GENDER AND CRIME

Gender is the single best predictor of criminal behavior: men commit more crime, and women commit
less. This distinction holds throughout history, for all societies, for all groups, and for nearly every crime
category. The universality of this fact is really quite remarkable, even though many tend to take it for
granted.

Most efforts to understand crime have focused on male crime, since men have greater involvement in
criminal behavior. Yet it is equally important to understand female crime. For example, learning why
women commit less crime than men can help illuminate the underlying causes of crime and how it might
better be controlled.

This discussion of gender and crime first reviews both current and historical information on the rates
and patterns of female crime in relation to male crime. The discussion is followed by a consideration of
theoretical explanations of female crime and gender differences in crime. Finally, the authors briefly
outline a "gendered" approach to understanding female crime that takes into account the influence of
gender differences in norms, in socialization, in social control, and in criminal opportunities, as well as
psychological and physiological differences between men and women.

Similarities in male and female offending rates and patterns

Both males and females have low rates of arrest for serious crimes like homicide or robbery; and high
rates of arrest for petty property crimes like larceny-theft, or public order offenses such as alcohol and
drug offenses or disorderly conduct. In general, women tend to have relatively high arrest rates in most
of the same crime categories for which men have high arrest rates. For example, rates of homicide are
small for both sexes (about 17 offenders for every 100,000 males, about 2 offenders per 100,000
females), as compared to larceny rates, which measure about 800 offenders per 100,000 males and 380
offenders per 100,000 females.

Male and female arrest trends over time or across groups or geographic regions are similar. That is,
decades or groups or regions that have high (or low) rates of male crime tend to also have high (or low)
rates of female crime. For example, in the second half of the twentieth century, the rates of arrest for
larceny-theft increased dramatically for both men and women; and declined even more dramatically for
both men and women in the category of public drunkenness. Similarly, states or cities or countries that
have higher than average arrest rates for men also have higher arrest rates for women (Steffensmeier,
1993; Steffensmeier, Allan, and Streifel

Male and female offenders have similar age-crime distributions, although male levels of offending are
always higher than female levels at every age and for virtually all offenses. The female-to-male ratio
remains fairly constant across the life span (Steffensmeier and Streifel, 1991). The major exception to
this age-by-gender pattern is for prostitution, where the age-curve for females displays a much greater
concentration of arrests among the young, compared to an older age-curve for males. A variety of
factors account for this difference. For example, males arrested under a solicitation of prostitution
charge may be men old enough to have acquired the power to be pimps or the money to be customers
—men who often put a premium upon obtaining young females. The younger and more peaked female
age curve clearly reflects differing opportunity structures for crimes relating to prostitution. Older
women become less able to market sexual services, whereas older men can continue to purchase sexual
services from young females or from young males. The earlier physical maturity of adolescent females
also contributes to their dating and associating with older male delinquent peers.

Female offenders, like male offenders, tend to come from backgrounds marked by poverty,
discrimination, poor schooling, and other disadvantages. However, women who commit crime are
somewhat more likely than men to have been abused physically, psychologically, or sexually, both in
childhood and as adults

Differences Between Male And Female Offending Patterns

Females have lower arrest rates than males for virtually all crime categories except prostitution. This is
true in all countries for which data are available. It is true for all racial and ethnic groups, and for every
historical period. In the United States, women constitute less than 20 percent of arrests for most crime
categories.

Females have even lower representation than males do in serious crime categories. Since the 1960s in
the United States, the extent of female arrests has generally been less than 15 percent for homicide and
aggravated assault, and less than 10 percent for the serious property crimes of burglary and robbery.

Aside from prostitution, female representation has been greatest for minor property crimes such as
larceny-theft, fraud, forgery, and embezzlement. Female arrests for these crime categories has been as
high as 30 to 40 percent, especially since the mid-1970s. The thefts and frauds committed by women
typically involve shoplifting (larceny-theft), "bad checks" (forgery or fraud), and welfare and credit fraud
—all compatible with traditional female consumer/domestic roles.

Trends in female crime relative to male crime are more complex. Some writers claim that female crime
has been increasing faster than male crime, as measured by the percentage of female arrests. This has
clearly been true in the case of minor property crimes, where the percentage of female arrests had
about doubled between 1960 and 1975 (from around 15 to 30 percent or more), with slight additional
increases since then. Smaller but fairly consistent increases are also found for substance abuse
categories, but they remain less than 20 percent for all categories. The same can be said of major
property crimes (which remain less than 10 to 15%). However, the percentage of female arrests has
declined for other categories like homicide and prostitution; and it has fluctuated for still other
categories such as aggravated assault and druglaw violations (see Steffensmeier, 1993, for a review of
trends and explanations).

The patterns just described are corroborated by other sources of data. The National Crime Victimization
Survey asks victims about the gender of offenders in crimes where the offender is seen. The percentage
of female offenders reported by victims is very similar to (or lower than) the female percentage of
arrests for comparable categories. Self-report studies also confirm the UCR patterns of relatively low
female involvement in serious offenses and greater involvement in the less serious categories.

From a variety of sources, it is clear that females are less involved in serious offense categories, and they
commit less harm. Women's acts of violence, compared to those of men, result in fewer injuries and less
serious injuries. Their property crimes usually involve less monetary loss or less property damage.

Females are less likely than males to become repeat offenders. Long-term careers in crime are very rare
among women. Some pursue relatively brief careers (in relation to male criminal careers) in prostitution,
drug offenses, or minor property crimes like shoplifting or check forging.

Female offenders, more often than males, operate solo. When women do become involved with others
in offenses, the group is likely to be small and relatively nonpermanent. Furthermore, women in group
operations are generally accomplices to males (see Steffensmeier, 1983, for a review). And males are
overwhelmingly dominant in the more organized and highly lucrative crimes, whether based in the
underworld or the "upperworld."
Females are far less likely than males to become involved in delinquent gangs. This distinction is
consistent with the tendency for females to operate alone and for males to dominate gangs and criminal
subcultures. At the onset of the twenty-first century, female gang involvement was described as a sort
of "auxiliary" to a male gang. By the 1980s and 1990s, gang studies found somewhat increased
involvement on the part of girls (perhaps 15%), including some allfemale gangs. Regardless, female gang
violence has remained far less common than male gang violence.

The criminal justice system's greater "leniency" and "chivalry" toward females may explain a portion of
the lower official offending rates of women in comparison to men. Likewise, the justice system's
tendency to be relatively less lenient and chivalrous toward females today may help explain recent
increases in levels of female arrests. Although there appear to be relatively small differences between
adult women and men in likelihood of arrest or conviction, women defendants do appear to have a
lower probability of being jailed or imprisoned. This difference appears to be related to a variety of
factors: pregnancy, responsibilities for small children, the greater likelihood to demonstrate remorse, as
well as perceptions that women are less dangerous and more amenable to rehabilitation (Daly;
Steffensmeier, Ulmer, and Kramer.

Explaining Female Offending

Social, biological, economic, and psychological explanations have been used to develop theories to
explain why women commit crime, as well as why they commit less crime than men. The number and
complexity of these theories has expanded greatly in recent years as part of the growing body of work
on gender both in criminology and in the social sciences more generally.

Early social science views. Early explanations of female crime reflected prevailing views regarding crime
and human behavior more generally. During the late 1800s and early 1900s, theories of human behavior
tended to be deterministic. In criminology this perspective was apparent in theories attributing crime to
either biological or social factors beyond the control of individuals. Psychological explanations of crime
emerged as psychological theories gained prominence. At the same time, major sociological
explanations of crime (differential association, anomie, social disorganization) were emphasizing social
and cultural factors that could account for female as well as male criminality.

Explaining Female Offending

Social, biological, economic, and psychological explanations have been used to develop theories to
explain why women commit crime, as well as why they commit less crime than men. The number and
complexity of these theories has expanded greatly in recent years as part of the growing body of work
on gender both in criminology and in the social sciences more generally.

Early social science views. Early explanations of female crime reflected prevailing views regarding crime
and human behavior more generally. During the late 1800s and early 1900s, theories of human behavior
tended to be deterministic. In criminology this perspective was apparent in theories attributing crime to
either biological or social factors beyond the control of individuals. Psychological explanations of crime
emerged as psychological theories gained prominence. At the same time, major sociological
explanations of crime (differential association, anomie, social disorganization) were emphasizing social
and cultural factors that could account for female as well as male criminality.

Access criminal opportunity

Crime opportunity theory suggests that offenders make rational choices and thus choose targets that
offer a high reward with little effort and risk. The occurrence of a crime depends on two things: the
presence of at least one motivated offender who is ready or willing to engage in a crime, and the
conditions of the environment in which that offender is situated, to wit, opportunities for crime. All
crimes require opportunity but not every opportunity is followed by crime. Similarly, a motivated
offender is necessary for the commission of a crime but not sufficient. A large part of this theory focuses
on how variations in lifestyle or routine activities affect the opportunities for crime.[1]

Opportunity thus becomes the limiting factor that determines the outcome in environments prone to
crime because the offender generally has little or no control over the conditions of the environment and
the conditions that permit particular crimes are often rare, unlikely, or preventable.

Summary

The majority of girls and women involved in the criminal justice system have committed ordinary crimes
—mostly minor thefts and frauds, low-level drug dealing, prostitution, and misdemeanor assaults
against their mates or children. Some of them commit crime over several years and serve multiple jail or
prison terms in the process. But they are not career criminals, and women are far less likely than men to
be involved in serious crime. These generalizations hold true regardless of data source, level of
involvement, or measure of participation.
The gender gap for criminal offending is remarkably persistent across countries, population subgroups
within a given country, and historical periods. This persistence can be explained in part by historical
durability of the organization of gender and by underlying physical/sexual differences (whether actual or
perceived). Human groups, for all their cultural variation, follow basic human forms.

Recent theory and research on female offending have added greatly to our understanding of how the
lives of delinquent girls and women continue to be powerfully influenced by gender-related conditions
of life. Profound sensitivity to these conditions is essential for understanding gender differences in type
and frequency of crime, for explaining differences in the context or gestalt of offending, and for
developing preventive and remedial programs aimed at female offenders.