What evidence, if any, is there to support the
A short visit to a magistrates ‘ tribunal will expose the most obvious gender prejudice: most of the wrongdoers are work forces. A similar prejudice can be seen in the literature on wrongdoers up until the last few decennaries – most of the research investigated work forces. The research on female wrongdoers has become much more widespread late, along with the hunt for the possibility that adult females are treated more laxly by the condemnable justness system. One theory for the indulgent intervention of adult females, if it exists, was put frontward more than a century ago: the ‘chivalry thesis ‘ . This treatment will first concentrate on the beginnings of the ‘chivalry thesis ‘ and so travel on to look for grounds of its being, foremost, in the condemnable statistics and so in the research, both qualitative and quantitative, that has been carried out.
The ‘chivalry ‘ thesis is usually traced back to the Hagiographas of Otto Pollak, many of which seem highly sexist and inappropriate when read today. Still, Klein ( 1973 ) describes Pollak ‘s ( 1950 ) bookThe Criminality of Womenas one of the most of import plants on female offense in the post-war period. The first of import statement from Pollak ‘s ( 1950 ) book was that the offense that adult females committed is basically concealed. This is a consequence, argues Pollak ( 1950 ) , of three of import factors. The first is adult females ‘s biological nature which is basically inactive. Womans are besides biologically fallacious and vindictive, doing them much more suitable to condemnable Acts of the Apostless, but those condemnable Acts of the Apostless that are centred on the abetment of offense instead than its commission – he even asserts that work forces are lured into offense by adult females. Pollak ( 1950 ) put the ground for this down to the force per unit areas and conditioning of society, although his statement is basically physiological.
The 2nd of import statement Pollak ( 1950 ) makes is the thought that the types of occupations that adult females do – house servants, instructors and nurses – are besides suited to commiting undetectable offenses. The concluding of import ground for Pollak ‘s statement that female offense is hidden is that the condemnable justness system provides lenience towards adult females: this is the ‘chivalry thesis ‘ . Pollak draws on the thought of a cultural prejudice that argues that it is the basically male members of the condemnable justness system – attorneies, constabulary officers and Judgess – that have a disfavor for the apprehension and penalty of adult females.
The ground Pollak ‘s thoughts have survived is certainly that, while grossly sexist, they still reflect some facet of truth that many research workers in criminology are still look intoing today. The physiological statement for pardoning female offense still limps on, although in different pretenses, but it is possibly the cultural statement that still catches the imaginativeness. So, while authors on this topic are improbable to utilize the same nomenclature as Pollak, the thought of the sexualisation of female offense and, in peculiar, the probe of the gallantry hypothesis is still taken really earnestly.
Nagel & A ; Johnson ( 1994 ) point out that the alleged gallantry thesis is non peculiarly good defined in the literature. Modern authors, nevertheless, usually intend it to mention to a male attitude towards adult females that they are weak and are in demand of particular intervention to protect them. This thought is hypothesised to be linked to a perceptual experience that adult females are more inactive and submissive and are, as a effect, less responsible for their actions. In add-on, Moulds ( 1978 ) points out that the gallantry thesis is often confused and confounded with the thought of paternalism which tends to underscore the uneven power relationship between work forces and adult females and so cut down adult females ‘s duty for offenses. As can be seen, this is a slightly different significance to that originally outlined by Pollak.
These three statements together were Pollak ‘s response to what was clearly a much higher rate of captivity for work forces than adult females when he was composing half a century ago. Rather than entertain the thought that offense committed by work forces might merely be higher than that committed by adult females, he preferred to reason that female offense was hidden. In many ways, of class, criminologists and others are still seeking to reply the same inquiry of the disparity between male and female offense.
The Home Office ( 2003 ) statistics for female wrongdoers provide the footing for this treatment. Overall, it is clear that adult females make up a much smaller fraction of those dealt with by the condemnable justness system than work forces. Of the 1.65 million known wrongdoers in 2002, merely 19 % were female. For grounds of the usage of lenience towards adult females, it is utile to look at the comparings of the types of penalties given to work forces and adult females. Comparing per centums, it can be seen that for the most indulgent sentence, an absolute or conditional discharge, 23 % of adult females received this as opposed to 13 % of work forces. Comparing on the community sentences, the following measure up in earnestness of condemning, 39 % of adult females were given these, while 32 % of work forces received them. Finally, of those remanded into detention, merely 16 % were adult females while 27 % were work forces. While these statistics might, at first glimpse, seem to supply grounds for the gallantry hypothesis, it should be pointed out that these figures do non take into history the fact that work forces ‘s forms and types of piquing are, on norm, more serious than adult females. Given that penalty should by and large by relative to the offense this does non yet supply direct grounds. Alternatively these figures provide the background to the statement.
Equally good as the statistics for one peculiar twelvemonth, it is besides utile to look at the tendencies that have emerged over the last decennary in condemning. Hedderman ( 2004 ) examined the alterations in condemning that occurred between 1994 and 2002. There have been some suggestions that the badness of the sentencing of adult females had been increasing in this period, but Hedderman ( 2004 ) finds small grounds of this. Alternatively a more general tendency over this period is seen of increasing badness in penalty for both genders. Between 1994 and 2002, rates of being remanded to detention in the magistrates ‘ tribunal increased from 3.5 % to 10.7 % for adult females, and for work forces from 7.7 % to 15.8 % . Similarly, in the Crown Court, there have been additions in the badness of condemning, with a somewhat greater addition for work forces, but there is still small that requires account from a gender position. Hedderman ( 2004 ) besides finds that overall, in this clip period, there was no addition in the mean length of a tutelary sentence for adult females.
Having considered some of the major statistics on the penalty of work forces and adult females through sentencing, it is necessary to turn to the research for grounds that might back up the gallantry hypothesis. An early survey in the UK that looked at the possibility that adult females were treated more laxly than work forces in sentencing was carried out by Allen ( 1987 ) . This survey analysed the usage of community service orders and, to this terminal, collected informations from 2,000 tribunal records. From their analysis, Allen ( 1987 ) discovered that there was a inclination to be more indulgent towards adult females in the increased usage of community service orders which were deemed to be the more indulgent option. Hood ( 1992 ) , as portion of the survey of race and sentencing, besides found some interesting effects of gender on the results of condemnable instances. It was found that even once the legal and socio-demographic factors of person ‘s instances had been taken into history, there was a inclination for Judgess to be less likely to condemn adult females to detention.
Hedderman & A ; Hough ( 1994 ) provided some probationary grounds that adult females are treated more laxly than work forces by sentencers. They note, as have other surveies, that work forces make up a higher proportion of those come ining the condemnable justness system and by and large have more serious condemnable records. Hedderman & A ; Hough ( 1994 ) , nevertheless, argue that even when old strong beliefs are taken into history as an estimate of the earnestness of the offense, it still appears that adult females are treated more laxly than work forces. A similar analysis was carried out on types of offenses and besides found greater lenience towards adult females. While this survey does supply some utile penetration, as the writers insist, it merely provides probationary grounds.
More recent surveies, nevertheless, have tended to endorse up the findings that adult females are treated more laxly. Kapardis ( 2003 ) argues that there is, in fact, merely one survey that has found this non to be the instance. Before presenting this, it is necessary to analyze an facet of the research that has proved debatable in mensurating lenience, viz. that it can sometime be hard to judge which punishments are more terrible than others. To seek and supply a step, Kapardis & A ; Farrington ( 1981 ) asked magistrates to rate the punishments that they impose in rank order of badness. Then, utilizing this graduated table, Farrington & A ; Morris ( 1983 ) looked at the determinations of magistrates who they found by and large gave more indulgent sentences to adult females. Farrington & A ; Morris ( 1983 ) did, nevertheless, argue that these more indulgent sentences were in line with the less terrible fortunes of the offenses adult females had committed. For illustration, adult females tended to hold greater mitigating fortunes, it was frequently their first offense and, if they were accused of larceny, they had by and large stolen fewer points. While this was the general image, Farrington & A ; Morris ( 1983 ) did happen some differences between genders, in that those adult females whose fortunes were considered less conventional, i.e. non female parents, were non given as indulgent intervention as those who were considered more conventional.
Despite these findings, it is a more recent, and more extended, analyze carried out by Hedderman & A ; Gelsthorpe ( 1997 ) of the sentencing in the magistrates ‘ tribunal that has proved influential. As 95 % of all instances in England and Wales are heard in the magistrates ‘ tribunal, provides of import grounds. In the first portion of this survey, carried out by Dowds & A ; Hedderman ( 1997 ) , the writers analysed 13,000 instances taken from the Home Office ‘s Offender Index who were sentenced in 1991. Three different types of instances were chosen for analysis: shrinkage, drug offenses and violent offenses. To try to work out if adult females were being granted greater lenience than work forces, Dowds & A ; Hedderman ( 1997 ) included the fortunes of each instance in the analysis, this included, for illustration, the figure of old strong beliefs, the current age and the age at first offense.
Analyzing those who had been sentenced for shrinkage, Dowds & A ; Hedderman ( 1997 ) analysed repetition wrongdoers individually from first wrongdoers. For tutelary sentences, of first wrongdoers who were female, merely 1 % were given tutelary sentences, compared to 8 % of work forces. However there were a figure of prejudices and when these were controlled for there was small statistical difference except that there was a reluctance to give adult females mulcts as opposed to work forces. An analysis of the repetition wrongdoers revealed a similar reluctance to ticket adult females every bit good as a little overall inclination for adult females to be treated more laxly than work forces.
Turning to violent wrongdoers, Dowds & A ; Hedderman ( 1997 ) found that, once more, magistrates were less willing to enforce mulcts on adult females, despite the fact that Moxon, Corkery & A ; Hedderman ( 1992 ) have found that it is for violent offenses that magistrates are likely to use mulcts as there is a victim that can be compensated. No difference was found though between the sentences of first-time wrongdoers of each gender – so violent offenses are one of the few instances in which work forces and adult females receive the same tutelary sentences. For repetition wrongdoers, though, the form resumed with adult females more likely to be treated laxly. Finally, for those being sentenced for drug offenses it was found there was small difference between work forces and adult females. Dowds & A ; Hedderman ( 1997 ) argue that the ground for this is that many of the adult females in this class had much more serious condemnable histories than those compared in the old classs. This likely contributed towards a less indulgent attack by the magistrates.
Analyzing the grounds discussed so far in visible radiation of the gallantry hypothesis, it can be seen that there is some grounds for it as, in many classs of offense, adult females were treated more laxly when the fortunes of the offenses were taken into history. There was grounds, nevertheless, from Dowds & A ; Hedderman ‘s ( 1997 ) survey that on occasion adult females were treated more harshly than work forces because of the magistrates ‘ reluctance to enforce a all right on adult females. While there is grounds that would suit with the gallantry hypothesis here, there is still the inquiry of preciselywhysentencers are more indulgent towards adult females. For this ground the treatment now turns from quantitative analysis to more qualitative analysis.
There is now a diverseness of research looking at how significance is constructed in the courtroom that allows some farther decisions to be drawn about the gallantry thesis. Allen ( 1987 ) finds that, overall, the manner in which female actions are constructed in the courtroom are such that there is a greater grade of sympathy towards adult females. This is manifested in the manner that a adult female ‘s fortunes are assessed by the tribunal – after all it is the fortunes of the offense that have a immense impact on the types of sentences imposed ( Ashworth, 2005 ) . A more sympathetic building will take to a more indulgent sentence.
Court buildings were examined farther by Worrall ( 1990 ) who identified three of import discourses within which adult females were constructed: through gender, pathology and domesticity. Women ‘s behavior could foremost be excused through their gender, every bit long as the behavior was considered typical for adult females. Types of behavior that were considered outside society ‘s stereotypes for adult females tended to pull less lenience. Those least likely to illicit understanding from the tribunal were those adult females who had committed offenses that were most associated with work forces, and were hence frequently the furthest from female norms of behavior. The discourse of pathology emphasised how adult females were frequently seen as responding to their ain endocrines and were hence non blameworthy for that ground. Magistrates besides, in this context, tended to be swayed by input from head-shrinkers who frequently back up the pathological discourse. Finally, domesticity was an of import discourse because it was found that magistrates frequently constructed female wrongdoers in footings of the domestic state of affairs in order to pardon their behavior. For illustration, adult females were stealing to supply nutrient for their household.
A 2nd of import survey taking a qualitative attack was that carried out by Gelsthorpe & A ; Loucks ( 1997 ) . A major determination of their survey of 189 magistrates ‘ attitudes towards male and female wrongdoers was that they were frequently split into the classs of ‘troubled ‘ and ‘troublesome ‘ . Womans, in contrast to work forces, were more likely to be seen as ‘troubled ‘ – this tended to intend that adult females were in demand of aid instead than penalty. Womans were by and large seen to be stealing for the endurance of their household. It was unusual for magistrates in this survey to happen that adult females were ‘troublesome ‘ . Using kids in perpetrating offenses, or holding many old offenses, nevertheless, would do them look troublesome.
Gelsthorpe & A ; Loucks ( 1997 ) examined different classs of offense, and, surprisingly, even found much sympathy for adult females in violent offenses. Generally, in violent offenses, adult females had been provoked into action by menaces to their relationships, whereas work forces tended to utilize force on a random footing. An of import factor in penalty was the wrongdoer ‘s fortunes – here adult females about ever had households and it was seen that this was a strong ground to avoid giving adult females tutelary sentences. The same was non true of work forces who tended non to hold exclusive detention of kids.
In decision, it is clear that adult females are outnumbered by work forces in the condemnable justness system. The quantitative empirical grounds suggests that even one time this instability is taken into history along with adjusting for the comparative fortunes of female offending, there is still some lenience shown towards adult females in many classs of offense. But, what is the ground? Having reviewed the research and taking Pollak ‘s original thesis as it is, there is merely modest grounds to back up the thought of a male-dominated condemnable justness system ‘disliking ‘ the penalty of adult females – after all, half the magistrates in England and Wales are female. But stretching the thought to include a more paternalistic impression it can be seen that there is considerable grounds for the thesis. The qualitative analyses show in both Worrall ‘s ( 1990 ) work every bit good as Gelsthorpe & A ; Loucks ‘ ( 1997 ) that the manner in which the tribunals construct female individuality has considerable analogues to the gallantry hypothesis. Womans are construed to be weaker, more inactive, less in control of their actions and more at the clemency of domestic agreements, and, hence, more deserving of indulgent intervention.
Allen, H. ( 1987 )Justice Unbalanced: gender, psychopathology and judicial determinations. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Ashworth, A. ( 2005 )Sentencing and Criminal Justice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dowds, L. , Hedderman, C. ( 1997 ) The Sentencing of Men and Women, in C. Hedderman, L. Gelsthorpe ( explosive detection systems. ) ,Understanding the Sentencing of Women, Home Office Research Study 170, London: Home Office.
Farrington, D. P. , Morris, A. ( 1983 ) Sexual activity, condemning and reconviction.British Journal of Criminology, 23, 229-248.
Gelsthorpe, L. , Loucks, N. ( 1997 ) Magistrates’ Explanations of Sentencing Decisions. In: C. Hedderman and L. Gelsthorpe ( explosive detection systems. ) ,Understanding the Sentencing of Women, Home Office Research Study 170, London: Home Office.
Hedderman, C. ( 2004 ) Why are more adult females being sentenced to detention? In G. McIvor ( ed. )Womans Who Offend. London: Jessica Kingsley
Hedderman, C. , Gelsthorpe, L. ( 1997 )Understanding the sentencing of adult females, Home Office Research Study 170, London: Home Office.
Hedderman, C. , Hough, M.( 1994 ) Does the condemnable justness system dainty work forces and adult females otherwise? Research Findings No. 10.London: Home Office.
Home Office ( 2003 )Statisticss on Women and the Criminal Justice System. London: Home Office.
Hood, R. ( 1992 )Race and Sentencing: A survey in the Crown Court. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Kapardis, K. ( 2003 )Psychology and Law: A Critical Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kapardis, A. , Farrington, D. P. ( 1981 ) An experimental survey of condemning by magistrates.Law and Human Behaviour, 5, 107-121.
Klein, D. ( 1973 ) The etiology of female offense.Issues in Criminology, 8 ( 2 ) , 3-30.
Molds, E. F. ( 1978 ) Chivalry and Paternalism: Disparities of Treatment in the Criminal Justice System.Western Political Quarterly, 31 ( 3 ) , 416-430.
Moxon, D. , Corkery, J. , Hedderman, C. ( 1992 )Developments in the Use of Compensation Orders in Magistrates’ tribunals since October 1988. Home Office Research Study No. 126. London: Home Office.
Nagel, I. , Johnson, B. L. ( 1994 ) The Role of Gender in a Structured Sentencing System: Equal intervention, policy picks and the sentencing of female wrongdoers under the United States condemning guidelines.Journal of Law and Criminology, 85, 181-221.
Pollak, O. ( 1950 )The Criminality of Women. New York: A.S. Barnes.
Worrall, A. ( 2000 ) Community Sentences for Women: Where Have They Gone?Condemnable Justice Matters, 39, 10-11.