. (2001) An Introduction to Criminological Theory (Cullompton: Willan Press)
Carlen, P. (1990) Alternatives to Women’s imprisonment (Milton Keynes: Open university press)
Gelsthorpe, L. (1990) Feminist Perspectives in Criminology (Milton Keynes: Open university press)
Gelsthorpe, L. and Morris, A. (1990) Feminist Perspectives in Criminology: New Directions in Criminology (Milton Keynes: Open university press)
Heidensohn, F. (ed) (1996) Women and Crime (London: Macmillan)
Lloyd, A (ed) (1995) Women and Violence (Harmondsworth: Penguin)
Maguire, R., Morgan, R, and Reiner, R. (ed) (2002) The Oxford Handbook of Criminology (Oxford: Oxford university press)
Naffine, N. (1997) Feminism and Criminology (Cambridge: Polity Press)
Smart, C. (1976) Women, Crime and Criminology: A feminist critique (London: Roultedge)
Walklate, S. (1998) Understanding Criminology (Buckingham: Open university press)
White, R. D. (ed) (2000) Crime and Criminology: An introduction (Oxford: Oxford university press).
Website
.
