FEMINIST THEORIES OF CRIMINOLOGY

This paper was written March 20, 2007 for my UFV Crim 212 (Women, Crime and Criminal Justice) course, instructed by Sherry Mumford.

=====================================================================

INTRODUCTION

From the time of Adam and Eve women have committed crime. The question is why? This paper will address four main feminist criminology theories. Liberal, Marxist, Radical, and Socialist, as well as a number of traditional criminology theories in an attempt to explain why women commit crime.

According to DeKeseredy (2000), these four feminist criminology theories address causes of gender inequality, process of gender formation, strategies for social change, and key concepts (pp. 86-89).

For the Liberal Feminist theory, causes of gender inequality is not stated explicitly, but assumed to stem from societal inhibitions on women’s full exposure to and participation in intellectual inquiry (reading and writing), physical education (competitive sports and physical fitness), and other activities in the public sphere. The process of gender formation is the socialization into gender roles; psychological theories such as social learning, cognitive development, or schema used (DeKeseredy, p. 86).

Strategies for social change is the removal of all obstacles to women’s access to education, paid employment, political activity, and other public social institutions; enabling women to participate equally with men in the public sphere; emphasis on legal change. The key concepts for this theory are socialization, sex (or gender) roles, equal opportunity, equal treatment of men and women, equal rights (DeKeseredy, p. 87).

Liberal conflict feminists see gender as one among many valid, competing categories in society, others of which are class, ethnicity, and race. This approach parallels pluralist conflict theory (Deutschmann, 2002. p. 358).

Containing and balancing these overlapping interests can and does at times give rise to intense stress within this part of the feminist movement. Such was the case when a women’s hostel in Toronto was rocked by a political coup staged by women of colour within the organization (Deutschmann, 2002. p. 358).

In the resulting media frenzy, the reputations of many people were shredded by charges of racism, lesbianism, emotional instability, greed, and ingratitude. Similar strains have emerged over issues like pornography, which have different meanings for women at different levels in the economic system---for some, participation in these activities is seen a a choice and a way of making a living, while for others, pornography and prostitution are seen as the worst sort of capitulation to exploitation and oppression (Bell, 1987; as cited in Deutschmann, 2002. p. 358).

Liberal conflict feminist (Deutschmann, 2002) are further characterized by their support for initiatives designed to improve women’s position within the existing structure rather than to overthrow the system. Thus, they advocate “fixes” such as employment equity (job quotas), provision of daycare for working mothers, better education for women, and less streaming of women into domesticity or caring professions (p. 358).

This form of feminism tends to attract moderates who target specific injustices and practices for remediation (e.g., laws that punish prostitutes but not their customers and the differential treatment of girls in sports) but who do not challenge the system as a whole and often reject the label “feminist” (Deutschmann, 2002. p. 358).

According to Boyd, et al. (1986), traditional liberal feminist theory focuses on equality of opportunity and equal application of presumptively fair, gender neutral rules. Accepting the basic economic and political institutions of Canadian society and the precept that government should only interfere in the “public” sphere, liberal feminists tend to believe that equality for women can be achieved substantially within the current framework (p. 7).

For the Marxist Feminist theory, causes of gender inequality is derived from hierarchical relations of control with the rise of private property and its inheritance by men. Class relations are primary; gender relations, secondary. The process of gender formation is not stated explicitly in early works, but implicitly a master-slave relationship applied to husband and wife. Some twentieth-century arguments draw from psychoanalytic theories (DeKeseredy, p. 87).

Strategies for social change lies in the transformation from a capitalist to a democratic socialist society, bringing women fully into economic production, socializing housework and child care, abolition of marriage and sexual relations founded on notions of private property, eradication of working-class economic subordination. Key concepts are capitalist oppression and working class- resistance, women as a “sex class” or a reserve army of labor for capital, husbands’ exploitation of wives’ labor (DeKeseredy, p. 87).

Although they diverge in many ways, Marxist and Marxist feminists have in common a belief that social class (economic position), as a variable, is more fundamental than gender. Gender relations, Marxist feminist feel, will be resolved once the central issue of class relations is resolved. From their perspective, women’s position in society is a consequence of the hierarchical power relations of capitalism. These relations objectify women by assigning them social roles that serve dominant male interests (interests that are themselves created and maintained by the system) (Simpson & Elis, 1994; as cited in Deutschmann, 2002. p. 358).

In the Marxist view, female deviance and crime (and the deviance of youths raised by single mothers) result from women’s marginalized economic position within both the legitimate world and the world of crime. Women in a capitalist-patriarchal system are less criminal because, in such a system, the most serious crimes are those that reinforce male dominance and privilege via aggression (Messerschmidt, 1986, as cited in Deutschmann, 2002. P. 358).

Marxist feminists (Deutschmann, 2002) use the Marxist paradigm to argue for revolutionary changes in the political economy of nations and to combat what they view as the “false consciousness” of groups like Real Women that enshrine the traditional female role and support the patriarchal hegemony that sustains the capital system (p. 358). Marxism does not free the oppressed. Marxism oppresses them. It is capitalism that promotes freedom. Capitalism does not promote crime. It is the individual selfishness that promotes crime.

For the Radical Feminist theory, causes of gender inequality is derived from the needs or desires of men to control women’s sexuality and reproductive potential. Patriarchy----a set of social relations in which individual men and men as a group-----predating the rise of private property; “ownership” of women the precursor to ownership of territory.

Some arguments assume a biological basis for men’s needs or desires to control women (DeKeseredy, p. 87). The process of gender formation refers to power relations between men and women structure socialization processes in which boys and men view themselves as superior to and has having a right to control girls and women. Gender power relations amplified and reinforced by heterosexual sexuality (male defined). Psychological and psychoanalytic theories used (DeKeseredy, p. 87).

Strategies for social change include overthrowing patriarchal relations, devising methods of biological reproduction to permit women’s sexual autonomy, creating women-centered social institutions (and women-only organizations) (DeKeseredy, p. 87).

In strategies for change, dealing explicitly with the oppressive nature of sexual and familial relations for women and with their link to relations in the public sphere. Eradication of women’s social subordination without obliterating gender differences (DeKeseredy, p. 87).

Radical theories and postmodernist theories (Deutschmann, 2002) raise the possibility of liberating understandings of deviance and control but also go beyond what is tested and clearly attainable (p. 359). Non-Marxist radical feminists share in common with postmodernism their emphasis on the importance of language in constructing differences between men and women. These theorists tend to challenge the rules, especially those that define appropriate gender roles (Deutschmann, 2002. P. 359).

On a small scale, Carolyn Heilbrun challenges the stereo-type of the “good girl” through her fiction when she has her detective heroine engage in a number of vices (Heilbrun, 1988, p. 122; as cited in Deutschmann, 2002).

According to Boyd, et al. (1986), radical feminist theory addresses women’s oppression in patriarchy a systematic expression of male domination and control over women. The desire for supremacy, the psychological pleasure of power, and male fear of female sexual and reproductive capacity are identified as the motivating forces of patriarchy (p. 13). Boyd et al. (1986), also claim that laws governing reproduction, sexual assault, and pornography are viewed as extensions of patriarchal control over female sexuality with violence against women reinforcing this control (p. 13).

Boyd, et al. (1986), also claim that radical feminism poses solutions which range from female separatism at one end of the spectrum to identification, affirmation and incorporation of female values and interests in legislation at the other end (p. 13).

A new offshoot of radical feminism (or perhaps an amalgam of liberal and radical feminism)----cultural feminism----celebrates gender differences, especially women’s special capacities or talents, but does not situate gender differences in the framework of power differences. Key concepts include patriarchy, women’s oppression, men’s control of women’s bodies and minds, and heterosexism (DeKeseredy, p. 87).

For the Social Feminist theory, causes of gender inequality is derived from the flexible combination of radical and Marxist categories, i.e. universal male domination and historically specific political-economic relations, respectively.

The focus is on gender, class and racial relations of domination, in which sexuality (including reproduction) and labor (paid and unpaid) are linked. Differs from Marxist feminism in that both class and gender relations are viewed as primary (DeKeseredy, p. 88).

Process of gender formation is similar to radical feminism, but with greater emphasis on making psychological or psychoanalytical arguments historically and culturally specific and on analyzing women’s agency and resistance (DeKeseredy, p. 88).

Strategies for social change include amalgam of Marxist and radical feminist strategies; simultaneous focus on transforming patriarchal and capitalist class relations (includes similar relations in self-defined socialist or communist societies). Key concepts are capital patriarchy, women’s subordination and resistance to men; men’s exploitation and control of women’s labor and sexuality (DeKeseredy, p. 88).

Socialist feminist theory, according to Boyd, et al. (1986), regards both gender and class relations as being inextricably linked, but which does not prioritize either set of relations as the primary cause of women’s oppression (p. 16).

I do not support the above theories as explanations why women commit crime because the above theories focuses more on women’s rights in the family, career, and social context rather than explanations for criminality.

EXAMPLES

Theories I believe that can better explain why women commit crime fall in the traditional criminological school of thought. For example the criminological theory that can best explain the criminal actions of Teresa Senner, in my opinion, would be Berkowitz’s revised Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis. This theory, according to Bartol et al (p. 245: 2005) addresses three causation: the person is blocked from obtaining an expected goal; (2) frustration results, generating anger; and (3) anger predisposes or readies the person to behave aggressively.

On November 20, 2002, Senner broke into her boyfriend’s, Norman Wick’s home in a jealous rage, kicking down his door. She then read his personal emails and discovered that he had been pursuing other relationships, including with his ex-wife. When Wicks came home, there was an altercation between them. Senner then fatally stabbed Wicks in the groin area with a long and sharp kitchen knife. As Wicks lay bleeding to death on the floor, Senner called the police, claiming to have killed Wicks. She then went down to the river in order to dispose of the knife she had used (R. v. Senner [2005]).

Frustration can be channeled in many directions, but it often results in anger and aggression. This idea was developed and dubbed “frustration-aggression theory” by psychologists in the late 1930s. Dollard et al. (1939) and Dollard et al. (1987) proposed that frustration and aggression always follow when goal attainment is blocked. The aggression is not necessarily or even usually against the original cause of the frustration (as cited in Deutschmann, 2002, pp. 171, 173).

It is notable that frustrated individuals tend to displace their anger onto targets who are less likely to fight back. Displaced aggression may also explain attacks on particular kinds of people (Hughes & Dagher, 1993, p. 302; as cited in Deutschmann, 2002, p. 173).

People who feel insecure in other ways may develop an inferiority complex that reveals itself in arrogance and aggression against others. Frustration may be linked with relative deprivation, the belief that one is not getting as much as one should have, relative to others (Deutschmann, 2002).

Some evidence exists, mainly anecdotal, to support the view that women and girls may use relational aggression more often than physical aggression; that is, women are more likely to harm others’ relationships (through gossip, innuendo, and social exclusion) than they are to engage in physical violence (Deutschmann, 2002). Deutschmann (2002) goes on to allege that recent reported rises in female violence have been exaggerated in the news media and that they seem to be restricted (I strongly disagree) to episodic gang-type violence and bullying perpetrated by adolescents (p. 174).

In the matter of R. v. Gladue [1999], Jamie Gladue had an argument with her common law when she confronted him about his infidelity. Prior to the argument, Gladue was celebrating her 19th birthday and was drinking beer with some friends and family members, including her common law. During the argument Gladue’s common law insulted her, she then stabbed him in the arm and ran after him when he fled the residence. When she caught up with him outside she stabbed him in the chest. Gladue and her common law had a daughter and at the time of the incident Gladue was 5 months pregnant with their second child.

At the time of the offence, it was alleged that Gladue had a hyperthyroid condition which allegedly caused her to overreact to emotional situations. The criminological theory that I believe best explains Gladue’s attack on her common law would be Arousal Perspectives theory. According to Bartol et al (2005),

Toch, Berkowitz, and Zillmann all suggest that when experiencing powerful emotional reactions, many people become incapable of considering the consequences of their violent acts.

Toch also posits that humiliating affronts and threats to reputation and status are major contributing factors to violence. A blow to the self-esteem of the person who has few skills for resolving disputes and conflicts (such as verbal skills) may precipitate violence. This is especially true if the person’s subculture advocates that disputes be settled through physical aggression (p. 355).

In a similar vain, Berkowitz (1970) hypothesized that people sometimes react violently, not because they anticipate pleasure or displeasure from their actions, but because “situational stimuli have evoked the response (they) are predisposed or set to make in that setting” (p. 140). This is, individuals have been conditioned---specifically, classically conditioned---to react violently by prior experiences in similar situations (as cited in Bartol et al., 2005, p. 355).

In some instances, according to Berkowitz, powerful environmental stimuli essentially produce impulsive behavior. Under these conditions, one’s “thinking” becomes highly simplified and one responds “mindlessly” to stimuli in a well-learned manner. Thus, some people “fall into” a rage, striking out in an impulsive and automatic response to unpleasant feelings brought on by aversive or noxious stimuli (Bartol et al.). Toch, Berkowitz, and Zillmann all suggest that when experiencing powerful emotional reactions, many people become incapable of considering the consequences of their acts. High arousal inhibits cognitive processing to the point that they may not think before acting. The environment and the relevant external stimuli take control over the internal mediation processes, which have been weakened by extremely high levels of arousal (Bartol et al.).

In the matter of R. v. Homolka [1993] Karla Homolka, along with her husband, lured, sadistically raped and tortured young women, including Homolka’s younger sister, and murdered them. The theory, I believe, that could be applicable to these criminal acts is Bandura’s (1990, 1991) moral disengagement theory which explains why people do immoral or heinous acts against their moral judgment when ordered to do so by some higher authority or under high social pressure (Bartol et al, 2005, p. 184).

One example, as described by Bandura, Barbaranelli, Caprara, and Pastorelli (1996) found that delinquents use various methods of moral disengagement, relying most heavily on moral justification and dehumanization of victims. The delinquents could justify certain antisocial behavior by relying on habitual and various forms of moral disengagement from the social standards of conduct.

Dehumanization refers to the process of maintaining beliefs that strip people of human qualities or invest them with demonic or bestial qualities (Bandura et al., 2001; as cited in Bartol et al., 2005, p. 185).

“The victims are then seen as subhuman, without the same feelings or hopes as the perpetrators, and thus one can rationalize that normal moral principles do not apply” (Tsang, 2002, p. 41; as cited in Bartol et al.).

Another theory that could also explain why Homolka did what she did with her husband is Hirschi’s social bond theory, which factors in attachment, commitment, involvement, and belief (Deutschmann, 2002, p. 307).

In other words, Homolka’s attachment to her husband caused her to be deeply committed to him which then caused her to be involved with his crimes, which then caused her to believe she was doing it for love.

Attachment is measured by the nature of the bond between children and their parents and by the degree of parental supervision. An extreme lack of attachment is characteristic of the psychopath, who neither cares how others feel nor welcomes their attention (Deutschmann, pp. 307-308).

Commitment, according to Toby (1957), is “a stake in conformity.” The idea behind commitment is that the more people have to lose by violating norms, the less likely they are to risk it (as cited in Deutschmann, p. 309). Involvement, when voluntary, is frequently a consequence of commitment (Deutschmann, 2002).

When Audrey Trudeau, told her alleged lover, Deborah Point, that she was moving, Point attacked her with an axe at least fifteen times on the back of the head, crushing it like an egg shell. Point then dismembered Ms. Trudeau’s body and placed the pieces in garbage bags and boxes that she then concealed in a friend’s garage. Point also forged cheques and withdrew money from Trudeau’s line of credit to feed her vlt (video lottery terminal) addiction while remaining in her house and telling her friends and family members that Audrey had left in a hurry to attend to some business. She also started a new relationship with a woman who moved in with her a few months later. It was five months before the body of Audrey Trudeau was found and Deborah Point was charged (R. v. Point [2000]).

The theory I believe that can explain the criminal actions of Point is Dodge et al’s Reactive aggression theory. Reactive aggression includes anger expressions, temper tantrums, vengeful hostility, and, more generally, “hot-blooded” aggressive acts (Bartol et al, 2005, p. 256).

Reactive aggression appears to be a reaction to frustration and is associated with a lack of control due to high states of arousal. In general, reactive aggressive is a hostile act displayed in response to a perceived threat or provocation (Bartol et al.).

According to Reisig, et al. (2006), feminist argue that mainstream criminological theories (e.g. learning and control theories) are androcentric; this is, these theories were developed by men who relied on their own assumptions of social life and used samples of men and boys to test their hypotheses. (p. 387).

Accordingly, feminists reject the notion that the same ordered sets of propositions explain both male and female criminality (Belknap, 2001; Chesney-Lind, 1989; Daly & Chesney-Lind, 1988; Simpson, 1989; as cited in Reisig, et al., p. 387), and argue that male-centered theories fail to appreciate a variety of elements unique to female criminality (Daly, 1992, p. 62; as cited in Reisig, et al., 2006, p. 387).

Reisig, et al. (2006) sums it up by stating that criminologists working from a feminist perspective argue that the male-centered theories of crime and delinquency fail to take into account a host of critical factors that lead women into crime (p. 389). Ericsson, et al. (2006), state that social control of women is seen as embedded in, and as constitutive of, the patriarchal structures of society (p. 126).

Barton (2005) claims that the family is a major identical site of control for women (as cited in Ericsson et al., 2006, p. 127). If men are to be removed from center stage and a feminist vision fulfilled, that feminist vision must be explicitly focused on men to move them off center (Brod, 1987, p. 40; as cited in Ericsson et al., 2006, p. 129).

When Barton (2005), in accordance with a vast bulk of feminist research, points out that the social control of women traditionally has been aimed at keeping them in line as Feminine Women, punishing, reforming, treating deviations from the prescriptions of respectable womanhood, however, by depicting the social control of women as gendered, in contrast to that of men, the feminist runs the risk of reproducing the assumption that man is the universal human being, woman is sex (as cited in Ericsson et al., 2006, p. 130).

Another feminist theory that addresses female criminality is Women’s Liberation/Emancipation. According to Adler (1975) and Simon (1975), women have lacked opportunities to break the law, and if given such opportunities, they would act just like men (as cited in DeKeseredy, 2000, p. 80).

OTHER THEORIES

Other theories I believe that can better explain why women commit crime are Reckless’ Containment theory, Hagan’s Power Control theory, Hirschi and Gottfredson’s Low Self Control theory, Tittle’s Control Balance theory, Expectancy theory, and Differential association-reinforcement theory.

Reckless’ Containment theory was an early version of the social control perspective. According to containment theory, the individual experiences, in varying degrees, feelings of inferiority, hostility, anger, rebellion, and even organically based urges toward deviant gratifications (Deutschmann, 2002, p. 306).

If these inner pressures toward deviance are uncontrolled, deviance will occur. Inner controls may be direct or indirect. Direct inner control is evidenced by the ability to feel guilt and shame and not to respond to this with neutralized, while indirect inner control is based on the individual’s rational interest in maintaining a “stake in conformity” Costello, 2000; Toby, 1957; as cited in Deutschmann, 2002, p. 306).

Paralleling his view of the inner life, Reckless felt that the external world provided both pressures toward deviance and “fences” to prevent it. External factors such as poverty, relative deprivation, adversity, insecurity, deviant companions, and deviant opportunities can make deviance more likely unless contained by controls (Deutschmann, 2002, p. 307). Like inner controls, outer controls may be direct or indirect. Direct outer controls are external to the individual and usually carry with them the threat of sanctions. Indirect outer controls are mainly relational---control derives from the need to maintain role relationships (Deutschmann, 2002).

Power-control theory is a variant of control theory that emphasizes differences in power among potential deviants, and by extension, the importance of social class and gender. People with power have greater opportunity to avoid surveillance and discipline at work and in their neighborhoods, and more opportunities to avoid being held responsible for their actions, either because no one knows, or because they can access the best (legal) protection available (Deutschmann, 2002, p. 315).

In the 1990s, Hirschi and Gottfredson began to argue for a radically different version of control theory, known as the “low self-control theory” or, more ambitiously, “the general theory of crime” (Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990; as cited in Deutschmann, 2002, p. 312). The person with low self-control will tend to be a career deviant----repeatedly breaking the rules for impulsive, opportunistic reason-----while the person with high self-control will not (Deutschmann, 2002, p. 313).

Control balance theory “tries to bring together a large number of earlier theories into one coherent account.” The individual’s motivation toward deviance is a function of his or her balance of being controlled (either by others or by situational constraints) or being in control (Deutschmann, 2002, p. 314).

Deviance can be understood as “a maneuver to alter control imbalances” to overcome feelings of humiliation provoked by any reminder of one’s unbalanced control ratio (Tittle & Paternoster, 2000, p. 557; as cited in Deutschmann, 2002, p. 314).

The theory claims that the desire to avoid being controlled and “to exercise more control than one is subject to” is “the major compelling force for human motivation" (Tittle & Paternoster, 2000, p. 550; as cited in Deutschmann, 2002, p. 314).

Expectancy theory argues that a person’s performance level is based on that person’s expectation that behaving in a particular way will lead to a given outcome Bartol et al., 2005, p. 170). This theory says that when people engage in unlawful conduct, they expect to gain something in the form of status, power, security, affection, material goods, or living conditions (Bartol et al.).

The violent person, for example, may elect to behave that way in the belief that something will be gained; the serial murderer might believe that God has sent him on a mission to eliminate all “loose” women; the woman who poisons an abusive husband looks for an improvement in her life situation (Bartol et al.).

Differential association-reinforcement theory states that people learn to commit deviant acts through interpersonal interactions with their social environment. The crucial factors are with whom a person associates, for how long, how frequently, how personally meaningful the associations, and how early they occur in the person’s development. A person becomes delinquent or criminal “because of an excess of definitions favorable to violation of law over definitions unfavorable to violation of law (Bartol et al.).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the Liberal, Marxist, Radical and Socialist feminist theories are very weak in explanations of female criminality. It is my belief that the criminological theories that can best explain female criminality lies within the traditional criminological school of thought, such as the Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis, Arousal Perspective theory, moral disengagement theory, social bond theory, Reactive Aggression theory, Containment (inner/outer) theory, Power-Control theory, Low Self-Control theory, Control Balance theory, Expectancy theory, and Differential Association-Reinforcement theory. One other theory that I believe can best explain female criminality, which has not been included in this paper is the Demonic Perspective theory.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bartol, C. R.; Bartol, A. M. (2005). Criminal Behavior, a Psychosocial Approach, seventh edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Bell, S. J. (2003). Young Offenders and Juvenile Justice, second edition. Scarborough, On: Thomson Nelson.

Boyd, S. B.; Sheehy, E. A. (1986). Feminist perspectives on law: Canadian theory and practice. Canadian Journal of Women and the Law, 2, 1-52, retrieved March 18, 2007, from Academic Search Premier database.

Burgess-Proctor, A. (2006). Intersections of race, class, gender, and crime: Future directions for feminist criminology. Feminist Criminology, 1, 27-47, retrieved March 19, 2007, from Criminology: a SAGE full-text collection database.

DeKeseredy, W. S. (2000). Women, Crime, and the Canadian Criminal Justice System. Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.

Deutschmann, L. B. (2002). Deviance and Social Control, third edition. Scarborough, On: Thomson Nelson.

Ericsson, K.; Jon, N. (2006). Gendered social control: ‘A virtuous girl’ and ‘a proper boy’. Journal of Scandinavian Studies in Criminology and Crime Prevention, 7, 126-141, retrieved March 18, 2007, from Academic Search Premier database.

Hudson, B. (2006). Beyond white man’s justice: Race, gender, and justice in late modernity. Theoretical Criminology, 10, 29-47, March 19, 2007, from Criminology: a SAGE full-text collection database.

Reisig, M. D.; Holtfreter, K.; Morash, M. (2006). Assessing recidivism risk across female pathways to crime. Justice Quarterly, 23, 384-404, retrieved March 18, 2007, from Academic Search Premier database.

Webber, C. (2007). Revaluating relative deprivation theory. Theoretical Criminology, 11, 97-120, retrieved March 19, 2007, from Criminology: a SAGE full-text collection database.

Wikstrom, P. H.; Treiber, K. (2007). The role of self control in crime causation: Beyond Gottfredson and Hirschi’s general theory of crime. European Journal of Criminology, 4, 237-264, retrieved March 19, 2007, from Criminology: a SAGE full-text collection database.

Zita, J. N. (1988). The feminist question of the science question in feminism. Hypatia, 3, 1-57, retrieved March 18, 2007, from Academic Search Premier database.