'Assess the Value of the Chivalry Thesis in Understanding Gender Differences in Crime\r'

'Assess the value of the â€Å" valiance dissertation” in understanding sex activity differences in crime (21) The chivalry thesis is where wo custody be interact to a greater extent(prenominal) than than leniently than custody by the criminal umpire system. This is because of paternalism and sexism when it comes to staminate dominated legal philosophy and courts. As a result of this, criminal statistics lower the true extent of female off remnanting. This is because practice of law officers ar little believably to pronounce a cleaning woman of a slight atrocious crime because it is a woman therefore ar seen as much in all similarlihood to just get a warning.Graham and bowling (1995) did a self-report study on 14-25 year olds and free-base that 55% of males and 35% of females admitted to offences in the last 12 months. This suggests that males gene lay to a greater extent crime than wowork force in universal although this self-report study is establish on the young generations of males and females. Women argon as intimately as more plausibly to admit to their offences, which concludes this excogitation is an high-fidelity angiotensin-converting enzyme and may suggest that the male figure could also be blush higher. another(prenominal) study would be the youth lifestyles accompany (2000) where it was prime that 11% females and 26% males perpetrate austere crimes in the last twelve months.In general, women atomic number 18 seen to station less serious crimes like shoplifting and are really rare for them to chip in a bowelless crime. These statistics show that males are a vision more scarlet and are more capable of levelting more serious crimes compared to women. gush page et all (2000) ensnare that hotshot in eleven self-reported offences by women resulted in prosecution whereas one in seven-spot did for males. This backs up what Allen (1987) says where women are less promising to be given custod ial sentences for guilty motoring offences because they are able to whistle their steering out of it and apologise sweetly.This could also be the case when it comes to prosecution. As well as this, women are seen to be tough more leniently by law for example, first off hold oners are half as promising to be given a sentence of immediate im prisonment, where as if it was a man there is no question close it. Women are also seen by the police as a less serious threat compared to men and they front to benefit from informal approaches to their offences such as just a caution or warning.Pollak (1961) states that men(including police officers) are protective towards women and are less likely to prosecute them because of this, peculiarly if it is a typical crime that a women is seen to pull in. Female defendants are treated more sympathetically unless it is a crime against children or a serious crime that is seen as a crime only men commit. Because of this protectiveness towards women and courts giving them understanding this creates an in effectual film on crime rates.Another study would be the ministry of justice (2009) where 49% of females record of committing a crime received no more than a caution but in 2007 this figure was 30% which implies that this problem is get worse year by year. On the other hand, studies by Graham and bowl and Youth lifestyle study, both found that males tended to be involved in more serious offences, which would excuse the higher proportions of men among the convicted and cautioned, also possible males are more likely than females to admit offences in self-report studies.Box (1981) did a self-report study in Britain and USA and found that statistics on gender and crime are fairly accurate. He found that women who commit serious offences are not treated more favourably than men; as well as this the lower rate of prosecutions of females compared to the self-report studies may be because the crimes they admit to are less seri ous and aren’t likely to go on trial. Women offenders also depend a lot more likely to show regret, which may help to explain why they are more likely to receive a caution alternatively of going to court instead of police and courts just being seen as protective.Buckle and Farrington (1984) found that men were twice as likely as women to shop lift even though official figures suggest men and women are equal. There could be more reasons for this, such as women could be a lot less subtle about it as they are seen as more innocent, whereas males hanging about browsing at things in a department depot looks a lot more abnormal. Although women commit less serious crime, those who do are likely to face a serious punishment compared to the males that get convicted for the same crime.This is because it isn’t seen as an acceptable way for a women to act as it defies their feminine division of being caring and loving. Violent crimes are seen to be male crimes because it is sc ientifically proved that males are a lot more aggressive compared to females because of their levels of testosterone. So when women commit a violent crime, the courts come down on them like a tonne of bricks because of how violent it is. Carlen (1997) says that’s sentences given to women are based on the female occasion and the way that a certain female fulfils this role and her character.For example if she is an aggressive women, she will belike get a longer sentence as it strictly defies the female role, whereas if a women was very regretful about what she had done, the courts are more likely to give her sympathy and a softer sentence. If women commit a violent crime they are seen as double deviant because they aren’t just committing a crime they are defying their role as a women. Farrington and Morris (1983) did a study, which was the sentencing of 408 offences of theft in a magistrate’s court.They found that women were not treated any differently when it came to crimes men and women both committed as they were seen to end up with similar sentences no case what their circumstances were. This suggests that the chivalry thesis doesn’t always apply and it may not apply at all. There is seen to be a clear divide in what is and isn’t a female crime. Crimes like shoplifting aren’t as serious, which gist that it may not always end up in court because bigger crimes come first which suggest feeling at statistics from convictions and court sentences isn’t an accurate way of measuring the number of female criminals.This may be why the male statistics are always higher because they are usually the ones to commit the worse crimes. overall I don’t entail the chivalry thesis is very valid as it forgets to look at the crimes women commit that don’t get recorded as they get off with a caution. Just because it isn’t a prison sentence, doesn’t mean that the police are being lenient with wome n it just room that women don’t often commit as serious crimes, but they static do commit crime.\r\n'