the chivalry thesis evaluation

Reference Library

Collections

See what's new
All Resources
Student Resources
Assessment Resources
Teaching Resources
CPD Courses
Livestreams

Study notes, videos, interactive activities and more!

Sociology news, insights and enrichment

Currated collections of free resources

Browse resources by topic

All Sociology Resources

Resource Selections

Currated lists of resources

Topic Videos

Chivalry Thesis - Gender and Crime

Last updated 30 Nov 2022

The concept of chivalry thesis as an explanation of why crime statistics show men commit many more criminal acts than women is explained in this video.

Gender identity & sexual orientation - census 2021 update for aqa a-level sociology.

Additions to Recommended Content in the AQA Teaching Guide (Crime & Deviance)

10th November 2022

Watch Recommendation: BBC Panorama - The Channel Crisis

10th October 2022

Pereira, ‘Girls Feel They Must ‘Play Dumb’ To Please Boys’, (2014)

Study Notes

What is Gender? Introduction to A-Level Sociology

City of liverpool comes together to call for change after olivia pratt-korbel murder.

6th September 2022

Sociology in the News: Cost of living crisis used by gangs to lure new recruits

16th August 2022

Topic Recap | Media and Crime (A-Level)

Teaching Activities

Our subjects

Boston House, 214 High Street, Boston Spa, West Yorkshire, LS23 6AD Tel: +44 0844 800 0085

Last Updated 20 Apr 2022

Assess the Value of the Chivalry Thesis in Understanding Gender Differences in Crime

Assess the value of the “chivalry thesis” in understanding gender differences in crime (21) The chivalry thesis is where women are treated more leniently than men by the criminal justice system. This is because of paternalism and sexism when it comes to male dominated police and courts. As a result of this, criminal statistics underestimate the true extent of female offending. This is because police officers are less likely to convict a woman of a less serious crime because it is a woman therefore are seen as more likely to just get a warning.

Graham and bowling (1995) did a self-report study on 14-25 year olds and found that 55% of males and 35% of females admitted to offences in the last twelve months. This suggests that males commit more crime than women in general although this self-report study is based on the younger generations of males and females. Women are also more likely to admit to their offences, which concludes this figure is an accurate one and may suggest that the male figure could also be even higher. Another study would be the youth lifestyles survey (2000) where it was found that 11% females and 26% males committed serious crimes in the last twelve months.

In general, women are seen to commit less serious crimes like shoplifting and are very rare for them to commit a violent crime. These statistics show that males are a lot more violent and are more capable of committing more serious crimes compared to women. Flood page et all (2000) found that one in eleven self-reported offences by women resulted in prosecution whereas one in seven did for males. This backs up what Allen (1987) says where women are less likely to be given custodial sentences for indictable motoring offences because they are able to talk their way out of it and apologise sweetly.

Order custom essay Assess the Value of the Chivalry Thesis in Understanding Gender Differences in Crime with free plagiarism report

This could also be the case when it comes to prosecution. As well as this, women are seen to be treated more leniently by law for example, first offenders are half as likely to be given a sentence of immediate imprisonment, where as if it was a man there is no doubt about it. Women are also seen by the police as a less serious threat compared to men and they seem to benefit from informal approaches to their offences such as just a caution or warning.

Pollak (1961) states that men(including police officers) are protective towards women and are less likely to prosecute them because of this, especially if it is a typical crime that a women is seen to commit. Female defendants are treated more sympathetically unless it is a crime against children or a serious crime that is seen as a crime only men commit. Because of this protectiveness towards women and courts giving them sympathy this creates an invalid picture on crime rates.

Another study would be the ministry of justice (2009) where 49% of females recorded of committing a crime received no more than a caution but in 2007 this figure was 30% which implies that this problem is getting worse year by year. On the other hand, studies by Graham and Bowling and Youth lifestyle study, both found that males tended to be involved in more serious offences, which would explain the higher proportions of men among the convicted and cautioned, also possible males are more likely than females to admit offences in self-report studies.

Box (1981) did a self-report study in Britain and USA and found that statistics on gender and crime are fairly accurate. He found that women who commit serious offences are not treated more favourably than men; as well as this the lower rate of prosecutions of females compared to the self-report studies may be because the crimes they admit to are less serious and aren’t likely to go on trial. Women offenders also seem a lot more likely to show regret, which may help to explain why they are more likely to receive a caution instead of going to court instead of police and courts just being seen as protective.

Buckle and Farrington (1984) found that men were twice as likely as women to shop lift even though official figures suggest men and women are equal. There could be many reasons for this, such as women could be a lot less subtle about it as they are seen as more innocent, whereas males hanging about browsing at things in a department store looks a lot more abnormal. Although women commit less serious crime, those who do are likely to face a serious punishment compared to the males that get convicted for the same crime.

This is because it isn’t seen as an acceptable way for a women to act as it defies their feminine role of being caring and loving. Violent crimes are seen to be male crimes because it is scientifically proven that males are a lot more aggressive compared to females because of their levels of testosterone. So when women commit a violent crime, the courts come down on them like a tonne of bricks because of how unnatural it is. Carlen (1997) says that’s sentences given to women are based on the female role and the way that a certain female fulfils this role and her character.

For example if she is an aggressive women, she will probably get a longer sentence as it strictly defies the female role, whereas if a women was very regretful about what she had done, the courts are more likely to give her sympathy and a softer sentence. If women commit a violent crime they are seen as doubly deviant because they aren’t just committing a crime they are defying their role as a women. Farrington and Morris (1983) did a study, which was the sentencing of 408 offences of theft in a magistrate’s court.

They found that women were not treated any differently when it came to crimes men and women both committed as they were seen to end up with similar sentences no matter what their circumstances were. This suggests that the chivalry thesis doesn’t always apply and it may not apply at all. There is seen to be a clear divide in what is and isn’t a female crime. Crimes like shoplifting aren’t as serious, which means that it may not always end up in court because bigger crimes come first which suggest looking at statistics from convictions and court sentences isn’t an accurate way of measuring the number of female criminals.

This may be why the male statistics are always higher because they are usually the ones to commit the worse crimes. Overall I don’t think the chivalry thesis is very valid as it forgets to look at the crimes women commit that don’t get recorded as they get off with a caution. Just because it isn’t a prison sentence, doesn’t mean that the police are being lenient with women it just means that women don’t often commit as serious crimes, but they still do commit crime.

Assess the Value of the Chivalry Thesis in Understanding Gender Differences in Crime essay

This essay was written by a fellow student. You can use it as an example when writing your own essay or use it as a source, but you need cite it.

Get professional help and free up your time for more important courses

Did you know that we have over 70,000 essays on 3,000 topics in our database?

Cite this page

Explore how the human body functions as one unit in harmony in order to life

Assess the Value of the Chivalry Thesis in Understanding Gender Differences in Crime. (2017, Mar 09). Retrieved from https://phdessay.com/assess-the-value-of-the-chivalry-thesis-in-understanding-gender-differences-in-crime/

Run a free check or have your essay done for you

More related Essays

Didn`t find the right sample?

Using material from item A and elsewhere, assess sociological views of crime reduction strategies. (21 marks). There are numerous different types of strategies for crime reduction. These include crime prevention.

My scorn-bound edition of Chambers Concise defines socialisation as "the act or process of socialising: the process by which infants and young children become aware of society and their relationship.

* Using your knowledge assess explanations of gender and ethnic inequalities in HEALTH CHANCES * Write about the health chances for the different situations within society. Health Chances- Can be defined as.

“Gender inequality exists to some extent, in most areas of society, in all countries of the world”. Geographically examine this statement. Gender inequality refers to unequal treatment or perceptions of.

THE IMPORTANCE OF UNDERSTANDING DIFFERENCES IN A BUSINESS SETTING In a business setting, understanding cultural, ethnic and gender differences can help managers and professionals ensure efficiency and productivity among fellow.

In to day s society we are more relaxed about many things. And that is what seems to cause the biggest difference between generations. Today the people of the younger.

Sociological theories of crime contain a great deal of useful information in the understanding of criminal behavior. Sociological theories are very useful in the study of criminal behavior because unlike.

Understanding the value of Creativity in Advertising Creativity is thinking new things. Innovation is doing new things. " (Theodore Levitt) In today’s media landscape where it’s very difficult to shape.

Find Study Materials for

Business studies, combined science.

English literature

Environmental Science

Human geography, macroeconomics, microeconomics.

Create Study Materials

Select your language.

Gender and Crime

Lerne mit deinen Freunden und bleibe auf dem richtigen Kurs mit deinen persönlichen Lernstatistiken

Nie wieder prokastinieren mit unseren Lernerinnerungen.

Did you know that men and women commit different types of crimes at different rates?

For example, men are more likely to commit crimes than women in general (although there’s been a change in the numbers since the late twentieth century). Men are also more likely to commit violent crimes, such as murder.

In this explanation, we will be looking at gender and crime in sociology . We'll cover:

The relationship between gender and crime

Gender differences in crime statistics

The relationship between gender and crime in sociology

To understand the link between gender and crime , sociology offers different theories explaining gendered differences in offending.

Before we dive into them, let's examine some statistics on gender and crime patterns.

If we look at the figures from the Ministry of Justice's 2019 report on Women and the Criminal Justice System , it is clear that women still commit fewer crimes, and less dangerous crimes, than men. 3

Out of approximately equal numbers of men and women in the population, 85% of the people arrested were men.

About 75% of those charged with criminal activities and 95% of prisoners were also men, which means that 5% of the total prison population are women.

Statistics show that 85-90% of male criminals commit serious crimes, e.g. violence and robbery, and 98% of sexual offenders are men while only 2% are women.

Summary non-motoring and fraud offences were somewhat balanced in terms of gender.

Gender and crime theories in sociology

There are several sociological theories on the relationship between gender and crime. These include:

The sex-role theory argues that gendered differences in crime rates result from differences in gender roles, identities, and processes of socialisation.

Followers of this perspective believe that the traditional values and norms associated with femininity discourage criminal activity and behaviour in women. However, the values and behaviours associated with masculinity are conducive to crime amongst men.

Femininity and low crime rates

According to Talcott Parsons (1937) , women traditionally perform the ‘ expressive role ’ in their families, including raising children and taking care of their husbands' emotional needs. As a result, girls grow up internalising values such as being caring and empathetic, which reduces their likelihood of causing harm to others or committing crimes.

Gender and Crime, Vintage drawing of housewife cooking in kitchen, StudySmarter.

Parsons also argues that women get more attached to their families and wider communities in carrying out the expressive role. They are more likely to keep in touch with relatives, friends, etc. This effectively broadens and strengthens their community bonds . Thus, women are less likely to commit crimes due to their attachments to others in broader society.

Additionally, due to traditional gender roles and expectations, in recent decades, women have taken up a ‘ dual burden ’ or ‘ second shift ’ of working while also being responsible for housework and childcare. This keeps them busier than men, reducing opportunities to engage in criminal activity.

Masculinity and high crime rates

During the early stages of socialisation , boys familiarise themselves with traditional masculine roles and identities that are partially responsible for the high crime rates among adult men.

American sociologist Edwin H. Sutherland (1960) suggests that the tendency to teach boys to be 'rough and tough' makes it more likely for them to engage in delinquent behaviour.

Sutherland claims that ever since masculine roles and values started to be ingrained in boys during adolescence , they engaged in more rebellious and unruly behaviour than girls. Similarly, young boys in gangs learn necessary traits of strong masculine identity, e.g. dominance and toughness, from other adult male members ( Cloward and Ohlin, 1960).

Gender and crime: feminist perspectives

There are two main strands of feminist theory concerning gender and crime: marginalisation and control theory .

Gender and crime: marginalisation

Some feminist sociologists assert that the marginal position of women in patriarchal societies is the primary reason men commit more crimes.

The marginalisation thesis suggests that men are not limited to domestic roles and duties and therefore have greater opportunities to commit occupational crimes or form criminal subcultures.

Gender and crime: control theory

Another explanation for gendered differences in offending is based on the idea that women are more controlled than men.

Conventional gender roles and behaviours imprinted during socialisation have given men more personal freedoms than women - men can stay outdoors for later hours, not be under strict supervision, etc.

In Frances Heidensohn’s (1985) view, women are controlled by their fathers and relatives as young girls and later by their husbands once they get married. The corresponding lack of supervision or control by authoritative figures in the case of men could therefore be responsible for their high levels of delinquent and/or criminal behaviour.

Pat Carlen argued that the class and gender deal combine and keep working-class women under control .

Class deal: working-class women would work hard in exchange for money which was then used to pay for consumer products and services.

Gender deal: women only engage in domestic labour - taking care of the needs of their husband, household, and family - and receive affection, love and financial support in return.

These deals kept working-class women respectable, and as suggested by Carlen , women committed crimes as a rational choice when these deals would break. As a feminist, Carlen believed that women were exploited in both areas - within families as well as by their employers in the capitalist structure.

Gender and crime: the liberation thesis

According to Freda Adler (1975) , increased freedom and growing economic opportunities for women have resulted in higher female crime rates. She argues that as women achieve similar social standings and employment patterns as men, they start to resemble men's criminal behaviours as well.

Adler based this theory on a cross-national correlation between the levels of women’s economic liberties and their crime rates.

Gender and crime: biological theories

Biological explanations focus on the biological differences between men and women to explain the differences in crime rates.

Men have higher testosterone levels than women, meaning that they are more likely to display aggression. This is why men tend to engage more in aggressive and/or criminal behaviour.

Gender and Crime, Black and white image of woman hands in handcuffs, StudySmarter.

Gender and crime: the chivalry thesis

While crime statistics show that men commit higher crime levels than women, some sociologists claim that statistical data does not reflect reality. This is because most male law enforcement officers tend to protect women from the criminal justice system out of a gentlemanly attitude known as the chivalry thesis .

This theory may seem somewhat fanciful, but it can be explained by gender roles and expectations . Letting off a person who has perpetrated a crime simply because they are a woman indicates that men’s ‘chivalrous’ approach rests on the belief that women are incapable of criminal behaviour. As they are considered emotionally or physically weak, women's crimes are taken less seriously .

Therefore both society and the criminal justice system may underestimate women's criminality and let them go rather than punishing them.

Otto Pollack argued women get away with committing as many crimes as men as they lie better. He further adds that this is natural to women as they learn the act of deceiving for reasons such as hiding menstruation and faking orgasms.

When regarding Pollack's argument, it is important to remember that accusing women of being more deceptive than men with no proof can be viewed as sexist .

Gender and crime: research topics

James Dabbs and Robin Morris conducted research in 1990 on the relationship between testosterone levels and antisocial behaviour. He studied over 4400 men and found that men with high testosterone levels tended to have issues with substance abuse, delinquency, etc. 1

These men were also more likely to have multiple sexual partners, troubled relationships with authority figures such as teachers, and were more vulnerable to using hard drugs. This was exacerbated by factors such as inadequate education and low incomes.

Another study by Dabbs et al. (1995) on young male prison occupants found that men with high testosterone levels engaged more in violent crimes, violated prison rules, and so on. 2 Even in women prisoners, Dabbs et al. found that elevated testosterone was related to unprovoked violence, decisions against parole, etc.

Evaluation of gender and crime theories

Stephen Jones (2008) disagrees with the liberation thesis and counters that women in prison were mostly suspects who were forced into criminal activities because of a controlling man due to patriarchal control .

Critical of "malestream" theories on gender and crime, Carol Smart points out that feminists need to develop a transgressive approach toward criminology and focus on what is harmful to women regardless of whether it is illegal or not. Theories of crime and deviance are generally based on men's interests, conditions, circumstances, etc. Therefore, we cannot expect them to carry the answers to women's issues.

Liberal feminists would diverge from the other feminist theories on gender and crime and consider them outdated, arguing that women in contemporary societies have achieved much more equality.

The number of female workers has comparatively increased in the criminal justice system . However, judges are primarily male.

Female crime is often considered 'doubly deviant'.

The concept of double deviance refers to the fact that women are treated more harshly than men for committing crimes - first, for breaking social norms and expectations of how women should behave, and secondly, for breaking the legal rule/law.

Gender and Crime: A Human Rights Approach

In Gender and Crime: A Human Rights Approach (2016), Marisa Silvestri and Chris Crowther-Dowey look at gender and crime issues through a human rights framework. The authors cover the fundamental problems with gender discrimination in the criminal justice system and argue for the recognition of the human rights of every person in the CJS.

Gender and Crime - Key takeaways

Frequently Asked Questions about Gender and Crime

--> what is the relationship between gender and crime.

To understand the link between gender and crime, sociology offers different theories explaining gendered differences in offending.

--> What influence does gender have on crime rates?

Men and women commit different types of crimes at different rates. For example, men are more likely to commit crimes than women in general (although there’s been a change in the numbers since the late 20th century). Men are also more likely to commit violent crimes such as murder.

--> How are gender and sexuality linked to crime and deviance?

An individual's gender, as well as their sexuality, can affect their likelihood of committing crimes/what crimes they commit.

--> Does age, race and gender affect youth crimes?

Age, race, and gender can all affect rates of youth crime.

--> What does gendered crime mean?

A gendered crime is a crime committed against a person solely because of their gender/the roles and characteristics associated with their gender. It can also refer to crimes that predominantly affect a specific gender.

Final Gender and Crime Quiz

Gender and crime quiz - teste dein wissen.

What is the sex-role theory?

Show answer

The sex-role theory argues that gendered differences in crime rates result from differences in gender roles, identities, and processes of socialisation .

Show question

According to Parsons, why are women less likely to commit crimes?

Talcott Parsons (1937) argues that women traditionally perform the ‘ expressive role ’ in their families, including raising children and taking care of their husbands' emotional needs. As a result, girls grow up internalising values such as being caring and empathetic, which reduces their likelihood of causing harm to others or committing crimes.

Fill in the blanks: Parsons also argues that women get more attached to their families and wider communities in carrying out the expressive role. They are more likely to keep in touch with relatives, friends, etc. This effectively broadens and strengthens their ____ ____. Thus, women are less likely to commit crimes due to their ____ to others in broader society.

Community bonds, attachments .

Which sociologist suggests that the tendency to teach boys to be 'rough and tough' makes it more likely for them to engage in delinquent behaviour?

Edwin H. Sutherland (1960).

Describe the 'dual burden' or 'second shift'.

In recent decades, women have taken up a ‘ dual burden ’ or ‘ second shift ’ of working while also being responsible for housework and childcare. This keeps them busier than men, reducing opportunities to engage in criminal activity.

What is the marginalisation theory of gender and crime?

Some feminist sociologists assert that the marginal position of women in patriarchal societies is the primary reason men commit more crimes.

The marginalisation thesis suggests that men are not limited to domestic roles and duties and therefore have greater opportunities to commit occupational crimes or form criminal subcultures.

Heidensohn’s control theory argues that female crime is less common because women are controlled more than men.

Finish the sentence: According to Freda Adler (1975) , increased freedom and growing economic opportunities for women have resulted in higher female crime rates. She argues that as women achieve similar social standings and employment patterns as men...

They start to resemble men's criminal behaviours as well.

What do biological theories focus on while explaining the relationship between gender and crime? Give an example.

Biological explanations focus on the biological differences between men and women to explain the differences in crime rates.

For instance, men have higher testosterone levels than women, meaning that they are more likely to display aggression. This is why men tend to engage more in aggressive and/or criminal behaviour.

What were the results of Dabbs et. al.'s research?

Men with high testosterone levels engaged more in violent crimes, violated prison rules, and so on.

What is the 'chivalry thesis'?

Describe Jones' (2008) argument against the liberation thesis.

What do we mean by 'doubly deviant'?

How does Carol Smart evaluate theories of gender and crime?

Men are more likely to commit crimes than women in general (although there’s been a change in the numbers since the late twentieth century). Men are also more likely to commit violent crimes, such as murder.

Mention some sociological theories on the relationship between gender and crime.

How does 'dual burden' affect women and crime?

Due to traditional gender roles and expectations, in recent decades, women have taken up a ‘ dual burden ’ or ‘ second shift ’ of working while also being responsible for housework and childcare. This keeps them busier than men, reducing opportunities to engage in criminal activity.

Define 'class deal'.

Class deal refers to a situation when working-class women would work hard in exchange for money which was then used to pay for consumer products and services.

Define the 'gender deal'.

Gender deal refers to when women only engage in domestic labour - taking care of the needs of their husband, household, and family - and receive affection, love and financial support in return.

Liberal feminists broadly agree with the other feminist theories on gender and crime, arguing that women still face much discrimination in society.

of the users don't pass the Gender and Crime quiz! Will you pass the quiz?

More explanations about Crime and Deviance

Discover the right content for your subjects, english literature, no need to cheat if you have everything you need to succeed packed into one app.

Be perfectly prepared on time with an individual plan.

Test your knowledge with gamified quizzes.

Create and find flashcards in record time.

Create beautiful notes faster than ever before.

Have all your study materials in one place.

Upload unlimited documents and save them online.

Study Analytics

Identify your study strength and weaknesses.

Weekly Goals

Set individual study goals and earn points reaching them.

Smart Reminders

Stop procrastinating with our study reminders.

Earn points, unlock badges and level up while studying.

Magic Marker

Create flashcards in notes completely automatically.

Smart Formatting

Create the most beautiful study materials using our templates.

Join millions of people in learning anywhere, anytime - every day

This is still free to read, it's not a paywall.

You need to register to keep reading, get free access to all of our study material, tailor-made.

Over 10 million students from across the world are already learning smarter.

StudySmarter bietet alles, was du für deinen Lernerfolg brauchst - in einer App!

Feminist perspective of crime – revision notes with evaluative points

Gender and the criminal Justice System

(-) Heidenson came up with the double deviance theory. This is a criticism of the chivalry thesis as it instead argued that women are in fact treated worse by the CJS than men as female criminals are seen as doubly deviant. They have deviated from both their social norms as well as their gender norms.

Continues…

Follow Blog via Email

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Email Address:

Follow me on Twitter

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

The chivalry thesis claims that women will be treated more leniently for committing certain crimes, generally shoplifting is often associated more with females than males, but the statistics suggest that males commit many more acts of theft than women, an

Using material from Item A and elsewhere, assess the value of ‘chivalry thesis ‘in understanding differences in crime. gfg

Pollak (1950) was of the opinion that police and magistrates tended to be more ‘chivalrous’ and ‘lenient’ towards female offenders, resulting in sentence disparities, and as a result, criminal statistics underestimate the amount of female offending. (Item A).

Pollak (1961) argued that men – namely in this case police officers, magistrates and judges, are socialised to be protective towards women and thus are less likely to chare or prosecute them, and are also treated more leniently in court. Pollak goes further to argue that women are accustomed to deceiving men, for example in faking orgasms during sex, or lying in a relationship to gain material wealth. This skill in deceit mean that their crimes, such as poisoning and infanticide, are less easily uncovered (item A) leading to women being underrepresented in criminal statistics.

The chivalry thesis claims that women will be treated more leniently for committing certain crimes, generally shoplifting is often associated more with females than males, but the statistics suggest that males commit many more acts of theft than women, and this may be because females are let off with a warning rather than a conviction. This could be because the statistics of crime are so male dominated, a police officer may not think convicting a woman of petty theft is worth it, when there may be, in his opinion, a man selling drugs elsewhere, it may not be worth it in his view. Similarly, men are more likely to be convicted of theft because the criminal justice system seemingly victimises males over females, while it is probably more likely that males are more likely to commit crime than females, the gap between the crime rates between gender may not be as large as first assumed. It is also possible that female occurrences of shoplifting, as Pollak argues, never even come to the attention of the authorities, again because more often than not they are not reported.

Farrington and Morris (1983) which involved a study of ‘sentencing’ in Magistrates courts. They discovered in 1979, 6.6% of men, but only 2% of women found guilty of indictable offences were imprisoned. Although men received more severe sentences than women, the research found the differences disappeared when the severity of offences was taken into account. Although personal opinions of the judges, witness reports or specific details of the crimes in question may have played a role, this does show that to an extent women are more likely to be let off for an offence.

This is a preview of the whole essay

Hilary Allen (1989) based upon an examination criminal statistics of 1987, showed apparent leniency towards female offenders. For example, of people found guilty of indictable motoring offences, 73% of women, but only 54% of men were given fines, this difference resulting in more men being given prison sentences. Although these findings may not show the severity of the specific offences. Campbell through self report studies in 1976, of urban schoolgirls, compared to 16 year old males, these sources showed that 1.33 offences were committed by males for every 1.0 for females, this hugely contrasted to 1976 official figures on convictions, which showed 8.95 convictions for every female 1.0. This shows how official statistics can be greatly misleading, that although males may convict more crime, the gulf between the amount of offences shown by statistics, and popular opinion, is not as wide as it seems.

Although these studies do give evidence towards the chivalry thesis, the bulk of research does not give this indication. Steven box 1981, reviewed data from self report studies in UK and USA, and concluded that ‘the weight of evidence on women committing serious offences does not give clear support to the view that they receive differential and more favourable treatment from members of the public, police or judges’. Although it has to always be remembered that in a self report study, the validity and reliability relies upon the respondent’s ability and willingness to tell the truth, which is not always apparent.

To counter this, Buckle and Farrington carried out an observational study on shoplifting in a British department store in England 1981, found that only 1.4 % of the 361 females observed shoplifted, whereas 2.8% of the 361 males did. Although far too small of a sample to conclude anything categorically, it does provide evidence against the chivalry thesis.

A rather different, feminist view is that women are treated far more harshly by the criminal justice system than men, which often is the case in rape trials. Carol Smart argues that such trials ‘celebrate notions of male sexual need and female sexual capriciousness. ‘ The feminist view is often of the opinion that women are labelled as being dressed provocatively, being drunk when the rape occurred, or often the male in the case argues she did not object at the time of the incident, and by these happenings the male is let off. A similar feminist opinion is found in the case of domestic violence, in a study on domestic violence by Dobash and Dobash, it was found that police officers were ‘very unlikely to make an arrest when the offender has used violence against his wife. ‘(1979). this has spurred feminist campaigners to urge police officers to take cases of domestic violence more seriously.

Pollak’s full chivalry thesis is in short, slightly sexist as it states that ‘women are particularly adept at hiding their crimes, this is attributed to female biology ‘. Because of his inadequate analysis the theory has been subject to a heavy and fierce amount of criticism. Frances Hiedensohn 1985 slated the theory greatly, stating that is was based on analysis that had very little evidence and many unsupported assumptions, she regarded it as being based upon an unsubstantiated stereotypical image of women. In conclusion, although some parts of Pollak’s chivalry thesis, namely the parts saying women are naturally more likely to conceal crime are quite unsupported and base, studies associated with the theory have hinted that women are often in some cases treated more leniently by the criminal justice system. Although the extent of this cannot really be measured, statistics would have us believe that the gap between male and female criminality is huge, but upon closer investigation this is not the case. Reasons for this may be that criminology and sociology is largely dominated by males that the research is done on males by males, leading to an underrepresentation on female crime, or that perhaps female crimes are comparatively seen as trivial and are not deemed worthy of research. Whichever way it is looked it, there is a case for the argument that females are often not treated as harshly as males upon committing crime, but of course the opposite argument could be valid also.

Teacher Reviews

Here's what a teacher thought of this essay.

Matthew Wilkin

Overall this is a really strong essay. The content never drifts from the focus of the question, there is a good even debate on both sides of the discussion and the use of the item has been applied well. The studies applied are also very effective and support the evidence throughout. At times there is opportunity to apply key terms such as iceberg theory or the hidden figure of crime.

The chivalry thesis claims that women will be treated more leniently for committing certain crimes, generally shoplifting is often associated more with females than males, but the statistics suggest that males commit many more acts of theft than women, an

Document Details

Related Essays

Examine some of the reasons why females may be less likely than males to co...

crimes committed by males and females

Are women underrepresented in crime statistics because of sexism within the...

Asses the arguments and evidence which suggest women commit much less crime...

sociologysaviour

Everything you need to pass a2 sociology, women and crime – unit 4.

Gender patterns in Crime – Official Statistics

Do women commit more crime?

The Chivalry Thesis

Evidence for the Chivalry Thesis

Evidence Against the Chivalry Thesis

Bias against women

Evidence for Bias Against Women

Sex Role Theory and Gender Socialisation

McRobbie (1978)

Invisible Female Offenders

Heidensohn (1989) – believed that previously sociological researchers had been male dominated , ignoring the role of women in crime. Therefore, women are not committing more crime now, their crimes are just being acknowledged within sociology.

Heidensohn : Patriarchal Control

Liberation thesis – Adler 1975

Evaluation of liberation thesis

Pat Carlen 1988 – Class and gender deals

Masculinity and crime

Criminology & Sociology Hull – Student Research Journal

Student research journal, gender differences and sentencing: a critical literature review.

This review focuses on various pieces of literature that surrounds the perceived differences in sentencing gender. Also, literature examining the reasons why these differences are taking place between genders, and theories that could be applied when explaining these differences, will be scrutinised in order to give an indication as to whether a reason for gender differences in sentencing has been identified. The two theories that will be focused are the Chivalry theory (including Selective Chivalry) and the Double Deviance/ Evil Woman theory. Some other factors effects on sentencing, and the literature surrounding them, were also looked at as it would be negligent to say that only one factor could cause the perceived disparity between male and female sentencing. This review mainly focused on bodies of work based in the United States of America. This is because a large amount of research has been done in this area in the United States. Therefore, any questions answered will mostly be only applicable to that country due to cultural and legal differences in other parts of the world. Throughout the review a lot of bodies of research can be seen to be relatively supportive of the ideas that Double Deviance and Selective Chivalry has on the sentencing process, less so for regular chivalry. This is because various other factors seem to have some sort of effect as well as gender. Therefore, it is perhaps inaccurate to point to gender being the factor that decisively affects the sentencing outcomes. More research should be done in this area to fully grasp the relationship between gender and sentencing outcomes, while taking into account a larger number of relevant factors (legal and extra-legal) in order to not over attribute the outcomes to gender.

Author: Kieran Malon, April 2020

BA (Hons) Criminology with Psychology

1. Introduction

A question that has long been discussed in various forms of academic literature is why there seems to be a difference in how genders are treated during the sentencing phase of trials. Within the United States the male population in prisons massively outnumber the female population. This may suggest a difference in how genders are treated at some stage during the criminal justice process in the United States. The stage that will be focused on within this review will be the sentencing phase of the system. A focus will also be made on two theories that have been looked at in various pieces of academic literature as well as other factors that may be contributing to this disparity in treatment. The literature will then be reviewed, and its validity will be looked at in relevancy and ability to test and explain the differences between genders.

The sentencing phase of the criminal justice process was chosen because there is evidence to suggest that this area is where the most difference in how the differing genders are treated in relation to what they are sentenced to do. This is suggested by academic literature like authors such as Steffensmeier et, al (1998), who used the gender effect as one of the factors that affect how an individual is sentenced, and Gelsthorpe (2013) who also looked at this factor as well as whether that number is justified in the crimes the crimes they commit. The justifiability may come in the form of whether the different genders get the same treatment when it comes to being sentenced to a crime that is similar in nature. If after looking at that justifiability differences do appear, we will then begin the process of looking at why that may be. Some theories that have been hypothesised will be looked at in relation to any differences in treatment found and the literature surrounding these theories will be reviewed and scrutinised in order to find if they have any relevant effects on modern sentencing outcomes.

The two theories that will be focused on when it comes to this topic are the Double Deviance theory and the Chivalry theory. These two are theories that have been discussed frequently in literature when it comes to this area of the criminal justice system. The literature surrounding these theories will be further discussed later in the text and their relevance, or lack of, will also be discussed further on. Beyond these two theories however, I will also be briefly looking at further factors that have been hypothesised to affect this stage as well as the gender of a defendant. This may include popular factors in research in this area such as race and age of a defendant. Also, as these factors may interrelate with each other it is important to discuss how these may be advantageous to some groups of people and disadvantageous to other groups. This may lead to different sentencing being given to different groups of people depending on characteristics that may be out of their control.

Review Structure

Within this review, three studies have been chosen as the focus for each of the theories (Chivalry and Double Deviance/ Evil Woman). These studies will be analysed as well as various other forms literature on these theories and relevant studies will be mentioned in reference to whether they support the studies in focus. An attempt at looking at a variety of different crimes has been made to investigate whether the theories apply or not across a spectrum of different sentencing events. In order to take into account other factors that may contribute to any differences, other than gender, in sentencing, two legal and two extra-legal factors have been chosen for further discussion. However, it should be noted that there are a range of other factors that will not be discussed in as much detail due to the large amount. But it is noted that these other factors exist that may influence sentencing decisions. This will be finished with a discussion on future studies that could be conducted as well as the limitations of this review and a conclusion on what can be found from the reviewed literature.

2. Chivalry, Selective Chivalry, and Paternalism Theory

This is an idea that was put forward by Otto Pollak (1950) to suggest that women within the criminal justice system are treated much more leniently than men due to the idea of chivalry towards women. Later Paternalism would be identified as something that frequently follows the chivalry aspect. It is suggested under this theory that law officials/judges see women as child-like and defenceless in their behaviour (Herzog and Oreg, 2008) and therefore are in need of protection, this leads to said leniency I favour of women. It can be said that Pollak’s research could be seen as outdated, we look at whether elements of the theory can be seen in today’s criminal justice system when looking at sentencing. Paternalism has led to modifications to the Chivalry theory however, this has been called Selective Chivalry. It is suggested by Farnworth and Teske (1995) that the leniency that comes with this chivalry idea is only open to white women and those who have wealthy backgrounds (Jeffries and Bond, 2013). There have been studies conducted on a range of different crimes which then have looked at how chivalry could possibly influence how sentencing decisions turn out the way in which they do.

Holland and Prohaska (2018) conducted a study in which they looked at whether females were more likely than males to receive shorter sentences while also controlling for relevant factors that could possibly affect the sentences also. One factor that they did want to account for and investigate further, in addition to gender, was race. Racial effects will be discussed in more depth further in the review, however they did want to see, as well as if there are differences between men and women, whether there are differences in sentences between women of different racial groups. This would allow a view into whether just gender could possibly effect sentencing between the males and females, or if other factors also need to be present to effect sentencing. Therefore, a second hypothesis was that white women would receive more lenient sentences than women of colour, which would support the work of Farnworth and Teske (2008) who suggested chivalry would only apply to white women. They also took into account geography when making various assumptions about what the results may show in their hypotheses. They hypothesised that women in the south of the country will be sentenced differently from women in other regions. The data collected looks at all federal cases that spanned the year between the 1 st of October 2014 and 30 th of September 2015. Also, due to the database containing information on a range of controls for legal and extra-legal factors, it means that an in depth analysis can be done to measure the various factors influence on the sentencing process and seeing how they could interact with the gender factor to lead to a sentencing outcome.

From the results, they found that their first hypothesis was proven correct. Women in general did receive shorter sentence lengths in comparison to males. This is also with legal factors considered and supports the chivalry theory. This supports the various bodies of work that have shown similar results through various experiments they have conducted (Doerner and Demuth, 2010; Rodriguez et al., 2006). This supports the idea that women are not seen by law officials as being as culpable for the crimes they committed as men are. However, the results contradicted the selective chivalry claims that would suggest that white women would mostly benefit from the leniency hypothesised in the chivalry theory. Hispanic and black women got shorter sentences when sentenced for federal drug crimes. This is surprising as the reverse has been shown in respect to selective chivalry as white women have benefitted the least from the suggested leniency shown in the results of this study. However, that may be because they have been adjudged to have been more out of line with traditional gender roles leading them to punished as doubly deviant rather then being viewed as needing protection.

There are some limitations on this study even if it does cover a population across a large area (Across multiple states). This is a problem in itself as guidelines differ across different states. This means that some judges will have more discretion than others, allowing them more freedom in decision making on sentences. Therefore, that has to be taken into account when looking at the results. Therefore, this may need to be built upon by more studies looking on a state by state basis accounting for those guidelines and taking them into account. There are also multiple other variables that could be explored. These may explain any contradiction with other forms of research that show support for selective chivalry as it does not have any detail on if these other factors could have had a effect on the sentencing process.

Embry and Lyons (2012) focused their study on the discrepancies in the way that male and female sex offenders are sentenced and how chivalry theory could possibly have an influence in these sentencing decisions. They give an initial idea of what they expect to find, which is based upon previous literature (Jeffries, Fletcher and Newbold, 2003; Curry, Lee and Rodriguez, 2004), that females receive more lenience than males do when it comes to sentencing. For their study, they collected data from the National Corrections Reporting program in order to do secondary data analysis. The sample they used was spread over ten years but they originally had more than this. They used the most recent ten years in order to get the most relevant results. This gave them a more modernised picture of what is affecting the current sentencing process as values and views can change over time. Also, using a large time frame allowed them to offset another problem which is the low number of female offenders who have been sentenced on being a sex offender. Therefore, looking at a data set over a larger period allows them to have a large sample of female offenders in the data to look at and analyse.

From the study, the evidence showed that although there is no difference in sentencing rates between men and women who commit sexual offences, men do tend to get harsher sentences. This shows that although judges can see that women should be charged (because they have committed a crime), they may not believe that they are as perhaps dangerous as male sex offenders are. Embry and Lyons (2012) earlier talk about this stereotypical image of a sex offender, which is usually a male offender with victim coming to mind as a young female according to them. This could be proven to have some accuracy if you look at the perceived leniency that could be inferred from the results of this study. Due to women not fitting the stereotypical image of a sex offender, even if they have in fact committed the crime, they may still be deemed as less dangerous as a male sex offender. This shows that although the decision that all genders need to be punished for criminal offences is equal, the severity of the punishment across genders is not equal.

There are areas that could be developed in this study in order to perhaps improve its scope and relevancy to a broader population as well as limitations that can be identified in this study. Although the number of women that were included in these studies was a fairly even split, this may not always be a study that can be compared to real life. This is because although it was a fairly even numbers, compared to a lot of studies, the offending rates of women are way below the offending rates of males. Therefore, even if they did get a better idea how the factors and theories may affect a trial. Therefore, if you did want to investigate these discrepancies women will based on even figures, women will be sampled far more than they generally offend. These results may simply seem to point to one answer when it is simply just a question of numbers in terms of offending rates. There is also an issue with the fact that the study they conducted was built from basic figures taken from the data base they were sourced. Although we can assume from the studies that support the chivalry theory that sentence lengths were affected by the gender of the individual being sentenced, we can be certain due to the lack of specificity within the statistics. Therefore, we cannot rule out the fact that there was a higher percentage of males who had committed a more severe form of the crime that they had committed in comparison to the females who were being sentenced. A final limitation would be that although they would class this as a cautious generalization, they could only possibly say that it is a cautious generalization of the population in the United States, where it was based. The sample population that had been sentenced that they were looking at was entirely from the United States, if they broadened their sample to include statistics from various other countries a much larger cautious observation could be made.

Therefore, if they were going to look at doing a further study with this as the basis, a few steps should be taken to expand on this body of research. A more detailed data set would be needed in order to see more information about crimes committed or perhaps so we can find out more about the defendant being sentenced. We would hopefully be able to see whether Chivalry was in fact taking affect in the sentencing phase, if there were legitimate reasons for sentencing for one group being to harsher degree or if other theories and factors may be able to be more relevant in affecting the process. Finally, a sample of offenders that are from a range of different countries in order to give it the best chance of it being more generalizable to the rest of the world. Different countries have different views, values and offending rates. It would therefore be interesting to see if these theories can be applied across more than just one country.

Study Three

A final study that looks at the Chivalry theory is a study conducted by Spivak et al. (2014), who looked at an area that is unique from the other pieces of literature that were focussed upon. They looked at status offences committed by juvenile offenders. Status offences committed by juveniles include but not limited to, truancy, consumption of alcohol or tobacco or running away. This is an interesting area as previous literature done on this suggests that status offences are the only area in the juvenile system in which female offenders outnumber male offenders (Tracey et al., 2009). It is generally assumed that males do commit more crime than females (Messerschmidt, 2007) and so to find a category in which males do not outnumber females, and in fact females outnumber males, makes it an area for further study. The study was conducted in Oklahoma and the data was collected by a local agency that collects basic data on juvenile cases. They then cut down the cases to only look at the relevant cases in relation to the type of crime they were looking at (Status offences). In relation to this review, two of the hypotheses included looking at the cases as to whether the chivalry theory could apply to these cases. More specifically, they wanted to see if girls’ cases were filed for review, in comparison to boys. They suggest that if proven this may show a want to make sure girls’ cases are scrutinised to make sure they get a correct judgement.

From the results of the study conducted, both hypotheses relating to chivalry seem to be supported. The results show in this that girls were more likely then boys to have their cases further reviewed. An idea of why this could be explained by the chivalry theory is they want to try and protect girls from being guilty through further looking at their cases and the circumstances behind them. This perhaps leading to mitigating circumstances being shown on their behalf which could result in them receiving lesser sentences. Therefore, if chivalrous and paternalistic attitudes can be found even when it comes to looking at cases involving juveniles, it suggests that the want to protect females may start from juvenile court and be seen through most age groups once moved to be judged and sentenced as an adult. However, in this case it must be noted that although it was shown that girls did tend to get lesser sentences than boys, the relationship between gender and lesser sentences was very weak. Meaning that more studies must be done in this area as it is inconclusive when it comes to whether sentencing may differentiate between female and male juveniles, even if there is a slight relationship in favour leniency towards girls.

As is a regular problem when it comes to a lot of research in this area, a lot focus on one state for their research. This means that it cannot be generalisable as there are many differences in population and justice processes across the world and even in the United States. Therefore, more research in this area would be needed specially to help the more inconclusive aspects of this study. The database used is also quite dated for this study as they admit. This means that changes might be viewed if data was collected for juvenile cases now. If policies have been brought more recently, this may lead to a difference in results and lead to different hypotheses being drawn.

3. Double Deviance / Evil Woman

Double Deviance is theory based on the point of view that certain women are punished under the view of doing two things wrong. They are viewed as having broken societal norms and expectations of how a woman behaves, as well as breaking the law. They are then judged upon the basis that they have done doubly wrong. Murphy and Brown (2000) suggest that under this theory it creates a situation where women can either be demonised or can be shown more leniency depending on if they broke these societal norms on what is expected of women. Double Deviance theory which is sometimes referred to as the Evil Woman theory. Although this idea may seem like selective chivalry in the way in which some women may be treated more leniently. It differs greatly in the notion that women who break these societal ideas of gender norms are punished even greater than men do when they commit the same crime. Women who fit into this theory and are seen as doubly deviant are seen as more blame worthy in this case which leads to harsher sentences, even if the crime they have committed is the same (Herzog and Oreg, 2008; Tillyer, Hartley and Ward, 2015).

Tillyer et, al (2015) based their study on looking at the perceived unfairness that exists within the court systems. Although they noted various factors may contribute to these differing sentencing outcomes between various groups, they chose to focus this study on gender and the different theories surrounding the gender factor. The crime they chose to investigate was narcotic cases taken from a federal data base. Narcotic cases have been chosen because it is a crime that will be viewed as breaking traditional gender roles. Therefore, if the theory is to be accurate the results will show that women get a harsher punishment then men who commit the same crime. Some factors may effect this as well however such as criminal history as well as evidence showing that race may have an effect as well (Spohn and Holleran, 2006) therefore that also has to be taken into account when looking at the gender and sentencing differences. The dates taken from the database in order to be analysed has been specifically chosen due to it have the highest amount of women to have committed crime within this time frame, with females being most populous being sentenced for this crime than any other in the dates analysed. This should allow for a good comparison to be made between male and female sentencing cases as it gives more cases that will be analysed then other crimes and dates. According to the authors they look to answer two hypotheses. They want to test whether women with limited criminal history will get more lenient sentences and those with extensive criminal history get a harsher sentence then their male counterparts.

The results in this case showed support for both the hypotheses in their assumptions. The first hypothesis which suggested more lenient sentences for women who had limited criminal histories was correct. This can be assumed under the Double Deviance theory that it has led to those who are deemed to have acted in accordance with the image of how an idealised woman should act, which has led to them getting a more lenient sentence overall. The results gained from the database also suggested that the second hypothesis was also correct in it assumption that women who have been deemed to have broken the law and the norms of societal conduct for a women have been punished more severely than men who committed a similar offense. This assumption supports the hypothesis of Bontrager et, al (2013) and Herzog and Oreg (2008) that women are punished further for factors and occurrences that allow them to be viewed as doubly deviant. However, this could also show why there is a gap between the genders within the prison numbers. Although some women are overly punished for breaking a conceived notion of how a woman should act, some are also being given lesser sentences then men for committing similar crimes, which may explain some huge gaps in numbers between the genders in prisons. This study also shows the importance of how criminal history interacts with gender to influence the sentencing phase. That is a unique aspect about this study and has allowed it identify a key factor that has effected women who are being sentenced and may allow law officials to become more aware of factors that may be unconsciously effecting their decision making process. This sort of identification, if it increased awareness, could lead to more equal sentences in regards to these factors.

The limitations that have been noted does increasingly affect the ability to make this study generalizable. A large limitation that seems plague this study is the effect that new policy changes have on the sentencing phase. These policy changes may give judges more or less discretion when it comes to sentencing. For example, if a policy came in after this study was released that limited a judge’s discretion on sentencing for crimes like drug crimes, it may lead to a more equal distribution regardless of gender. This would be because a judge would then have less freedom when they are passing a sentence and may have to stick to more rigid guidelines when sentencing. If a policy such as this did come into law, then another study would have to be held in order to investigate how these changes may have affected sentencing and may lead to theories like the double deviance theory losing its validity. A further limitation is absence of a few different factors that may provide more information on the complexities when it comes to examining gender and sentencing. For example, they only limitedly consider factors such as family status and whether they are depended upon by others, which may include children. This is identified as a factor that could influence a sentencing decision and would be helpful if a more in depth study was done to look at how factors such as this could impact the findings and if they would give them a different look to lead to different findings.

The study conducted by Koons-Witt et, al (2012) had a smaller focus when it comes to population they focused on. They conducted their study on the state of South Carolina, whereas the previous study looked at sentences across the country. However, within this study they looked at various crimes to see how the effect of gender changes across the various crimes that are committed. As well as looking at how gender has an effect when it comes to sentencing, they consider various other factors and how they interact with interact with gender sentencing processes. These include race and gender which will be discussed later in the review. Within the study they expect to find that women are treated more leniently when it comes to sentencing, which is in line with chivalry theory. However, as mentioned within this study the environment they a basing this study in must be taken into account. According to Koons-Witt et, al (2012) the state of South Carolina historically has rather conservative views of women which means that there may be stronger view, than in most places, in the traditional gender role of women. Traditional crimes for women are often non-violent crimes such as fraud according to Rodriguez et, al (2006). Therefore, when women commit crimes that are not viewed as traditionally crimes women commit (violent crimes), the evil woman hypothesis may have a stronger effect then it may do in states or countries with less conservative views. The data for this study was collected from a now disbanded commission within the state. They focused on the latest data set that was made by the commission which was from 2001. This was due to various reforms that made the data collected before problematic to use. Therefore, they had 12 months of data to study and analyse.

The results for this study again showed support for the double deviance hypothesis. Similarly Tillyer et, al (2015), shows that only women with very limited criminal history are shown leniency in this case. Koons-Witt et, al (2012) mentions how the effect of women having an extensive criminal history background makes the leniency that is shown to women completely vanishes which then leads to them being sentenced on the same level as men. A woman with an extensive criminal history seems to then lose the protection that is often shown when it comes to sentencing. This could be as the law officials view that as the criminal history builds up, they are viewed as increasingly culpable for their actions and lose leniency that they are perceived to have. As a result, they receive greater sentences than females with lesser criminal histories might have. The support for the evil woman theory is further shown by this study because it again shows that women are shown leniency up until a certain point within the criminal justice system. Although this study focuses just on one state, it still supports a pattern that has been shown in many different pieces of literature on this topic (Belknap, 2007; Franklin & Fearn, 2008). This can also explain why there is a clear difference in how women and men are treated in this study. They note that in the sample they looked at the average for women with no criminal history was lower than the average for males with no criminal history. Therefore, this would then lead to a lack of cases where the double deviance hypothesis would take place which would, if women did have a higher average criminal history, theoretically lead to more women being sentenced on a similar or more harsh level then the males.

There some limitations to this study and suggestions on how to further this line of research in the future, if it has not already been conducted. The focus of this study was on, as the author says, a rather conservative state in relation to how women are supposed to behave. Due to this being on juts the single state, it would be interesting to see how this would compare to other states that are viewed as conservative in a similar way to South Carolina. This would give a better idea of how the ideological in the environment may change how different genders are sentenced. If similar results are seen, then it can be ruled out as an outlier and helps with generalizability. It would also be interesting to see how a more liberal state would sentence with a focus on differences between genders. This would give information on whether the conservativeness of the environment may have an effect of sentencing between genders and if it does, how much of an effect does it have. Due to it being secondary data they are working from as well, they cannot control what was recorded and what was not recorded. This has led to various factors being excluded from the recorded data that may have had an influence on the sentencing process. Although this may not have necessarily affected what was learnt from the results, some information that may have allowed a further, more detailed analysis from taking place. This would have looked at how these factors interacted with gender and sentencing outcomes, due to some of these factors often being stereotypically thought of as female roles, such as whether there are dependent children or the role of the individual with a family. These may have an effect due to women often being thought of as the primary care giver when children are involved compared to males. Daly (1987) suggested that women are more likely to receive leniency due to them holding important familial roles. This therefore that accounts for some disparity in sentencing outcomes between genders. However, without data recorded on this factor we cannot tell if this influenced sentencing outcomes in this case.

Tasca et, al (2018) based their study upon analysing how parental status and sentence length interact with each other. The study was based in the state of Arizona with data collected through self-report and official data. The questions for their study were based around whether the parenthood factor, whether they have children that they care for, get affected by gender when sentencing. They also wanted to look at how sentencing lengths vary between offenders without children as well as parents who are involved with their children and those who are not involved. Various studies have already been done in this area on how familial status may affect sentencing outcomes (Daly, 1987; Freiburger, 2011). However, the unique aspect of this study is that it also considers how involved the offender may be with their children. This will give a more complex look into how the parenting dynamic affects sentencing outcome, while considering how gender plays into the dynamic. Within this study, they also look at various smaller factors within the parenting dynamic, such as how women incarcerated often tend to be single mothers with reliant children. Therefore, with factors like these in mind it may be easier to interpret the results as well as make initial predictions. Although within this study they are not necessarily looking into how the evil woman theory plays into this study, through the results it gives you an idea of how the theory’s ideas may have had a role in affecting the sentencing outcomes.

The results, if split between men and women parents, without breaking them down into the further categories could already suggest that women might be viewed as doubly deviant in the crimes they have committed. This is because the results show that female parents received longer sentences than fathers. Under the evil woman hypothesis, you could suggest that this may be because they have broken the traditional gender role of committing a crime when they are supposedly the primary caregiver in comparison males who are traditionally the economic support for the family. These initial results contradict previous research and hypothesis (Daly, 1987; Daly, 1989), however there may be other factors to be revealed that explain this further in the results section. Once the results were then further broken down, although it did show that women who lived with their children prior to arrest received more lenient sentences compared to mothers uninvolved with their children. However, it still shows that males still received less harsh sentences then the women. The fact that the results did show less lenient sentences on women who were uninvolved with their children could suggest that double deviance has an effect. It could be argued that the women who are uninvolved with their children are being more severely punished for not performing their motherly duties and are therefore being punished for more than just the crime they committed. It is also mentioned that the sample was drawn from offenders who are not new to being involved with the criminal justice system. Therefore, the criminal history factor also has to be taken into account as it has been earlier suggested that it can negate any leniency they may have been granted under the chivalry theory (Tillyer et al, 2015; Koons-Witt et al, 2012). Therefore, it could be argued that because this study was mainly populated by a sample of women who have a criminal history, most would lose the leniency effect that would be applied to those without a criminal history. Meaning that if the evil woman theory was applied here it could explain why the women had on average a higher length of sentence then the males did. As under the theory they would be treated more harshly for breaking traditional gender roles and committing the crime.

There are couple of limitations and suggestions for future studies that could be made based from this study. One limitation of this is the need for a larger sample. This is because varying court systems throughout the United States, as well as throughout the world, may show different results. It may have been more generalizable if they at least looked at various court judgements in different states within the country. Due to the different court systems between states giving judges varying degrees of discretion, that may prove to be a key factor in how sentencing patterns show in the results. Therefore, a larger more varied sample should be looked at in further research to see if the results and hypotheses drawn from the results are applicable to more than just Arizona. As the authors mentioned also, the majority of the sample had criminal backgrounds and that may have had a potential effect on the results. Therefore, a more varied sample in terms of whether they have a vast criminal history or not should be explored. This will allow a more balanced view on how much effect certain factors have on the sentencing process as it hard to measure the effect of factors such as criminal history when many of them have criminal histories.

4. Contradicting Literature

Although a lot of literature that has been analysed show a pattern that supports the hypotheses. There is going to be some literature that contradicts the pattern that is seen. This can be for various reasons and these reasons can be discussed later when looking at the literature. One piece of literature that was reviewed did seem to contradict the pattern of support and although there may be more, only one will be the focus here.

A study that contradicts the findings in support of the theory is one that looks at chivalry in relation to nonviolent offending. Specifically, the study undertaken by Koeppel (2012), looks at nonviolent property crime in rural areas in the state of Iowa, in the United States. This study is interesting as Rodriguez et, al (2006) mentioned that there are varying degrees of leniency in the sentencing process depending on the crime, but males do often receive harsher sentences. Rodriguez et, al (2006) and their body of work suggested that males were more likely to receive harsher sentence outcomes when it comes to property crime. This, if backed up by continuous research as well as the study of focus here, would look like it would be following a pattern on which females receive more lenient sentences across multiple types of crime. The author of this study (Koeppel, 2012) suggests that we may see differences because of the setting also, as the they are focussing on a rural setting. Steffensmeier et al. (1998) suggests that because of the volume of cases that an urban judge must get through, they succumb to using stereotypes and generalizations in order to make their decisions. Therefore, if this theory is correct, we should see a decline in the difference in sentences between male and female who commit the same crime. This could then show evidence against chivalry and suggest other factors may yet have a larger influence on sentencing.

The data was collected from five small rural counties that have similar demographics; this could then decrease the effect that different environments may have had on the process. The sample size in this case is a 507 split between 188 females and 319 males. Worth noting also was that 95% of the sample were white which will be a point brought up later when analysing this study. The presumed result for this study was based from previous research and that a clear pattern of leniency in favour of females would be present. However, the results of the study contradicted previous research and found that gender did not have a significant effect on the sentencing outcomes. This is surprising, if the Chivalry theory is to be believed, considering the nature of the crime itself. The crimes looked at were nonviolent crimes that would, in theory, be seen as crimes a woman would get more leniency under the Chivalry theory. Herzog and Oreg (2008) discuss how the judges would think of women as defenceless and weak under chivalry and paternalism. Therefore, because it is a white, female, nonviolent offender they fill that criteria in which chivalry/paternalism is suppose have an effect and lead to leniency in sentencing them. This may also give support to the idea that sentencing may vary between urban and rural with the idea of chivalry also having a different degree of effect. It also goes against Rodriguez et, al (2006) and their idea that chivalry can be seen across the entire spectrum of crime sentences and even if it does have an effect, that effect is negligible enough to not affect the results as much as it would compared to other crimes perhaps because of the non-violent nature of it. Also, due to there being no specific gender effect notable, the double deviance theory cannot be applied either as measures of traditional sex roles did not have any effect on sentencing length. Therefore, in this case the results suggest that no matter if they have broken traditional gender norms, they sentenced on equal basis with women who might not be viewed to have broken traditional gender norms.

There are some developments that could be made to this study that would allow researchers to develop a clearer and more real to life picture of this area of study. One such development would be to look at basing the study in more diverse areas or look at similar data from rural areas in different countries if they want to focus on the rural aspect of the study. This is because it has been suggested (Herzog and Oreg, 2008; Jeffries and Bond, 2013) that chivalry only really effectively applies to certain women who fit the ideal image of “womanhood” which according to Steffensmeier and Demuth (2006) is white and middle class. Therefore, because this study was done in an environment where there is a miniscule amount of individuals, compared to the sample population size, where from an ethnically diverse background, it makes it hard to be generalizable except from maybe to small counties with little ethnic diversity like the ones that have been researched in this study. Also, although it could show some partial evidence against general chivalry’s effects on sentencing for this crime, it would struggle with some other theories. It would struggle to show evidence against selective chivalry as it has very little diversity to show that certain women would get better treatment then others due to its lack of a diverse sample population. As previously referred, it would only be able to show evidence to support counties with similar populations to itself and it would struggle to provide evidence in other states and counties as the diversity varies around the country. Support for the generalization of the conclusions of these studies is very low as it would only apply to a very small group. They state themselves that the results may differ from rural counties in different states. A further limitation was the issue that for some cases they could not access their criminal background. Therefore, they were unable to take the factor of whether some may have a criminal history which would then affect the outcome. The resulting sentence could then be different because of this and would then have to be considered when looking at the results of this study. For example, the reason why in some of the cases women look like their sentence is just as long or harsh as their male counterparts is because they have a criminal history. If this was then it may be that women in this case may have only gotten similar judgements due to having a criminal history. Although, it may be unlikely that enough women had criminal histories that affected their sentence length to then affect the results and conclusion of this study, we cannot rule it out due there being no proof against this idea.

5. Other Factors

So far, the focus has been on how certain theories help explain the differences that may be seen during the sentencing phase of the criminal justice system. Various other factors have been mentioned when looking at the theories and how they may moderate and interact with gender and the theories surrounding differences in sentencing in relation to gender. However, this chapter will look more specifically at studies surrounding factors and how they may have an influence on the sentencing process. Four factors, legal and extra-legal, shall be looked at within this section, however there are many more factors that have been looked at in various research and are can be said to have some sort of effect. Each factor will look at how they interact with gender and sentencing, looking at whether they have a significant impact on how defendants are sentenced.

Racial Factor

Within this section the race of the defendant being sentenced will be looked at in reference to seeing if there are any differences to be seen between gender and race. There are substantial bodies of research that detail how race can affect how individuals may be sentenced, with white defendants often getting the more lenient sentence (Brennan & Spohn, 2008; Spohn, 2000). The focus for this however will be how race and gender can lead to differences in sentencing with a discussion on what those differences are and what they show about the sentencing system.

What is found through looking through various pieces of literature is that black women do not receive the same level of lenience from the court system as white women do (Koons-Witt et al., 2012; Brennan, 2006; Steffensmeier et al., 1993). Therefore, you can assume the leniency that is supposed to apply to women when it comes to sentencing only applies to certain women, which supports the theory of selective chivalry. This shows that there may be some king of racial stereotype in causing this and allows them to fall out of the archetype image of women that need this protection because they believe they are have a low risk to society. However, there are also studies that contend this theory that black females are treated less leniently then white females. Many of these studies still find differences in how people of different races are sentenced, however they find that the difference mostly occurs when it comes to black and white males as earlier mentioned (Steffensmeier & Demuth, 2006; Spohn & Spears, 1997). It can also be suggested that the area that is picked to base the study may affect the outcome and results of these studies. It is suggested by Zatz (2000) that studies based in the United States seem to see a pattern of where race appears to be a larger factor in the sentencing phase and these states where you see it are in the south of the country. Therefore, you may assume that the study may vary from area to area depending on how strong traditional gender roles and views on women are valued. For example, the Koons-Witt et, al (2012) study is based in South Carolina which is in the south of the country. They mention how conservative views on women are held within the state and the results showed that black women and men appear to be on the receiving end of less lenient sentences. A lot of studies also seem to only consider black and white sentencing disparities. There are studies however, that show Hispanic defendants can often face even harsher punishment then both black and white defendants (Brennan & Spohn, 2008). Therefore, although race does seem to have a definite effect in relation to men on a general basis, it is less certain in its effect when women are the defendant. A future study could look at the effects of gender and race and compare them between various states or countries in order to determine whether there is any connection between the factors.

The factor of age has not yet been discussed in this review though it is often included as control within most literature. Most of these studies often focus on the age of male defendants rather than across the gender divide. This maybe perhaps due to it having more of an influence over male sentencing then female leading to a lack of need to test how the factor may influence sentencing of women.

Steffensmeier et al. (1998) hypothesised this when looking at how a range of different factors interact when sentencing. They found that younger males are often sentenced more harshly than older individuals. They also found that as the defendant got older, the race and gender differences diminished. This may be because they are deemed too old to be deemed as much of a threat to the general public. This was then further built upon by Spohn and Holleran (2000) who narrowed down the age in which an individual was most likely to be punished harshly. It also must be borne in mind that they looked at which ethnic groups were mostly likely to receive harsher punishment as well as the age range in which those groups would likely receive this punishment. They identified that black and Hispanic male defendants between the ages of 21 and 29 while being unemployed were most likely to receive the harshest punishments out of the different groups. Therefore, it must be noted that age can show various patterns, when interacting with other factors, that can lead to various other avenues of research and groups that can be focused on that lead to much groups being identified for further examination.

Crime Severity Factor

How serious an offence is may seem like a more obvious indicator into how a defendant may be sentenced with the idea that the more serious the crime, the harsher the sentence. However, this may be a key factor to explain the why there is a lot more males serving out more severe sentences. According to literature women are a lot less likely to commit serious crimes and violent crimes (Belkanp, 2007; Rodriguez et al., 2006). Non-violent crimes, as previously discussed, like fraud and theft are seen as crimes that traditionally women commit. However, this may result in women who commit violent crimes being affected by the views that are brought up in the theories above.

This is possibly the most key feature that can lessen the disparity between sentencing leniency. It is shown in research that a lot of the disparity disappears when it comes to violent crimes (Rodriguez el al., 2006; Boritch, 1992). This is because under the selective chivalry theory, this would fall out of its purview as it is crime that outside of the gender role expectations (Koons-Witt et al., 2012). They, therefore, lose the leniency that they would get under that paradigm as well as being judged as doubly deviant because of that breaking of the gender norms. Warren et al. (2011) suggest that as the seriousness of the offence increases the less discretion the judge then has when giving a sentence. This would then lead to this factor outweighing other key extra-legal factors, such as gender, because the seriousness of the crime has more influence over the sentence than any possible influence these extra-legal factors could possibly have on the outcome of the sentencing. This does mean that when the crime is less severe, the extra-legal factors can seem to have some measure of effect. Rodriguez et al. (2006) can support this view as they saw differences when it came to property crime in the way in which leniency was shown in favour of women when it came to sentence them.

Criminal History Factor

Criminal history is factor that was discussed in one of the studies that was focused on earlier in this review. The results for that study suggested, in the case of narcotics cases at least, that women do tend to get more lenient sentences if they have a lack of criminal history in comparison to males with a lack of criminal history (Tillyer et al., 2015). This can be further backed by Spohn (2000) and Koons-Witt et al. (2012) in relation to chance of being incarcerated.

From the various pieces of literature that have reviewed (Tillyer et al., 2015; Spohn, 2000; Koons-Witt et al., 2012; Daly & Tonry, 1997), there is a large amount that suggest that criminal history is very useful factor to use when predicting how a defendant may be sentenced. Daly and Tonry (1997) suggest that when judges are deciding on how to sentence an individual, when they have some discretion on how sentence a defendant, they look at criminal history as means of predicting future behaviour. They suggest that they use it as a means of testing how much they respect the law. A large criminal history would suggest a lack of respect and give the impression that they have no reservations about breaking the law. If the judges have doubt that that the defendant will not commit another crime, then they will be a lot less likely to give sentence that will be lenient. They may have a lack of belief that the offender would learn from committing their crime and that it would expose the wider public to harm. All these different issues stemming from a larger criminal record would leave a law official less inclined to be lenient to what in their view may be a veteran offender.

6. Conclusion and Discussion

In terms of volume of research in the area of sentencing disparities between genders, there is large amount, as shown above. However, there are a few interesting areas of future research that could be partaken in to further understanding with more specific factors. For example, an underlying factor in the United States may be what region the sentencing is taking place in (Zatz, 2000; Myers and Talarico, 1986). As mentioned earlier certain states seem to have conservative views regarding gender roles as well as Zatz (2000) mentioning that race effects can generally be seen to be stronger. A more recent investigation into the differences that can be seen across a variety of states would be an interesting area. As a detailed comparison between states that have historically been seen either conservative or liberal in their views would be able to give an idea how much of an effect the historical views of the state they are based in, is having. More studies in this area conducted outside of the United States would also be interesting. There is a very large body of work existing in this this area in the United States and not as many in other countries. Therefore, more studies done in other parts of the world may show if cultural differences still allow the ideas of the above theories to have a basis there. As well as how much the other extra-legal and legal factors have in relation to sentencing. This is a large limitation within this review as the most popular studies in this area are mostly conducted in the United States, making it harder to generalize it on continental or worldwide basis due to lack of a large body of research in other countries. Also due to there being so many different extra-legal factors that exist and could influence the sentencing process, more studies at looking into precisely how much each factor may influence a sentencing procedure. The current studies that have been conducted use databases that only give so much information on different factors. Therefore, a future study on the subject should try to address this issue which can be done by a range of measures. One such way could be creating a database that is more qualitive in its approach and includes more extra-legal factors with more information on the offender and their offences. This can allow the analysis of more than on factors, in order to establish their influence, they may have on decision, on the same sentencing cases. More research into race and gender sentencing outcomes may also be an avenue of further research as although there is research in this area a lot of them only investigate the black and white race comparison. This approach risks missing out on how other ethnic groups experience the sentencing process and if there can be witnessed differences in how they are treated in that phase of the justice system

Based from the evidence shown in the studies above and the results given. It can be suggested that Selective Chivalry and the Evil Woman/Double Deviance theories have some relevance in showing how sentencing decisions are made. Gender does appear to be a factor when determining how an offender is sentenced. It can be shown that a large body of work, in which I reviewed, shows a pattern that supports the idea that women are shown more leniency when it comes to sentencing. Yet are judged more harshly sometimes then men when other factors contribute that could break the traditional gender roles and traditional gender stereotypes such as committing violent crime, as opposed to non-violent crime. However, they also show that other factors may need to be taken into consideration in order for it to have a significant effect. Further research into how extra-legal may affect sentencing, due to the sheer number of factors that there is, and how they may be assisting the gender disparity when it comes to sentencing outcomes. Overall, the literature reviewed does generally point to the idea that gender does play a role in sentencing outcomes, but also that other factors are also considered in order to give sentence and not just gender. Chivalry, Selective Chivalry and Evil Woman/Double Deviance theories all cannot be discounted in having elements of the ideas within them being relevant to sentencing within the United States justice system.

Bibliography

Belknap, J. (2007). The invisible woman: Gender, crime, and justice (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth Publishing Company

Bontrager, S., Barrick, K., & Stupi, E. (2013). Gender and sentencing: A meta-analysis of contemporary research. The Journal of Gender, Race, & Justice, [online] 16, 349-635. Available at: https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/jgrj16&id=371&collection=journals&index= [Accessed 3 April 2020]

Boritch, H., (1992). Gender and Criminal Court Outcomes: An Historical Analysis. Criminology , [online] 30(3), pp.293-326. Available at: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1992.tb01106.x [Accessed 3 April 2020].

Brennan, P. and Spohn, C., (2008). Race/Ethnicity and Sentencing Outcomes Among Drug Offenders in North Carolina. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice , [online] 24(4), pp.371-398. Available at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1043986208322712 [Accessed 3 April 2020].

Curry, T., Lee, G. and Rodriguez, S., (2004). Does Victim Gender Increase Sentence Severity? Further Explorations of Gender Dynamics and Sentencing Outcomes. Crime & Delinquency , [online] 50(3), pp.319-343. Available at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0011128703256265 [Accessed 3 April 2020].

Daly, K., (1987). Discrimination in the Criminal Courts: Family, Gender, and the Problem of Equal Treatment. Social Forces , [online] 66(1), p.152. Available at: https://academic.oup.com/sf/article-abstract/66/1/152/2231816 [Accessed 3 April 2020].

Daly, K., (1989). Rethinking Judicial Paternalism: Gender, Work-Family Relations, and Sentencing. Gender & Society , [online] 3(1), pp.9-36. Available at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/089124389003001002 [Accessed 3 April 2020].

Daly, K. and Tonry, M., (1997). Gender, Race, and Sentencing. Crime and Justice , [online] 22, pp.201-252. Available at: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/449263 [Accessed 3 April 2020].

Doerner, J. and Demuth, S., (2010). The Independent and Joint Effects of Race/Ethnicity, Gender, and Age on Sentencing Outcomes in U.S. Federal Courts. Justice Quarterly , [online] 27(1), pp.1-27. Available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/07418820902926197 [Accessed 3 April 2020].

Embry, R. and Lyons, P., (2012). Sex-Based Sentencing: Sentencing Discrepancies Between Male and Female Sex Offenders. Feminist Criminology , [online] 7(2), pp.146-162. Available at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1557085111430214 [Accessed 3 April 2020].

Farnworth, M. and Teske, Jr., R., (1995). Gender Differences in Felony Court Processing: Women & Criminal Justice , [online] 6(2), pp.23-44. Available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J012v06n02_02 [Accessed 3 April 2020].

Fernando Rodriguez, S., Curry, T. and Lee, G., (2006). Gender Differences in Criminal Sentencing: Do Effects Vary Across Violent, Property, and Drug Offenses? Social Science Quarterly 87(2), pp.318-339. Available at: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1540-6237.2006.00383.x [Accessed 3 April 2020].

Franklin, C. and Fearn, N., (2008). Gender, race, and formal court decision-making outcomes: Chivalry/paternalism, conflict theory or gender conflict? Journal of Criminal Justice 36(3), pp.279-290. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047235208000500 [Accessed 3 April 2020].

Freiburger, T., (2011). The Impact of Gender, Offense Type, and Familial Role on the Decision to Incarcerate. Social Justice Research , [online] 24(2), pp.143-167. Available at: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11211-011-0133-8 [Accessed 3 April 2020].

Gelsthorpe, L. (2013). ‘Sentencing and gender’ in Sheehan, R., McIvor, G., Trotter, C. (ed.) What Works with Women Offenders . Hoboken: Taylor and Francis.

Herzog, S. and Oreg, S., (2008). Chivalry and the Moderating Effect of Ambivalent Sexism: Individual Differences in Crime Seriousness Judgments. Law & Society Review , [online] 42(1), pp.45-74. Available at: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1540-5893.2008.00334.x [Accessed 3 April 2020].

Holland, M. and Prohaska, A., (2018). Gender Effects Across Place. Race and Justice , [online] p.215336871876749. Available at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2153368718767495 [Accessed 3 April 2020].

Jeffries, S. and Bond, C., (2013). Gender, Indigeneity, and the Criminal Courts: A Narrative Exploration of Women’s Sentencing in Western Australia. Women & Criminal Justice 23(1), pp.19-42. Available at: https://research-repository.griffith.edu.au/bitstream/handle/10072/55598/86997_1.pdf?sequence=1 [Accessed 3 April 2020].

JEFFRIES, S., FLETCHER, G. and NEWBOLD, G., (2003). PATHWAYS TO SEX-BASED DIFFERENTIATION IN CRIMINAL COURT SENTENCING. Criminology , [online] 41(2), pp.329-354. Available at: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2003.tb00990.x [Accessed 3 April 2020].

Koons-Witt, B., Sevigny, E., Burrow, J. and Hester, R., (2012). Gender and Sentencing Outcomes in South Carolina. Criminal Justice Policy Review , [online] 25(3), pp.299-324. Available at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0887403412468884 [Accessed 3 April 2020].

Messerschmidt, J., (2007). Masculinities, Crime and. The Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Sociology , Available at: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9781405165518.wbeosm039 [Accessed 3 April 2020].

Murphy, E. and Brown, J., (2000). Exploring gender role identity, value orientation of occupation and sex of respondent in influencing attitudes towards male and female offenders. Legal and Criminological Psychology , [online] 5(2), pp.285-290. Available at: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1348/135532500168047 [Accessed 3 April 2020].

Myers, M. and Talarico, S., (1986). The Social Contexts of Racial Discrimination in Sentencing. Social Problems 33(3), pp.236-251. Available at: https://academic.oup.com/socpro/article-abstract/33/3/236/1733372 [Accessed 3 April 2020].

Pollock, O. (1950). The criminality of women . Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press

Spivak, A., Wagner, B., Whitmer, J. and Charish, C., (2014). Gender and Status Offending. Feminist Criminology , [online] 9(3), pp.224-248. Available at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1557085114531318 [Accessed 3 April 2020].

Spohn, C. (2000). Thirty years of sentencing reform: The quest for a racially-neutral sentencing process. In J. Horney (Ed.), Policies, processes, and decisions of the criminal justice system : Vol. 3 (pp. 427-501). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.

SPOHN, C. and HOLLERAN, D., (2000). THE IMPRISONMENT PENALTY PAID BY YOUNG, UNEMPLOYED BLACK AND HISPANIC MALE OFFENDERS. Criminology , [online] 38(1), pp.281-306. Available at: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2000.tb00891.x [Accessed 3 April 2020].

Spohn, C. and Spears, J., (1997). Gender and Case Processing Decisions. Women & Criminal Justice 8(3), pp.29-59. Available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J012v08n03_02 [Accessed 3 April 2020].

Steffensmeier, D. and Demuth, S., (2006). Does Gender Modify the Effects of Race–ethnicity on Criminal Sanctioning? Sentences for Male and Female White, Black, and Hispanic Defendants. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, [online] 22(3), pp.241-261. Available at: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10940-006-9010-2 [Accessed 3 April 2020].

STEFFENSMEIER, D., KRAMER, J. and STREIFEL, C., (1993). GENDER AND IMPRISONMENT DECISIONS. Criminology , [online] 31(3), pp.411-446. Available at: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1993.tb01136.x [Accessed 3 April 2020].

STEFFENSMEIER, D., ULMER, J. and KRAMER, J., (1998). THE INTERACTION OF RACE, GENDER, AND AGE IN CRIMINAL SENTENCING: THE PUNISHMENT COST OF BEING YOUNG, BLACK, AND MALE. Criminology , [online] 36(4), pp.763-798. Available at: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1998.tb01265.x [Accessed 3 April 2020].

Tasca, M., Cho, A., Spohn, C. and Rodriguez, N., (2018). The Role of Parental Status and Involvement in Sentence Length Decisions: A Comparison of Men and Women Sentenced to Prison. Crime & Delinquency , [online] 65(14), pp.1899-1924. Available at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0011128718811929 [Accessed 3 April 2020].

Tillyer, R., Hartley, R. and Ward, J., (2015). Differential Treatment of Female Defendants. Criminal Justice and Behaviour , [online] 42(7), pp.703-721. Available at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0093854814560624 [Accessed 3 April 2020].

Tracy, P., Kempf-Leonard, K. and Abramoske-James, S., (2009). Gender Differences in Delinquency and Juvenile Justice Processing. Crime & Delinquency , [online] 55(2), pp.171-215. Available at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0011128708330628 [Accessed 3 April 2020].

Warren, P., Chiricos, T. and Bales, W., (2011). The Imprisonment Penalty for Young Black and Hispanic Males. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency , [online] 49(1), pp.56-80. Available at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0022427810397945 [Accessed 3 April 2020].

Zatz, M. S. (2000). The convergence of race, ethnicity, gender, and class on court decision-making: Looking toward the 21st century. In J. Horney (Ed.), Policies, processes, and decisions of the criminal justice system : Vol. 3 (pp. 503-552). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.

Get Revising

Join get revising, already a member, the chivalry thesis.

No comments have yet been made

Related discussions on The Student Room

Similar Sociology resources:

Gender and Crime 0.0 / 5

Gender and crime 0.0 / 5

Gender & Crime 0.0 / 5

gender crime 2.0 / 5 based on 1 rating

gender and crime 0.0 / 5

Ethnicity, Gender, Social Class and Crime 0.0 / 5

gender, crime, and justice 0.0 / 5

Key sociologists 0.0 / 5

sociol 0.0 / 5

The available literature on the "chivalrous" treatment of the female offender by the criminal justice system is reviewed in an effort to ascertain the nature of such treatment. Three characterizations of the female offender which have influenced the perpetuation and survival of the "chivalry" proposition are discussed: the instigative female offender, the sexualized female offender, and the protected female offender. The author concludes that the notion of a "chivalrous" justice system is largely a myth, and directions for future research are presented.

Published quarterly for the Society for the Study of Social Problems, Social Problems tackles the most difficult of contemporary society's issues and brings to the fore influential sociological findings and theories enabling readers to gain a better understanding of the complex social environment. Areas covered by the journal include: conflict and social action; crime and juvenile delinquency; drinking, drugs, and addiction; health policy and services; race and ethnicity; and sexual behavior and politics. One of the most respected and widely read professional journals in today's social sciences, Social Problems presents accessible, relevant, and innovative articles that maintain critical perspectives of the highest quality.

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. OUP is the world's largest university press with the widest global presence. It currently publishes more than 6,000 new publications a year, has offices in around fifty countries, and employs more than 5,500 people worldwide. It has become familiar to millions through a diverse publishing program that includes scholarly works in all academic disciplines, bibles, music, school and college textbooks, business books, dictionaries and reference books, and academic journals.

AQA Sociology A2 and AS revision

Gender and crime.

According to official statistics males commit way more crime than females.

By their 40 th birthday 1/3 males have convictions and only 1/10 for woman .

Men are responsible for about 4/5 recorded offences .

Females are more likely to be convicted for property crimes .

Males are more likely to be repeat offenders , have longer criminals careers and commit more serious crimes.

Frances Heidensohn (1996) suggests gender differences are the most significant feature of recorded crime

On top of this men are cautioned more than woman.

50x more likely for sex offences

14x more likely for burglaries

8x more likely for robbery and drug offences

7x more likely for criminal damage

5x more likely for violence against a person

Do woman commit more crime?

Sociologists argue that we underestimate the rates of female offending for two reasons;

Typical females crimes like shoplifting are less likely to be reported . Similarly prostitution which females more more likely to be engaged in is not going to be reported by either party.

Even if females crimes are detected they are less likely to be prosecuted, if they are then they will be treated lightly.

Functionalist Sex role theory and gender socialisation:

This theory looks at the gender socialisation and the different roles each gender has. Female roles include caring for partners, children, and dependant elderly parents. There is also household duties they are expected to perform. Gender socialisation wants women to adopt these roles, by adopting them they become more emotional and less aggressive making them more afraid of committing crime because they do not have the characteristics of a criminal . Men are encouraged to be tough and aggressive , therefore disposed to commit acts of violence . Parsons (1955) traces this back to differences in gender roles in nuclear family. Men take on the breadwinner role, whilst women take on the nurturing, caring role meaning they bring up children. Girls therefore have access to adult role model, but boys seek to distance themselves of feminine models of behaviour engaging in compulsory masculinity According to A. K Cohen (1955) the absence of the male role model leads boys to turn to all male street gangs as a source of masculine identity, here they earn status through delinquency (Think the other Cohen’s subcultural theory).

Evaluation of sex role theory:

Walklate (2003) criticises Parsons for assuming that because of a woman biological ability to bear children that they are the best to the expressive role. So although Parsons tries to explain this socially he is actually doing so biologically about sex differences.

Patriarchal Control theory and rational choice (gender deals):

Carlen (1988) and Heidensohn (1996) build on rational choice theories and explain female offending with it. Heidensohn argues that the difference in gender in offending is down to socialisation, social circumstance and and impacts of formal/informal control agencies.

Heidensohn argues that woman commit less crime because patriarchal society imposes greater control over woman. It operates in the home, in public and at work.

Control at home : A woman’s role in the home is to be a domestic goddess, clean and maintain the home, cook meals and look after the kids. This places high time demands on woman and gives them less time to commit crime. Women who try and make time may find themselves in a domestic abuse situation because their partners don’t like their breakaway from the rules.

Dobash and Dobash (1979) show how many violent attacks results from a man’s dissatisfaction with their wives performance domestically. Men also use control with their financial power to restrict funds for a woman’s leisure activities so that they spend more time working at home.

Daughters are restricted because they are under greater control to not come and go as they please or stay out late, as such they socialise in doors, a ‘bedroom culture’ is created and they are more likely to do housework chores than male counterparts.

Control in public : Woman are controlled in public because they fear going out and getting raped. Media reports help stipulate this fear to frighten women into staying indoors.

The crime survey found that 54% of women avoid going out after dark , against only 14% of men. There is also a fear of how women dress in public, dressing certain ways can get a reputation for being 'loose’ or sexually promiscuous especially if they go out in pubs alone where many crimes occur.

Control at work : Women have a subordinate role at work. The glass ceiling prevents reaching higher and potential white-collar crimes.

The gender deal and the class deal

Carlen looked at a small number of working class woman who had criminal convictions. She said that woman are expected to conform to two things, the class deal and the gender deal.

The class deal: the material rewards that happen when people work in paid employment, enabling woman to purchase things.

The gender deal: the rewards that woman get from f ulfilling their gender role in the family and home.

In terms of the class deal; woman in Carlen’s study failed to find legitimate ways to earn a decent living. Most had always been in poverty and couldn’t handle benefits. In terms of gender deal; some had been abused by farthers/families and so family bonds had broken.

Woman may then make the rational choice to commit crime (they have little to loose because they are poor) and crime offers some benefits like money and material goods.

The constrains of socialisation:

Heidensohn suggests that woman face greater loss than men if they commit crime because they would face a social stigma . Carlen argues woman are socialised into the domestic goddess role and risk disapproval when they don’t. Crime is double jeopardy for the crime and not being a 'woman’.

Social control:

Agencies of social control try to discourage people from crime. Heidensohn argues that there is a ideology over the spheres the genders are allowed in. For instance men dominate clubs and outside in public area’s, whereas woman dominate the home and private spheres.

The agencies of social control:

In the private sphere of the domestic home woman are too busy and have too many responsibilities to be committing crime, and teenage girls are more supervised than teenage male counterparts.

In the public sphere woman feel that they cannot go outside from fear of sexual/physical violence and at work they are often sexually harassed and supervised by a male boss.

Woman face the threat of their reputation as respectable people if they deviate from the norms. The applications of the word 'slapper’ or 'slag’ threaten their reputation.

Evaluation of patriarchal control theory:

-Underplays free will and choice in offending by saying that woman are controlled and determined by the patriarchal control.

-Carlen’s sample was small and may be unrepresentative, and largely WC offenders.

The liberation thesis:

If the patriarchal control is what is keeping woman from committing crime, then if it is removed its logically to say that female crime rates would be similar to males. Adler’s (1975) thesis says that woman’s liberation is leading to a new type of female criminals and rise in criminal rates.

Adler argues that the playing field is evening out, patriarchal controls and discrimination has lessened. Between 50’s and 60’s female crime rose from 1/7 to 1/6

Woman have begun to adopt more male roles both legitimately and illegitimately.

Evaluation of the liberation thesis:

+Good to point out a possible link between patriarchal liberation and offending rates

-Female crime rate has been rising since 1950’s before female liberation (which happened in the 60’s)

-WC females are more likely to be criminal ( Chesney-lind-1997 ), and WC females are less likely to be effected by liberation which has mainly affected MC woman.

- Chesney-lind did find evidence of woman doing more male offences like drugs, but they were already prostitutes which is very un-liberated.

-Little evidence that the illegitimate opportunity structure has opened up for women. Laider and Hunt (2001) found that women in gangs were still expected to conform to female roles

-She might have over-exaggerated the amount of liberation and the amount of female crime

The chivalry thesis:

This argues that most criminal justice agents – such as police officers, magistrates and judges are men, and men are socialized to be chivalrous towards women. Otto Pollak (1950) argues that men have a protective attitude towards woman so they are unwilling to charge, arrest or prosecute them. This means that their crimes are less likely to end up in the official statistics giving a bad picture on the actual amount of female crime.

Evidence for the chivalry thesis:

Self reported studies where the individual was asked about what crimes they have committed have often shown that woman are treated more more leniently than men.

Graham and Bowling (1995) research on a sample of 1,721 (14-25yr olds) found that although males committed more crime it was a lot less significant than OS say or example they found that males are 2.33x more likely than females to admit to committing a crime in the previous year not 4x.

Flood-Page (2000) found that while only 1/11 self reported female offenders were cautioned or prosecuted the figure for males was well over 1/7

The Home Office have said that woman are constantly treated more leniently by the law, with first offenders about half as likely to be given a sentence of immediate imprisonment.

Is this because they don’t commit serious enough crimes, not that they are given lee way.

Hood’s (1992) found that in a study of over 3,000 defendants, women were about 1/3 less likely to be jailed in similar cases.

The Ministry of Justice (2009) say 49% of females recorded offending received a caution, whereas only 30% of males did.

Evidence against the chivalry thesis:

Farrington and Morris (1983) Found in a study of 408 offences of theft in a magistrates court that women and men were sentenced equally

Buckle and Farrington (1984) Undertook an observational study of shoplifting. They found men were 2x more likely to shop lift. But official stats how the gender shoplifting prosecutions to be equal.

Carlen (1997) argues that sentences handed out to woman by the CJS are influenced by assessment of their characters and performance in relation to their traditional roles, rather than the severity of their offence. This way women are seen as really really bad because they violate norms , even though males commit more violent and severe attacks they are let of lighter as they are just overstepping their role not breaking it.

Females offenders are more likely than males to be held in custody before a trial even if they are no sentenced afterwards.

Women are 2x more likely to be denied bail when charged with drug offences and 3x more likely with being dishonesty.

Bias against women:

Feminists argue that the CJS is biased against women, they argue that the CJS treats woman more harshly especially when they deviate from gender norms of monogamous heterosexuality and motherhood.

Heidensohn (1996) notes the double standards of courts punishing girls but not boys for 'promiscuity’.

Carlen (1997) found that Scottish courts were much more likely to jail woman who had children in care than woman they saw as 'good mothers’.

Walklate (1998) argued that in rape trials the female victim on trial has to prove her respectability in order to have the sentence accepted.

Carol Smart (1989) quotes judge wild as saying; “Woman who say no do not always mean no. It is not just a question of how she says it, how she shows and makes it clear. If she doesn’t want it all she has to do is keep her legs shut” !! How disgusting!

Adler (1987) found that woman who are deemed to lack respectability; single parents, punks, peace protesters ect, find it hard to have their testimony believed.

Why do men commit crime?

The assertion of masculinity:

Messerschmidt: Accomplishing masculinity:

Messerschmidt (1993) argues th at 'masculinity is an 'accomplishment’, something that men constantly have to prove to others and build on. Some men have more resources than other to be able to do this.

Hegemonic masculinity (from what Connel 1987-95 describes) is the dominant form of masculinity and one a majority of men want to accomplish and are trying to do. It is fuelled by heterosexuality, paid work, aggression, toughness, competitiveness, and ability to subordinate woman.

Subordinated masculinities : some men who can’t get to hegemonic masculinity turn to crime because they lack resources. For example lower classes or ethnic minorities. Messerschmidt also says that MC men do also commit white-collar crime.

Messerschmidt says that men sometimes turn to crime as a means of asserting their masculinity when legitimate means are blocked. Legitimate means are; success in school, secure job and steady breadwinner status. The nature of hegemonic masculinity might explain why men from all social classes commit acts of violence and rape.

Evaluation of Messerschimdt:

-Not all crimes can be considered in aid of masculinity so why do some men commit them?

-Circular argument: masculinity is an description of male offenders not an explanation of crime. For example, masculinity explains male crimes (violence) because the crimes are committed by male males (who have violent characteristics).

-Why don’t all men use crime to achieve masculinity

Winlow : Post-modernity, masculinity and crime:

Globalisation has led to a shift to post-modern society. Manuel jobs which were used to express masculinity are now declining or have already declined. But there has also been an incline in service and leisure opportunities like clubs. Which combine employment and lucrative criminal activities. Simon Winlow’s (2001) study of bouncers in de-indiustrialised Sunderland he found that working as bouncers provided jobs and opportunity for illegal dealings in drugs as well a violence. Using Cloward and Ohlin’s conflict and criminal subculture distinction he says that there has always been a violent conflict subculture in Sunderland. But the absence in criminal structures left little opportunity for organised crime.

8 years ago

9 Notes / Hide

Topic 5 - Gender, Crime and Justice

Sets found in the same folder

Topic 9 - surveillance, topic 9 - punishment, exam questions for a-level sociology(aqa) (xx….

Topic 7 - Media and Crime

Other sets by this creator, british inventions of the 20th century, chapter 3 - a long and illustrious history, economic development, life in the uk test - a modern, thriving soci….

Chivalry Essay

Chivalry Is Not Dead : Chivalry

me a superhero...I’m doing it because I can take this one moment out of my day to demonstrate the archaic act of chivalry. Some say that chivalry is dead... Chivalry is not dead...chivalry is merely changed and if I have to be honest I would say that chivalry is changed for the better. The problem people have with modern day chivalry is its correlation with their definition of “chivalry”... which is...according to Webster’s dictionary, “Gallantry, courtesy and honor. The noble qualities a knight was

Chivalry is a concept that has baffled countless medieval historians throughout the years. Chivalry was supposedly a code that knights and nobles lived their lives by, however, like other social structures of the past historians have debated over the extent to which people lived according to chivalric principles. Sir Walter Scott believed that chivalry was meant as a code which knights could aspire, but not one that was carried out in reality. His description seems accurate. Chivalric principles

Medieval Chivalry Essay

2 Works Cited

Each different aspect of the code of chivalry held a separate role in society. Whether it be religious or barbaric, chivalry tended to hold a moral guideline among those who followed it. This moral guideline held them true to their duties to man, God, and women (Sex, Society, and Medieval Women). All of which are reflected in the three themes of Chivalry: Warrior chivalry, religious chivalry, and courtly love chivalry (Sex, Society, and Medieval Women). These three hold their individual roles, all

The Code of Chivalry Essay

motto of chivalry is also the motto of wisdom to serve all, but love only one” (Balzac 1). During the Medieval Age, there once existed a moral system that introduced a set of conducts such as, virtues, honor, and courtly love. This was known as the Code of Chivalry. These codes where available and practiced in knight's daily life. The idea of chivalry is extremely valuable to the people, that even everything a knight wore symbolized something valuable or unique. In other words, chivalry was no game

Examples Of Chivalry In Beowulf

Chivalry: The Code Itself and its Antecedents (An analysis of the Code of Chivalry and its antecedents using the Arthur stories, the Greek triad, Beowulf, and Song of Roland.) “Chivalry is essentially a martial ideal, a code of values that glorified military prowess as the supreme achievement of the virtuous knight.” (Mellen) The code of chivalry is a basic code that all of the most virtuous knights. The code is basically the rules of behavior that a noble knight must abide by. The code says a

Chivalry Research Paper

Chivalry as a necessary characteristic for Knights and brave men, heroes and aristocrats as depicted in early British literature provided a philosophy around key mix of values to readers, students and humanity at large. Code of Chivalry as per early British literature were meant to define as to obey set of rules to be sworn by all Knights. Some of the key rules included in this Code were emphasizing on courage, loyalty, devotion to duty, Protection of the weak, poor and needy as well as courtesy

Chivalry Compared To Today

Chivalry was designated for knights as a moral code or law for them to abide by, but sadly has been slowly being brushed under the rug by their following generations. Growing up I was taught certain aspects of a new hybrid of the Code of Chivalry such as courtesy, honor, humbleness, respect, and proper manners. Chivalry since medieval times has slowly dissipated into almost nothing compared to today. Now I am not suggesting that these traits have been lost indefinitely but they have certainly minimized

Chivalry Code Of Conduct

Chivalry is the code of conduct that was followed by knights all around in the Dark Ages. It was used to show honor and was built upon the foundation of righteousness, to protect the weak and to give to the poor respect those of high authority as well as those who were not in high authority positions were held in high esteem of those who followed Chivalric ideals. Most people did not live up to the code fully, but that did not stop people from following it to its fullest. It was highly influential

Code Of Chivalry Essay

Back in the middle ages when King Arthur ruled the throne, people lived by The Code of Chivalry. The Code of Chivalry lists the rules on how a knight should live his life with honor. This code was very important to the society during this time period. This was the code that they all lived by. When reading the code, it says “To live one’s life so that it is worthy of respect and honor by Fair Play, Nobility, Valor, Honor, Courtesy, and Loyalty. Next to each word, there are actions a knight must follow

Personal Code Of Chivalry

A code of chivalry are beliefs that one follows. To some, it means that they must be courageous and have the want to help those in need. My definition of chivalry means to have courtesy and honor. My personal code of chivalry is important because it defines who I am and what I believe in. I believe in being trustworthy, honest, caring, and inspirational to those who need it. Being trustworthy is very important to me. It is a very good quality that everyone should possess but not everyone does

Chivalry In Medieval Time

Chivalry has been around for centuries. It was around in Medieval Times and it is around now. Chivalry was valuable to mankind so it became part of tradition. The tradition of chivalry is shown in the past, present, and will be shown in the future. One way it is shown is in people’s loyalty to their country. Loyalty is a strong feeling of support or allegiance. In medieval times this was demonstrated by knights and their loyalty to their country and to the church. Another example of loyalty

Chivalry: Purpose And Influence

Purpose and Influence Chivalry was intended to control violence. It is important to note that Chivalry did not stop violence, but channeled it into something manageable (Abels, R, n.d.). In the twelfth century, men of war would compete in jousting competitions and duels. These competitions cast illusions of battle that were tremendously less dangerous, but still quite violent. If you consider how our modern attempt to neutralize violence is through intelligence and Olympic Games, then perhaps you

Chaucer's Code Of Chivalry

The foremost aspect of chivalry that should be understood is what this code of conduct actually implied for the nobles of the Medieval Ages. When it comes to the concept of chivalry developed during the time of the Crusades in the middle Ages, it began as a code of conduct for the knights. For them, their actions were not solely occasional, but rather a way of life. The key ideals behind chivalry were not intelligible acts that could be performed. Yet, they were about attitudes and virtues that should

A Knight's Code Of Chivalry

A knight’s Code of Chivalry was a system of morals that they lived by. Knights were very respected people because they lived by that code. A person’s morals or personal code can reflect a person’s character. I realized mine throughout the time I spent taking care of my great grandmother. My personal code is to always be generous, kind, and considerate. Kindness can always go a long way. I try and live my life by treating others the way I would want to be treated. It’s not a bad thing to be considerate

Chivalry Today Research Paper

Does Chivalry Live Today? In current society people are becoming more impatient, disrespectful, and self-centered. While this self-centered attitude may fulfill immediate needs, long-term consequences of this lifestyle can lead to the erosion of society. The problem is that younger generations are adopting this new lifestyle where they become more selfish and rude. Thus, everyone around them becomes selfish, and, as a result, society as a whole loses chivalry. Some people say chivalry is dead,

Examples Of Chivalry In King Arthur

The Clash of Chivalry According to Merriam-Webster Dictionary, chivalry is “a mounted man-at-arms in knightly skill” or a “gallant or distinguished gentleman with the spirit, or customs of medieval knighthood and the qualities of the ideal knight: chivalrous conduct” (Merriam-Webster Dictionary). At the beginning of the Middle Ages, chivalry was strictly pigeon holed by its followers and members into only protecting religious pilgrimages and to maintain the church of God, to serve in valor and combat

The Great Gatsby's 'Chivalry Is Dead'

expected the topic of chivalry to come up during a lunch conversation. The discussion began when Alvaro grabbed Britney’s chemistry textbook as well as Lucia’s binder, later he moved it to grab my chemistry textbook, but I said no. Alvaro replied that he was being a gentleman and he wanted to carry my book. I still didn’t allowed him to grab my book and told him that chivalry was clearly dead. “Chivalry is dead” is a saying used in modern society, but some people don’t know what chivalry truly is to begin

Personal Code Of Chivalry Essay

Personal Code of Chivalry Have you ever had an event change your life? When I took my first steps onto the marching band field for the first time, I realized I had found a place where I belonged. I quickly realized how the lessons I learned in marching band would become an integral part of my personal code of chivalry—a code that would guide not only my steps on the field but into my future as well. These three codes are: lead by example all the time, punctuality breeds perfection, and you can’t

Love And Chivalry In Erec And Enide

time when the chivalry, the code of knightly and courtly conduct, was hyper-idealized. Chivalry required knights to continually participate in tournaments and quests, and help those in need to bring about the greater social good, by defending good against evil, while it required maidens to not simply be saved by knights, but to support the knights in their endeavors. Through the story of the knight, Erec, and his wife, Enide, Chretien shows the struggle to balance love and chivalry. As the best knight

Examples Of Chivalry In The Return Of King Arthur

The code of chivalry was developed in Europe during the medieval ages as a system of ethics to hold knights responsible for their actions. The perfect knight was ideally humble, subservient to his king, skilled in warfare, and a good Christian. Many Arthurian poets incorporated the ideas of chivalry into their works. Ultimately, the code of chivalry left a lasting mark on European culture. The book “The Return of King Arthur” touches on the subject of chivalry in modern day practices: “From Arthurian

CHIVALRY AND PATERNALISM - DISPARITIES OF TREATMENT IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM

Additional details.

Salt Lake City , UT 84112 , United States

No download available

Availability, popular topics.

IqEssay experts provide help with assignments of all academic levels and disciplines.

Ordering process

The order process starts with the form, where you need to specify the type of assignment, academic level, and deadline. Please fill out form as more detailed and accurate as you can.

If we need more details about the work you need, we will contact you shortly

At this step, you can check the correctness of your order information, apply discount code, check the final price and proceed to pay.

Once you pay the invoice, we send your order to the relevant and experienced writer to start the process of writing

When the deadline comes, you will receive the completed assignment in your mailbox and to the personal account as well.

Check and review the paper you get and if you have any question - let us know, we appreciate any feedback you give us

our services

Thanks a lot! This is what I really needed. I completely forgot about my essay and remembered about it before the deadline. My author turned out to be a true professional with good punctuality.

His work deserves only the best words! At first, I was worried about the result, as I had never ordered an essay before, but the writer returned my essay a day before the deadline. I read it but did not find any mistakes or inaccuracies. The quality is just amazing, I'm happy.

I always thought that online writing services are scammers who paraphrase other people's papers from the Internet. My friend persuaded me to place an order here, and it exceeded all my expectations. My author is a true professional with good experience!

I am happy because he prepared an amazing term paper for me. I received praise from my professor. And most importantly, I was able to work and earn money for my family. This service has become real salvation!

I am a procrastinator and always regret it. But now I know that there is someone who will help me. Their papers are of high quality, free from plagiarism, and any errors. This is what can be called professionalism.

If they ask me if I am ready to recommend this author, I will answer without a doubt: Yes! This is the best experience of my life. We have become true friends. The writer is always in touch, offers new creative ideas in order to make the paper even better.

Main Information About The Service

Our service consists of a group of experts in the field of academic writing, editing, and proofreading. We have been working for more than 6 years, and the majority of clients become our loyal friends. We provide students with writing help of any type, no matter what problem they have. Our goal is to ease your complicated student's life, full of deadlines and requirements. We have experts in each academic discipline, and they seek to help you with the assignment.

Our writing company is a place where you are always welcome. IQEssay is not the other writing service, but a company with an innovative approach. Our goal is to make you stronger without getting lost or exhausted. We will help you comprehend the subject and get to a higher academic level. Our experts will help you come through the difficulties in academic writing. Order our online help and get a brilliant paper you can use as an example. Find the support and assistance you can always count on.

We offer fast and quality writing help with your writing assignments. Our writers are developing their writing experience every day. Thus, they can deal with any type of essay, research, or terms paper. Do not hesitate to contact us so that we can start working immediately.

We work on your success, knowledge, and positive reviews. Our experts are ready to handle your problems and give you some special advice. We want you to enjoy the cooperation, so we are ready to hear any feedback. Our team is working tirelessly to make the IQEssay more convenient to use.

We are not chasing money and popularity, as lots of companies do. Instead, we provide you with high-quality academic writing help and fast online support. When you work with us, you see how your knowledge and attitude to study is changing. Not only we help you with a particular homework but also make you more resilient and flexible. You will find the right way to succeed in studying.

We want every student to enjoy studying, rather than suffering from lots of assignments. Our mission is to let you set priorities so that you find education pleasant and fun. A lot of young people complain about the complexity of learning and the opportunities they wish they had to succeed. However, you do not have to suffer from the studying process because we turn it into pleasure.

If you cannot keep up with a large number of assignments, we will teach you to study faster and more productive. Our goal is to let you expand the boundaries and go beyond the limits of your abilities. That is how you succeed in not only studying but also each sphere of life. At IQEssay, you can feel free to ask for advice or share your fears about studying. We will help you find the fulcrum to implement your skills and talents.

We offer professional academic writing help with any type of homework. Whether you are a high school, college, or university student, you can rely on our help. Our experts are used to handling all types of essays, term papers, and article reviews. IQEssay group consists of writers and editors so that we complete the assignment from A to Z. Each writer has a Master's degree and at least five years of writing experience.

Do not ever doubt we can help you improve your grades and academic performance. We take responsibility for the services we provide. That is why you get quality assistance and fast online support. Discover the opportunity to enjoy studying with IQEssay.

When creating a company, we intended to gather like-minded people who seek to help students with their studying problems. The group of people who work for IQEssay is not just employees. They are writing experts and empathetic people who are ready to help.

Our team respects the values we created throughout the years of working. We do not want to burden you, so there are fundamental values:

[email protected]

Getting the A*

Gender – Crime and Deviance

Official statistics highlight that globally, males commit far more crimes than women. This creates a gender gap, which if you read the stretch and challenge, shows is minimising. Below are some key facts you need to know.

In England and Wales (2014):

Why do females appear to commit fewer crimes than men?

Less detectable offences

Sex-role theory and gender socialisation (Functionalism and New Right)

Control Theory and Rational Choice and opportunity in patriarchal society

Chivalry thesis

This concept was created by Pollak stating that women are treated more leniently by the CJS than men.

Evaluation of the chivalry thesis.

(Good) – First female offenders are half as likely to be given a sentence resulting in imprisonment than male.

(Good) – Women are less likely to be taken into custody.

(Good) – Women are more likely to be given alternative forms of sentences e.g. fines, warning, rather than imprisonment.

(Good) – Women on average receive shorter prison sentences.

(Bad) – It could be argued that women are given more lenient sentences because they do, as statistics show, commit lesser crimes.

(Bad) – When taking a look at CJS evidence, they highlight that women get more lenient sentences because they have more mitigating factors – factors that reduce sentences whereas males have more aggravating (factors that increase sentences).

(Bad) – Heidensohn’s theory that “If women commit crime, they are not only deviant, but also unfeminine creating two negative outcomes.” doesn’t really make any sense since if women were on trial for two offences, their sentences would be harsher than men’s.

(Bad) – It is known in rape cases that women have to prove their claim with substantial evidence before being allowed to take it to court showing they are not taken seriously.

Growing female criminality

Liberation Thesis

Adler’s Liberation Thesis highlights:

Evidence against this concept:

Why do males commit more crime than women?

Masculinity thesis

The Masculinity Thesis attempts to highlight why men commit more crime and highlights:

Evaluation of the masculinity thesis

(Good) – It provides an alternative argument why men commit crimes rather than focusing on women.

(Bad) – It tends to generalise by referring to all men e.g. some men who do not have blocked opportunities still commit crime.

(Bad) – Not all crimes committed by males are because of masculine traits.

the chivalry thesis evaluation

IMAGES

VIDEO

COMMENTS