1. FOUR KEY EXPLANATIONS FOR FEMALE CRIME PATTENSWEBB BOOK NOTES
1 FUNCTIONALIST SEX ROLE THEORY PAGE 103
1 Differential SOCIALISATION of males and females – boys encouraged to be masculine/tough so
more disposed to commit violence and crime
2 Parsons traces it to gender roles in nuclear family – instrumental and expressive roles. Women
do primary socialisation of expressive role in home. Girls get female adult role model but lads
reject feminine types of behaviour – tenderness, gentleness, emotion and seek to distance
themselves with COMPENSATORYCOMPULSORYMASCULINITY – aggression/anti-social behaviour
3 Men don’t do so much socialisation in nuclear family so socialising lads more difficult.
Cohen argues lack of male role model means boys turn to all-male street gangs as a source of
masculine identity. Status earned here by acts of toughness, risk-taking and delinquency.
4 NEWRIGHT – absence of male role model in one-parent families means boys turn to street
gangs as source of status and identity
Evaluation (A02):
Walklate – biological assumptions, Parsons links biological capacity to have kids with natural
affinity to expressive role
Although it is based on differences in socialisation patterns parts of the theory based on biological
assumptions about sex differences.
2 CONTROL THEORYA HEIDENSOHN: PATRIARCHAL CONTROL
1 Most striking thing about females – how CONFORMIST they are. Why? - Closer levels of
supervision throughout life imposed by patriarchal society, women more conformist, mechanisms
of social control tighter which reduces opportunities to offend – in 3 spheres:
i)HOME – domestic role/triple shift ties women to home for long periods, Dobash & Dobash show
that trigger to domestic violence often men’s dissatisfaction with women’s domestic duties.
Girls are less likely to be allowed out and have a distinct bedroom culture.
ii)IN PUBLIC IN GENERAL – by threat of male violence against them especially sexual violence e.g.
British Crime Survey 54% of women feared being victims after dark, only 14% of men. Exacerbated
by STRANGER DANGER media biased reporting
By fear of not being respectable ( sexualised gendered language/gaze - slag, slutty, loose etc).
Sue Lees – boys control girls through sexualised verbal abuse e.g. called‘slags’ if don’t conform to
gender role expectations
iii)WORK – by male supervisors and managers, sexual harassment widespread, glass ceiling denies
upward mobility and lessens ability to commit fraud, lower jobs women often perform are more
likely to be closely supervised.
Evaluation (A02):
Heidensohn is arguing less opportunities because tighter control = less crime but she also
recognises that patriarchy can push women into crime e.g. women more likely to be poor so turn
to theft/prostitution.
Heidensohn’s work been seen by some as a GROSS OVERGENERALISATION -feminisation of
workforce, women are getting top jobs.DETERMINISTIC – ignores choice/free will
These days crime CAN be committed in the home – internet. A lot of women are in high power
jobs. Lots of ways to go out at night without walking – taxi, lift..

2. 2 CONTROL THEORYB CARLEN: CLASS AND GENDER DEALS
Study of 39 working class women offenders. Argues that most convicted serious female criminals
are working class.
Uses Hirschi’s control theory. People act rationally and are controlled by a ‘deal’ which offers
rewards for conformity. People only turn to crime when these rewards are unavailable and
rewards of crime offer more.
Most working class women conform through promise of two types of rewards or ‘deals’:
i)Class deal: rewards for working – good standard of living + leisure opportunities
ii)Gender deal: rewards for acting out the conventional gender role – stability, respectability,
material rewards.
If these two deals are not available or not worth the effort crime becomes more likely. Women in
the study had failed to find a legitimate way of making a living and so had gained no rewards from
the class deal. Also they had experienced little opportunity to make the gender deal (bought up in
care, experienced domestic violence, poor academic performance at school….). Result these
women had concluded that crime was the only route to decent standard of living –nothing to lose
and everything to gain.
Evaluation: Heidensohn and Carlen both been accused of being deterministic (leaving out choice
and free will). Carlen used small sample so difficult to generalise.
3 CHANGING WOMEN’S ROLE OR ‘LIBERATION THESIS’ – reflects that female crime rising faster
than male crime in recent years. Adler (1975) argues that patriarchy is weakening and women now
adopting ‘male’ type roles in BOTH legitimate activity (work) and illegitimate activity (crime)
Women becoming more ‘masculine’ and finding release from social control. Evidence: women
committing white collar crime, violent crime, ladettes, girl gangs, risk-taking behaviour, looking
hard, drug taking…
Evidence: 1950s 1 in 7 crimes, 1990s 1 in 6 crimes, 2000s 1 in 5 crimes.
More women doing ‘male crimes’ like embezzlement & armed robbery.
Girl gangs e.g. Denscombe study of midlands teenagers in 2001 – girls adopting male stance like
being hard and indulging in risk-taking behaviour.
Evaluation:
a)most female criminals are working class – the group least likely to be influenced by women’s
liberation
b)Drug taking often linked to prostitution (very unliberated female offence),CHESNEY-LIND
c) Girl members of gangs subordinate to men and expected to conform to conventional gender
roles. LAIDLER & HUNT
d)Women’s’ crime started to rise long before rise of feminism
OVERALL Adler overestimates extent to which women have been liberated and the extent to which
they have access to serious crime. Patriarchy still embedded and most serious crime is male crime
still.