Others argue that it is paternalistic sexism to prohibit women from making a living with their bodies, though men are not prohibited from engaging in their most profitable forms of physical labor. There is no ideal answer regarding the question of the commoditization of sexuality. On the contrary, "both commodification and noncommodification may be harmful...under our current social conditions." Therefore, the issue becomes; which option is more likely to lead to more ideal social conditions? The fact is that, while some individual prostitutes may be better able to attain de facto equality if allowed to pursue prostitution, because it is their best available financial option, prostitution, on the whole, perpetuates the idea of women as "things." In addition, while some people claim that prostitution is a victimless crime, even when prostitutes are truly consenting sex partners, the crime does have victims. Wives, girlfriends, and children of johns are victimized by prostitution. However, they are not victimized in a criminal manner; the criminal prosecution of adultery has long-been abandoned. Therefore, it appears that, even if prostitution remains criminalized, johns, whose individual behavior is more likely to have a detrimental impact on society than prostitutes', should be penalized more harshly than prostitutes. However, in reality, the opposite is the case. Domestic violence is another area that is largely gender-driven. Conventional research suggests that women are much more likely to be domestic violence victims than men. However, a growing body of research challenges that assumption, and suggests that men and women are battered at the same rate. Regardless of the battering rate, the biological, inescapable differences in strength between males and females dictate that women are more likely to be severely injured or killed by domestic violence than men. In fact, each day, three women in the United States are murdered by their domestic partners. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that one of the hot-button legal issues of the last two decades is deciding what type of physical force a female domestic violence victim can use against a male...

The issue is not whether juries will agree with a battered woman's argument that her actions were self-defense, but whether the jury will even hear a self-defense instruction. This issue often turns on a defendant's ability to prove an overt act of abuse by a victim. When the issue does come before a jury, a jury is oftentimes left to decide whether a woman's use of a weapon against an unarmed domestic violence aggressor was acceptable, which is a very gendered question. Many feminist scholars would suggest that a woman's use of a weapon against an unarmed aggressor is a reasonable use of force when that aggressor is male because of the size and strength differences between the average male and female. However, others would argue that force can only reasonably be met with like force and that victims, domestic violence or otherwise, are not permitted to escalate non-deadly force to deadly levels when exercising the right to defend themselves.
As the above examples make abundantly clear, introducing the feminist perspective into criminology does not simplify criminal justice. However, that does not mean that one should ignore the feminist perspective. On the contrary, the United States system of criminal justice is not meant to be "one-size-fits-all;" it takes into account mitigating and aggravating factors in every stage of crime, from the decision to arrest to sentencing, and even post-sentence relief such as parole or pardon. Considering the feminist perspective just makes it more likely that women will receive the same type of individual consideration as men in all of these stages.

Michael M. v. Superior Court of Sonoma County. 450 U.S. 464 (1981).

Radin, M.J. (1990). The pragmatist and the feminist. S. Cal. L. Rev. 63, 1699-1701.

Bureau of Justice. (February 2003).

Intimate Partner Violence, 1993-2001. Washington: Bureau of Justice.

Maguigan, H. (1991). Battered women and self-defense: myths and misconceptions in current reform proposals.

U. Pa. L. Rev., 14, 382-387, 457-458.