This paper investigates whether female sex offenders are inherently more or less evil than their male counterparts by examining biological, psychological, and criminological evidence. The analysis considers hormonal differences between genders, explores how female sexual offenders operate differently from males (including grooming and coercion patterns), and applies feminist criminology perspectives to gender bias in the criminal justice system. The paper presents data on female offender prevalence, recidivism rates, and offense characteristics, concluding that female sex offenders are less likely to reoffend and tend to employ different methods than males, suggesting they represent a comparatively lower threat to public safety.
Biological differences between men and women have been thought to contribute to predispositions for various criminal activities. For example, hormonal differences exist between genders and cause significant alterations in behaviors. Men generally have higher levels of testosterone, which has been correlated with aggressive and competitive behavior in some studies. Women, by contrast, have higher levels of estrogen and different biological compositions. Studies have also shown that women are more likely to commit crimes during their premenstrual cycle (PMS), when elevated hormone levels make them more aggressive and irritable—a state associated with low levels of estrogen coupled with higher levels of progesterone.
This analysis addresses the question of whether there are gender differences in the occurrence of sexual offenses. The common stereotype of sexual crimes depicts males who use their size and strength to prey upon weaker female victims. However, evidence suggests these stereotypes may be incomplete, and there may be more female sexual offenses than previously recognized. This paper examines whether female sexual offenders are any more or less evil than their male counterparts by considering biological differences, the influence of gender roles in the criminal justice system, and other relevant perspectives.
Various studies have examined the roles of hormones and criminal activity across different genders. One study showed that females incarcerated for violent offenses comprised a high proportion of women who committed violent acts during their premenstrual period (Wright et al., 2008). During PMS, women have elevated hormone levels that increase aggression and irritability, influenced by the biological processes that produce low estrogen coupled with higher progesterone.
The biological perspective has also led researchers to investigate correlations between testosterone levels in men and criminality. Some studies have shown that high testosterone levels are linked to criminal behavior. However, this relationship produces only a moderate correlation, and results remain debatable. Furthermore, the correlation is insufficient to suggest that high testosterone levels can reliably predict criminal behavior.
Testosterone is a hormone present in both sexes but in greater amounts in males. It develops early in males and then increases rapidly during adolescence. Testosterone is commonly associated with competitive and aggressive behaviors, as well as a greater likelihood of engaging in risk-taking behaviors. There are also other factors related to testosterone levels in individuals, such as lower sensitivity to pain, enhanced seeking of sensory stimulation, and a right-hemisphere shift in brain dominance linked to higher spatial aptitude but lower levels of reasoning and empathy (Wright et al., 2008). Thus, some researchers believe that male biology, naturally possessing higher testosterone levels, better explains criminal behaviors and impulses along gender lines. Arguments based on biological gender differences can theoretically explain some trends in which men disproportionately engage in more criminal behaviors than women.
However, hormonal differences are not the only biological explanations for criminal behavior. For example, low levels of cortisol, a hormone that plays an important role in anxiety regulation, have been correlated with chronic offending in some individuals. Although high anxiety can be detrimental, abnormally low anxiety levels can also create problems. Anxiety can inhibit behaviors related to committing offenses; without adequate anxiety, an individual may not consider the consequences of their actions.
Biological differences inherent in the genders can also be trumped by cultural and social forces in the perceptions of these differences. Female sex offenders have a different psychological profile than their male counterparts. Female sexual abusers' cognition is inherently different from that presented by male sexual abusers, and to engage their victims, female sexual offenders (FSOs) typically coerce them rather than use violence or threats of violence (Forbes & Harris, 2014). Research has identified six different types of FSOs (Forbes & Harris, 2014):
Heterosexual Nurturers: FSOs who frequently met and related to their victims in the capacity of a caretaker or mentor and assaulted only male victims (e.g., female teacher).
Noncriminal Homosexual Offenders: This group had the lowest average number of arrests following their target offense. The average age of their victims (13) was the second highest among the types identified.
Female Sexual Predators: Similar to male sexual predators; their victims were more likely to be male than female.
Young Adult Child Exploiters: Their victims were the youngest, and they displayed no apparent preference for male or female victims.
Homosexual Criminals: Women who perform sexual assaults on other women and have the highest level of arrest among the different groups.
Aggressive Homosexual Criminals: This category includes women who use violence to commit sexual assaults.
One of the most publicized cases of FSO involved Mary Kay Letourneau, who received national attention when convicted of second-degree child rape for having sex with her sixth-grade student, Vili Fualaau, when he was 12 years old (Knoll, 2010). Letourneau gave birth to two children by the student and eventually married him after his release from prison. This case brought the role of FSO to national attention and sparked many studies to determine how prevalent the phenomenon was. The process of targeting a child is known as grooming, a term used to describe how sex offenders carefully initiate and maintain sexually abusive relationships with children (Knoll, 2010).
All feminist theorists share a common focus on gender inequality; however, feminism can be described as a set of perspectives rather than a single viewpoint (Strider, n.d.). This perspective has been applied to gender bias in the criminal justice system. Feminist perspectives consider many different factors that constitute gender inequality systematically established in institutions such as the criminal justice system. Many early theories of criminal behavior completely ignored the role of gender. Much of the criminal justice system has become largely male-dominated for various reasons.
Feminist criminology resulted from applying the general feminist perspective to the criminal justice system. This perspective now represents a large body of research in the literature and inhabits a social and political landscape radically altered and increasingly characterized by the politics of backlash (Chesney-Lind, 2006). The perspective considers two primary factors—gender and crime—though the political backlash has come in the form of racism and sexism.
Even though it is generally accepted that males commit crimes at a higher rate than women, there are specific examples in which this is not the case. Shoplifting is one example; some estimates are as high as 80% of all shoplifters being women. Although men sometimes shoplift, women are far more likely to steal more items than men, steal items from several stores, and steal items of lesser value (O'Connor, n.d.). Women also have been identified as having different methods and motives for crimes unique to their gender.
The current criminal justice system issues punishments to women on the assumption that they pose the same threat to public safety as their male counterparts, even though most criminal justice professionals believe that women represent substantially less risk to public safety (Covington & Bloom, 2003). Although men are still prosecuted for crimes at comparatively higher rates, the rate of women incarcerated has increased at nearly double the rate of men since 1980.
Most women currently incarcerated have been imprisoned for non-violent crimes. In addition, most violent crimes perpetrated by women are directed against a spouse, ex-spouse, or partner who had been the source of physical or sexual abuse against the women. However, despite the presence of female violent crimes, these represent only a small fraction of the overall violent crimes from both genders. The occurrences of female-perpetrated sexual offenses are only now becoming a publicized and studied phenomenon.
Although public awareness of female perpetrators of sex crimes has increased in recent years, primarily due to numerous highly publicized cases, there is limited guidance on effective approaches to working with them. Among the reasons for limited information regarding female sex offenders is that until recently, there has been underrecognition of female-perpetrated sex offenses (Pflugradt & Allen, 2010). The limited information available about FSO undoubtedly skews the data available for study. In actuality, the percentage of sexual assaults conducted by women would likely increase well beyond the current two percent range of total occurrences.
Previously, it was assumed that women rarely, if ever, committed sexual offenses. As more motivations for FSO are being identified, researchers are beginning to examine the social contexts of these acts as well. One factor investigated the differences between female sexual offenders who committed offenses with an accomplice (co-offender) and without (solo offender). Some studies have suggested that female co-offenders were more likely to have female victims compared to male victims, while female solo offenders were more likely to have male victims (Muskens et al., 2011).
Other traits attributed to female sexual offenders indicate they are more likely to offend with a co-offender, be younger, have younger child victims, and be less likely to engage in sexual acts involving penetration (Pflugradt & Allen, 2012). One study examined the relationship between gender roles and sexual sadism. While there is some agreement in the literature regarding the essential features of sexual sadism—including behaviors and fantasies related to inflicting pain, suffering, and humiliation—the motivations remain elusive. Women's sexual arousal patterns may be significantly different from males, and there is some evidence to suggest that deviant sexual arousal might contribute to female sexually assaultive behaviors (Pflugradt & Allen, 2012). This theory is also relevant to co-offender statistics because many assaults by females require assistance from another person to restrain the victim.
Despite the variety of female sexual offenses and their implications, it should be noted that they still represent a small portion of total sexual offenses. Women may be responsible for between 4% and 5% of all sexual offences, but observed sexual recidivism rates for females have been between 1% and 3% (Vess, 2011). Although more cases of female sexual offenses have become publicized, the total number of occurrences and repeat offenses is comparably low. The low recidivism rate indicates that most female offenders can be effectively rehabilitated through the criminal justice system.
"Evidence synthesis and conclusions on relative threat levels"
You’re 77% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 1 section.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.