Gender Differences on Crime and Punishment
| Author | Shannon Smithey,Jon Hurwitz |
| Published date | 01 March 1998 |
| Date | 01 March 1998 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/106591299805100104 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
89
Gender
Differences
on
Crime
and
Punishment
JON
HURWITZ
AND
SHANNON
SMITHEY,
UNIVERSITY
OF
PITTSBURGH
Despite
extensive
documentation
of the
gender
gap
across
a
range
of
po-
litical
issues,
little
is
known
about
gender
differences
toward
issues
of
crime
and
punishment.
In
this
study,
we
systematically
examine
how,
and
why,
women
and
men
approach
the
issue
of
crime.
We
find
that
women
are
more
afraid
of
crime
and
more
supportive
of
prevention
ef-
forts
than
men,
though
fear
of
crime
and
women’s
policy
attitudes
are
not
related
in
a
causal
sense.
These
findings
are
consistent
with
differences
in
women’s
and
men’s
socialization
experiences.
They
have
important
im-
plications
for
both
feminist
theory
and
the
ability
of
the
political
par-
ties
to
use
the
crime
issue
to
their
advantage.
Since
the
1980
election,
considerable
political
science
attention
has
been
devoted
to
the
gap
between
women’s
and
men’s
political
preferences
and
vot-
ing
behavior.
Although
the
differences
between
the
sexes
have
tended
to
be
fairly
small
in
empirical
terms,
they
have
appeared
across
a
consistent
range
of
issues.
At
the
same
time,
feminist
theory
has
been
exploring
the
implica-
tions
of
Carol
Gilligan’s
In
a
Different
Voice
(1982).
Gilligan’s
suggestion
that
women’s
psychology
is
premised
on
an
&dquo;ethic
of
care&dquo;
rather
than
on
an
&dquo;ethic
of
justice&dquo;
has
been
applied
in
numerous
contexts
because
it
seems
to
fit
with
the
differences
found
in
women’s
and
men’s
approaches
to
a
range
of
topic.
2
NOTE:
The
authors
wish
to
acknowledge
the
assistance
provided
by
Bert
Rockman
and
the
University
of
Pittsburgh
Center
for
American
Politics
and
Society,
as
well
as
that
offered
by
the
Editors
and
anonymous
referees.
We
are
particularly
indebted
to
Mark
Peffley
for
his
involvement
in
all
stages
of
this
project.
The
order
of
the
authors
was
determined
by
a
coin
flip.
1
The
difference
in
attitudes
is
often
much
smaller
than
the
difference
by
race.
As
an
example
of
this
point,
see
Bedyna
and
Lake
1994.
2
For
example,
interpersonal
violence
(Walklate
1995),
responsibility
for
children
and
aging
parents
(Brody
1990),
and
legislative
priorities
(Mezey
1994).
90
Gender
differences
have
been
well-established
over
a
wide
array
of
public
policy
attitudes
and
behaviors,
including
policies
promoting
government
care-
taking
of
vulnerable
citizens
(Conover
1994;
Thomas
1994;
Rhine
et
al.
1994;
Mueller
1988;
Stoper
1988),
military
commitments
(Conover
and
Sapira
1993;
Shapiro
and
Mahajan
1986;
Smith
1984),
and
voting
(Bedyna
and
Lake
1994;
Gilens
1988;
Pomper
1975).
Less
is
known,
however,
about
male-female
dif-
ferences
on
one
of
the
most
salient
&dquo;hot
button&dquo;
issues-crime.
This
gap
is
surprising
for
two
reasons:
first,
there
are
important
theoretical
reasons
to
presuppose
gender-based
differences
in
the
ways
men
and
women
respond
to
crime;
and
second,
as
we
shall
argue
in
the
conclusions,
crime
is
a
strategi-
cally
important
issue.
The
failure
to
appreciate
gender-related
differences
per-
taining
to
crime,
therefore,
undercuts
the
efforts
of
candidates
to
turn
the
issue
to
partisan
advantage.
In
this
article
we
systematically
examine
how,
and
why,
women
and
men
approach
issues
of
crime
and
punishment.
Our
first
purpose
is
to
explore
the
specific
areas
in
which
the
genders
differ.
Next,
we
consider
two
competing
explanations
of
these
differences.
The
first
of
these
hypotheses
relates
crime
and
punishment
attitudes
to
gender
differences
in
perceptions
of
vulnerabil-
ity.
The
second
links
these
attitudes
with
the
&dquo;different
voices&dquo;
approach
es-
poused
by
Gilligan.
Our
findings
support
the
idea
that
the
gender
gap
in
crime
and
punishment
attitudes
owes
a
great
deal
to
differences
in
men
and
women’s
caretaking
orientations
rather
than
emerging
solely
from
differences
in
their
fears
of
victimization.
PERCEPTIONS
OF
VULNERABILITY
Attitudes
toward
crime
and
punishment
are
often
thought
to
flow
from
feel-
ings
of
vulnerability.
It
would
come
as
no
surprise
to
find
that
people
who
are
more
afraid
of
crime
are
also
more
supportive
of
efforts
to
prevent
it.
For
example,
individuals
who
feel
particularly
vulnerable
might
be
more
prone
to
favor
increas-
ing
the
power
of
the
police
or
passing
laws
to
make
guns
harder
to
obtain.
Those
who
are
less
afraid
may
be
less
likely
to
see
the
need
for
such
measures.
Perceptions
of
vulnerability
may
explain
orientations
toward
punishment
as
well
as
prevention.
If
harsher
penalties
are
thought
to
keep
the
public
safer
by
deterring
potential
offenders,’
we
would
expect
to
find
people’s
support
for
aggressive
responses
to
crime
to
increase
along
with
their
level
of
fear.
3
This
appears
to
be
a
common
assumption.
For
example,
Stinchcombe
et
al.
(1980:
66)
note,
"We
punish
criminals
partly
because
we
think
criminals
deserve
to
suffer
for
their
wrongdoings
but
primarily
because
we
think
that
punishment
will
somehow
reduce
crime."
To continue reading
Request your trial