Feminism and Criminology PDF

Chapter 6 Feminism and Criminology by Elizabeth Comack University of Manitoba Slid...

Chapter 6 Feminism and Criminology by Elizabeth Comack University of Manitoba Slides prepared by Stephen Schneider Saint Mary’s University Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-1 Learning Objectives Explain the various theories that have been developed to understand women’s involvement in crime. Understand the social, cultural, and legal factors that pertain to the issue of male violence against women. Appreciate some of the connections between a woman’s law violations and her experiences of victimization. Appreciate the gains to be made in making gender a more central focus of criminological inquiry. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-2 The Invisibility of Women Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-3 The Invisibility of Women Criminology has traditionally been male-centred. Criminology has been mostly concerned about what men do. Women have been rendered invisible in much criminological inquiry. This is due in part to relative minor role women play as criminal offenders. Violence against women has not been seen as a crime concern. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-4  The Invisibility of Women The goal of feminist criminology is to move women and an analysis of gender to the centre of criminological inquiry. Initial feminist contributions were a critique of existing theories and took two paths: 1. A focus on the sexism of theories use to explain women’s crime, and 2. An explanation of the invisibility of women in the mainstream theories of criminology. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-5 Theories of Women’s Crime Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-6 Theories of Women’s Crime 1. Conservative approach 2. Liberal approach 3. Mainstream of theories of crime 4. Women liberation thesis 5. feminist approach The Conservative Approach This approach is characterized by biological determinism. It focuses on the biological differences between men and women that account for: Female criminal offending, and Differences in male and female offending. Women have been viewed as “naturally” inferior, which explains women’s criminality. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-8 The Conservative Approach Women were thought to be less intelligent, less sensitive to pain, more passive, and more conservative than Lombros men. It was an adaptation of atavism theory: o and  Women were not as evolved as men.  Thus, atavistically degenerate (born Ferrero criminal) women don’t stand out as much (1895) Female criminals were cruel, lacking in “maternal instincts” and “ladylike qualities.” Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-9  The Conservative Approach W.I. Thomas (1923) Human behaviour is an expression of biological instincts of anger, fear, love, and the will to gain status and power. Women had more varieties of love in their nervous system. The need to feel loved accounted for most female crime, especially prostitution. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-10 The Conservative Approach Glueck and Glueck (1934) Glueck and Glueck viewed criminal women as “Other” They also considered imprisoned women a “sorry lot”, characterized by “feeblemindedness, psychopathic personalities, and marked emotional instability” This “human material” was hard to reform into law-abiding citizens. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-11 The Conservative Approach Pollak (1950) Women’s crimes were equal in severity and scope to those of men. However, women’s crime is hidden and thus undetected (vastly undercounted compared to that of men). Women are inherently deceptive and vengeful. They instigate crime or get males to perpetrate crime. Women’s deceit rooted in biological ability to fake orgasm. Also caused by anger, vengefulness, irritability, and depression, which stems from generative phases. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-12  The Conservative Approach Critiques of conservative theories: These theories lent intellectual respectability to myths and folk tales about women and their behaviour (Heidensohn, 1985). They also reflected assumptions about the dual nature of women: Good girl/bad girl duality Sexual promiscuity amoral for women, but normal for men Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-13 Conservative Approach Critiques (cont.) This approach also fails to consider the gendered roles of men vs. women. This ignores broader structural factors that impinge on women’s lives and influence their criminal offending. More recent, these have included biologically determinist theories—for example, the idea that Premenstrual syndrome (PMS) is a cause of violent behaviour and criminality. Thus, women are pathologized as “sick” or “diseased.” Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-14 Theories of Women’s Crime 1. Conservative approach 2. Liberal approach 3. Mainstream of theories of crime 4. Women liberation thesis 5. feminist approach The Liberal Approach The liberal approach developed in the 1970s. It used a more sociological analysis and shifted focus from biology to culture. Differences between men and women were seen as due to gender roles and socialization patterns. Culture creates differences between men and women by proscribing certain roles and behaviours as “male appropriate” and “female appropriate.” Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-16 The Liberal Approach Role Theory Hoffman-Bustamante (1973): The lower rate of delinquency of girls is the result of differential socialization and childrearing practices. Males are socialized to be aggressive and outgoing and are allowed greater freedom vs. girls, who are socialized to be passive and domesticated and are closely supervised. This explains women’s lesser involvement in violence and heavier involvement in shoplifting (because women are traditionally consumers in society). Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-17 The Liberal Approach Role Theory (cont.) Hagan et al.’s power–control theory Patriarchal family (employed husband and housewife)  Parents, especially mothers, control daughters more than sons.  There are large gender differences in delinquent behaviours. Egalitarian family (both parents employed):  Parenting is more egalitarian, so daughters are less controlled.  Thus, there are smaller gender differences in delinquency. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-18 The Liberal Approach Role Theory (cont.) Smart (1976) Role theory can only partly explain women’s crime. Little attention is paid to why socialization patterns differ by sex (that is, the broader structural origins of gender roles) Hagan’s theory brings in the labour force participation of the parents, but does not go far enough in examining gender-based power and control in broader social structures. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-19 Theories of Women’s Crime 1. Conservative approach 2. Liberal approach 3. Mainstream of theories of crime 4. Women liberation thesis 5. feminist approach Mainstream Theories of Crime Mainstream theories have been criticized for failing to account for women’s crime. Merton’s strain theory reflected a sensitivity to class inequalities, but not gender inequalities. The theory posited that lower-class males engage in crime due to lack of access to legitimate means of monetary success. This does not explain why women under similar strain are less involved in crime than men. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-21 Mainstream Theories of Crime Sutherland’s differential association theory This theory posited cultural heterogeneity for men: some learn definitions favourable to crime while others do not. But women were seen as culturally homogeneous —as more selfless than men. Sutherland failed to examine the apparent cultural homogeneity among women. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-22 Mainstream Theories of Crime This theory focused on conformity of law-abiding people. Hirschi’s Since women appear to be social more conformist than men, it would make sense to treat control women as central to his theory analysis. However, he mostly ignored women in his theorizing. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-23 Mainstream Theories of Crime Mainstream theorists rely on stereotypical constructions of masculinity and femininity. Men are aggressive, independent, daring, and adventurous. Women are submissive, dependent, and compliant. Gelsthorpe & Morris (1988): Criminological theories are weak if they only apply to men Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-24 Mainstream Theories of Crime Generalizability Problem Can mainstream theories be modified to fit women? Leonard (1982) modified Merton’s strain theory: Females are socialized to aspire to different culture goals than males (marriage and children). Thus, women’s low rate of criminality are explained by the relatively easy manner in which females can realize their goals. Critique: a critique of this modified theory points out that it fails to adequately consider the strains and frustrations women face in relation to their familial roles and economic challenges. Modified mainstream versions treat women as afterthoughts not as integral to the arguments being developed. They also try to adapt male-centric theories to women. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-25 Mainstream Theories of Crime Why are women less likely than men to be criminals? What explains the sex difference in rates of The gender ratio arrest and in the variable types of problem criminal activity between men and women? Are women treated more leniently in the CJS? Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-26 Mainstream Theories of Crime The gender ratio problem (cont.) Is the CJS more lenient on women? Research findings: chivalry in the CJS only affects white middle- and upper-class women, and those who behave in stereotypical fashion (for example, crying). Rafter and Natalizia (1981): chivalrous behaviour in CJS is a means of preserving women’s subordinate position in society. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-27 Theories of Women’s Crime 1. Conservative approach 2. Liberal approach 3. Mainstream of theories of crime 4. Women liberation thesis 5. feminist approach The Women’s Liberation Thesis Female criminality will more closely resemble men’s as gender differences are diminished by women’s greater participation in the workforce. Simon (1975): increased employment opportunities for women will increase crime opportunities (for example, embezzlement from employers). Adler (1975): linked influence of women’s movement to increasing female criminality. Critique: women’s liberation thesis took males to be the norm; they did not look at women separately. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-29 Theories of Women’s Crime 1. Conservative approach 2. Liberal approach 3. Mainstream of theories of crime 4. Women liberation thesis 5. feminist approach Feminist approach A feminist approach starts from outside mainstream criminology. Understanding women’s involvement in crime should not take typical crime categories as the starting point. Crime categories reinforce a division between criminals and the law-abiding, making female criminals the “other.” This ignores the collective experiences of all women in a sexist society that help create “criminalized women.” The feminist thesis views the lives of criminalized women in a broader social context characterized by inequalities of class, race, and gender. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-31 Feminist approach Class Criminalized women tend to be young, poor, undereducated, and unskilled. They are most likely to be involved in property crimes: This is consistent with their traditional role as consumers, and increasingly with their role as low- income, semi-skilled, sole support providers for their families. The increase in female criminality is the product of feminization of poverty (not women’s liberation). Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-32 Feminist approach Racial Inequality In Canada, the focus is on inequalities affecting Indigenous women. They are overrepresented in crime statistics, incarceration, and offences involving alcohol. Colonization, marginalization, and dependence on the state are causal factors in violence, alcoholism, and drug use. Women’s involvement in prostitution is a reflection of their subordinate social and economic position. Women valued more for sexuality than for labour. They are treated as a commodity. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-33 Violence Against Women Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-34 Violence Against Women The Cultural Construction of Rape Feminists challenged the lack of societal concern about male violence against women. They also questioned the assumptions and beliefs surrounding the public’s understanding of this problem. Cultural construction of rape is riddled with myths and misconceptions and fraught with stereotypical images of victims and offenders. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-35 The Cultural Construction of Rape Women ask to be raped by their dress or behaviour. Myths, Rape is brought on by a man’s sexual miscon- urges, which cannot be halted once a woman has “turned him on.” ceptions When women say “no,” they really and mean “yes.” stereotype “Loose women” deserve to be raped. Women cannot be trusted. s include Rape has little long-term effect on the women. Men who commit “real rape” are following: abnormal. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-36 The Cultural Construction of Rape Smart (1989): these myths are “phallocentric” (emerging from male meanings of sexuality). These myths and stereotypes can translate into less chance of detection, a greater percentage of defendants being found not guilty lighter sentences for offenders. Many rapists do not believe they did anything wrong. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-37 The Cultural Construction of Rape Rape can mean “double victimization” for survivors. The second humiliation is from reporting it to the authorities and feeling responsible for the assault. The result of cultural construction of rape is fear and vulnerability of women, with attendant self-restrictions on their behaviour. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-38  Violence Against Women The law’s role in condoning violence against women Historically, women were viewed as the property of men. Until 1983, husbands could not be charged for raping wives; women needed corroborating evidence to have charges laid. The doctrine of recent complaint gave less credibility to a woman who complained some time after assault. The moral character of the woman was questioned in regard to whether she provided consent. The law historically gave husbands the right to use (moderate) force against their wives. The CJS viewed domestic violence as private matter and not a criminal one. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-39 Violence Against Women Criminology’s complicity Criminologists did not view male violence against women as a social problem. Criminologists focused on small group of pathological offenders who assaulted women. Amir’s (1967, 1971) concept of “victim precipitation” blamed women for being raped. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-40 Violence Against Women Breaking the Silence The absence of societal, legal, and academic concern about violence against women silenced women. The women’s movement encouraged women to share their stories. More services emerged for victims (rape crisis lines and centres, shelters for abused women, etc.). Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-41 Violence Against Women Breaking the silence (cont.) Growing awareness of male violence led to legislative reform in Canada. 1983 amendments to Criminal Code included the following: Husbands could be charged. Limits were placed on questions about a woman’s past sexual history from being used to discredit her testimony (“rape shield” law). The corroboration requirement was dropped. The doctrine of recent complaint was dropped. A publication ban on identity of the complainant was instituted. The police were instructed to lay charges in wife assault cases. The result was that more criminal charges were laid by the police. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-42 Violence Against Women The Montreal Massacre December 6, 1989: a gunman killed 14 and wounded 13 female students at École Polytechnique in Montreal. He blamed feminists for his own failures in life. This reinforced message that violence against women is pervasive. 1993 Violence Against Women Survey: Half of women were victims of physical or sexual violence. Almost half experienced violence from men they know. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-43 Violence Against Women Missing and murdered women Gendered and racialized nature of violence In Canada, Indigenous women Are five times as likely to die as a result of violence, and Are murdered or reported missing frequently. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-44 Violence Against Women Recent history of law’s response to violence against women: 1992: Bill C-49 Made the victim’s sexual past inadmissible as evidence when used in relation to consent Provided new rules of evidence and tests regarding consent for sexual activity Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-45 Violence Against Women Recent history of law’s response to violence against women (cont.): 1995: A Supreme Court decision required schools, women’s shelters, and rape crisis centres to give files to the courts. These files could be used against the women, thus forcing women to choose between prosecution and counselling. 1997: Bill C-46 attempts to limit access to these confidential records. However, subsequent Supreme Court decisions have upheld the disclosure of records. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-46 Violence Against Women Recent history of law’s response to violence against women (cont.): Cases show that judges and other CJS officials continue to adhere to cultural construction of rape beliefs. Zero-tolerance policies in domestic assault cases result in a high number of charges, but many are dismissed or stayed. Police now routinely charge both spouses in domestic assault (double charging), as if the levels of violence were the same. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-47  Blurred Boundaries: Women as Victims and Offenders Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-48 Women as Victims and Offenders Most criminalized women had been physically abused or sexually assaulted as children or adults. Indigenous women were much more likely to experience the above. “Pathways” research shows the connection between such victimization and subsequent criminal activity. The criminalized woman became the “woman in trouble”—more deserving of help than punishment and violent in self-defence. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-49 The Violent Woman Cases like Karla Homolka support the view that women are violent too (and not always the victim). For example, Pearson (1997): Not only are women violent too but this violence can be just as “nasty” as men’s violence. Women’s violence is more masked and underhanded than men’s violence. When their crimes are discovered, women are more likely to receive lenient treatment from a chivalrous criminal justice system. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-50 The Violent Woman Feminist criminologists say Homolka is an outlier. Women are seldom charged with murder. When they are, it is often self-defence (against a partner). The scope and severity of spousal violence is more severe for women than for men. Thus the “woman as evil” image is rejected. They are not men’s equals when it comes to violence. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-51 The Victimization-Criminalization Continuum Women’s experiences of victimization constrain or narrow their social supports and available options and leave them susceptible to criminalization. Insights from intersectionality theory showcase how systemic factors (patriarchy, poverty, and colonialism) interconnect to contribute to women’s vulnerability to victimization. This restricts their agency or capacity to make choices. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-52 Table 6.1: Theories of Women’s Crime Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-53 Summary A primary aim of feminist engagement with criminology is to bring women into view. One of the ways it accomplishes this is through re-evaluation of theories about criminalized women, the nature of their offending, and the claims made about their “differences” from males. Mainstream criminologists are forced to consider how men and male criminality has influenced their theories and research. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-54 Summary Feminist criminologists: understanding women’s criminality requires an awareness of the larger social context. Structured inequalities of class, race, and gender condition and constrain the lives of criminalized women. Breaking the silence around male violence against women means questioning how social and legal responses reinforce and reproduce the problem. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-55 Summary Making women more visible in criminology requires not simply letting women into the mainstream of the discipline, but also developing alternative ways to conceptualize and study the social world so that the interests and concerns of men and women are included. In the process, the criminological enterprise is itself transformed. Copyright © 2020 by Top Hat 6-56