Feminine Criminology

Feminist Criminology and Victimization Theory Feminist Criminology Feminist criminology theory proposes that social and ethnic structures that lead to gender oppression will increase the prevalence of criminality among the oppressed (Bernard, 2013). In most cultures, including the west, there exists a history of subjugation of women at all levels of society. The feminist movement in the United States and elsewhere accordingly sought to reduce or eliminate the power of these social, legal, and religious sanctions that relegated women to second class citizenship.

This was the driving force behind the emergence of the feminist criminology model. In support of the feminist criminology model, Bernard (2013) points out that some women within society have a higher risk of incarceration. In the U.S., this high-risk demographic is non-white, young, living in poverty, under-educated, and unmarried with children. There also tends to be a multi-generational history of drug/alcohol problems and domestic violence. This demographic represents one of the most vulnerable groups within American society, politically and legally.

In support of the feminist criminology model, Simpson and colleagues (2008) interviewed 351 women detained in a Baltimore criminal justice facility and found that these mostly African-American women (94%) found their way into the facility through pathways significantly distinct from men. Surprisingly, 54% were adult-onset offenders, a finding which contrasts with the view that criminal behavior for males generally begins in adolescence. Adult-onset women offenders were less likely to have a criminal history, criminals for friends, to use violence offensively, or to experience violence generally.

They were, however, more likely to be victimized by an act of violence, such as rape, robbery, or assault than their younger peers. The main factor discriminating adult-onset female offenders from childhood-onset or adolescent-onset offenders, however, was that they were significantly more likely to be married. This too contrasts with the male offender research suggesting that marriage is protective against criminality. The pathways to incarceration therefore differ significantly between men and women, due in part to victimization by male partners.

Victimization There are four costs associated with crime: (1) losses suffered by victims, (2) criminal justice system expenditures, (3) losses to society in terms of positive productivity by criminals, and (4) intangible losses such as pain, suffering, and fear of victimization (McCollister, French, and Fang, 2010). In 2007, the losses suffered by victims were estimated to be $15 billion and the cost of maintaining a criminal justice system $179 billion. Murder, for example, was estimated to cost victims about $738,000, the criminal justice system $400,000, society $150,000, and $8,442,000 in intangibles.

By contrast, rape and aggravated assault carry tangible costs totaling $41,000 and $20,000, respectively, and intangible costs of $200,000 and $95,000, respectively. The descriptive data generated by Simpson and colleagues (2008) provides considerable support for the conflict/critical/feminist theory of victimization (Wilcox, 2010). This theory holds that crime generally occurs in situations where there is an imbalance of power, such as between an adult and child, husband and wife, or gun wielding thug and unarmed pedestrian.

In a society that generally defines female roles as distinct from, and weaker than, their male counterparts, this theory of victimization would explain why Simpson.