“Sloping foreheads, receding chins, excessively long arms” Walklate (2005:9)
On the basis of these remarks he constructed four criminal types, the insane, the opportunist, the passionate and the born criminal. He found out that all of them shared differently in their features, except for the born criminal, which represented the true atavistic type. In other words Lombroso was using Darwin’s ideas in order to give a general explanation to criminal behaviour. He believed that people where criminals because they had a drawback in their biological make-up. Since these genetic differences are beyond the male or females control there could be an implication that Lombroso theories meant that it was not the criminals fault they engaged in criminal activity. This then raises question such as, can these abnormities be cured scientifically and how can criminals be punished if their actions are beyond their control? In returning again back to Darwin’s theory the highest evolution in his point of view was the white, Caucasian, heterosexual male. Women for Darwin were different, they were closer to nature than men because their biological development enables them to produce off-spring. He went as far to say that,
“They suffered from arrested development” Walklate (2005:11)
Therefore if male criminals had a development backlash, female criminals had a double biological backlash. As a result of his findings female criminals where seen as double deviant because they were perceived as not only broke the law but also as having lapsed their gender roles. This gives a slight insight into the sexist views of traditional criminology. William Shedon continued the basis of linking body shape to behaviour by the famous ‘body type’ theory. The theory divided the human body into three categories, firstly, endomorphs, a heavy, soft or rounded build with the personality traits of relaxed, sociable for example an outgoing person personality. Secondly, mesomorphs for example well-developed, muscular, athletic build with an active, dynamic, aggressive sometimes violent personality. Then lastly ectomorph, small, lean, weak built with the personality traits of hypersensitive, intellectual, for example a shy personality. Shedon continued by explaining that some individuals where pure types while others were hybrid as they contained two or three of the body types. Sheldon argued that,
“delinquents were characterized by a preponderance of mesomorphs, some indication of endomorph, and a marked lack of etcomorphs.” Hale et al (2005:666)
He also concluded that this pattern differed in non-criminal populations which supported his theory that there were differences in the physical type of criminals and non-criminals. Shedon believed that he could tell if a human being, either male or female was a criminal by investigating his or her body type and personality traits. Another biological theory which had been studied throughout the twentieth century is the Genetic transmission theory which relates to the passing of genes to the next generation. This is the idea that criminals are born from genetic inheritance, simply stated, born with the criminal gene. Several famous studies have been investigated to try in determining this theory. An example is in the 1920’s, where a German physician Johannes Lange began the study of twins where their criminal records were contrasted. Another good example is by Raymond Crowe 1974 and Barry Hutchings and Sarnoff Mednicks 1975 study in the criminal development of adopted twins. In this study the aim was to compare the criminal behaviour of adopted children in comparison of their biological parents. Therefore if the twin’s criminal behaviour was more closely linked to the biological parents than the adopted, there would be a strong case for his theory.
The Feminist theory also gives good understanding on the relationship between gender and crime. Feminist theory was strongly introduced in the 1960’s in reaction to the traditional period of carrying out criminology. Female criminality was neglected and male criminals were the main source of study. Furthermore when female criminals where discussed it was in a sexist nature. An obvious reason for this flaw is that men do dominate crime, it’s a fact. For example the Criminal Statistics, England and Wales 2002/2003, Home Office concluded that in 2002 male offenders in England and Wales outnumbered females by more than four to one. But even so women can be found in all offence categories from the most serious to the least serious. A reason for this development could be because women’s role in society has changed dramatically over the past couple of decades. For example in the book Criminology by Tim Newburn supports this argument by stating,
“women were leaving traditional housebound roles they were becoming more involved in violence and other forms of offending.” Newburn (2007:305)
Women now play an equal part in social, economical and political life. In other words more crimes are committed by females because there is increased opportunity. Therefore female criminality has increased so the understanding of their behaviour is essential. Feminist’s theories have developed this understanding which has become a very important source in the study of criminology.
Problems with studying gender and crime is that the criminal law has not been equal for men and women. An example is male homosexual acts. These acts are illegal in most western countries while lesbian acts are not. Another example is that before 1925 women who committed a crime with the presence of their husband could relay on the presumption that they acted under force, except for murder charges. Feminist’s theories have helped stress the need for equality because the reasons for which females commit crime are basically similar to male. For example many women commit crime for economic concerns which is the reason for many male crimes.
The difference theories of female criminal behaviour have become a strong debate between criminologists. For example Showalters concept of ‘female malady’, which describes the behaviour of female criminalility as irrational, psychotic and instable. On the other hand modern analysis has developed the understanding of female criminal behaviour by confronting the possibility of rational and purposeful intentions of their crimes. For example Carlen (1985, 1988) for example has argued that,
“female criminality involves conscious decision making processes and can often be understood in terms of women’s socioeconomic circumstances” Hale et al (2005:353)
This suggests again that the older criminologists neglected female crime. They did not see it as a necessary importance in developing the understanding of female criminal behaviour.
Feminist theory has enhanced our understanding of gender and crime because it has modernised the thinking of criminology and opened up a whole new gap in the study of criminology. As explained female crimes in the past where neglected and from the analysis female crimes are just as important in enhancing are understanding of criminal behaviour as much as male crimes. Feminist views have given us a proper analysis of why females commit crimes, rather than just overlooking the process. Also feminist approaches have shown the need for reform in the criminal justice system to make laws more equal between men and women. Finally feminist theories and understandings have surely widened the prospect of support systems for female criminals for example counselling because of the further understanding it has developed. Biological theories have also developed our understanding of gender and crime because it gives us a link between scientific approaches for example ‘body type’ and ‘genetic transmission’ in understanding both male and female criminal behaviour. Therefore once the nature and extent of this theory is fully discovered reduction in criminal offending is seen as possible through treatment. Even so the biological theory is limited in enhancing our understanding of gender and crime because it gives a rooted consumption that the criminal is always male. Its concept gives a more tradition outlook on the study of criminology.
Bibliography
Harrison, J., Simpson, M., Harrison, O. and Martin, E. (2005) Study Skills for Criminology, London: Sage Publications Ltd.
Hale, C., Hayward, K., Wahidin, A. and Wincup, E. (2005 eds.) Criminology, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Maguire, M., Morgan, R. and Reiner, R. (2007 eds.) The Oxfors Handbook of Criminology, 4th edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Newburn, T (2007) Criminology, Collumption: Willian.
Walklate. (2005), Criminology the basics, Oxon: Routledge.
White, R., Haines, F., (2006 eds.) Crime and Criminology, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Further reading:
Nicholas, S., Kershaw, C. and Walker, A. (2007) Crime in England and Wales 2002/2003, London: Home Office Statistica; Bulletin
