Gender Equality and the Usual Suspects: A Cross-National Study on Female and Male Homicide Victimization
| Published date | 01 February 2021 |
| Author | Meghan L. Rogers,Megan M. Alsleben |
| Date | 01 February 2021 |
| DOI | 10.1177/1088767920937765 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
research-article2020
Article
Homicide Studies
2021, Vol. 25(1) 83 –105
Gender Equality and the
© 2020 SAGE Publications
Article reuse guidelines:
Usual Suspects: A Cross-
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
https://doi.org/10.1177/1088767920937765
DOI: 10.1177/1088767920937765
journals.sagepub.com/home/hsx
National Study on Female and
Male Homicide Victimization
Meghan L. Rogers1 and Megan M. Alsleben2
Abstract
Gender inequality is a central concept in cross-national feminist criminological
literature. There is not a readily agreed-upon operationalization of gender inequality.
The variation in the operationalization of gender inequality in cross-national research
could be the cause for the inconsistent findings. We explored if the operationalization
of gender inequality affects the association of the variables with gender-specific
homicide across nations. Utilizing SUR and Wald Tests, our results indicate that
measurement matters. When a measure of gender inequality includes an income
competent, it has an association with gender-specific homicide. We conclude by
situating our findings into the larger cross-national literature.
Keywords
feminist theory, gender, cross-national, seemingly unrelated regression, female
homicide victimization, gender homicide victimization
There seem to be more operationalizations of gender inequality than studies on the
impact of gender inequality on homicide across nations. Two of the most commonly
cited feminist theories in cross-national homicide literature include the backlash and
ameliorative approaches. The backlash approach hypothesizes that as gender inequality
lessens, men become threatened by women’s increased status within society, and will
react in violence (Russell, 1975). Whereas, the amelioration approach suggests that as
1University of Iowa, USA
2University at Albany—State University of New York, USA
Corresponding Author:
Meghan L. Rogers, Department of Sociology and Criminology, University of Iowa, 140 Seashore Hall
West, Iowa City, Iowa 52242-1401, USA.
Email: rogersml@uncw.edu
84
Homicide Studies 25(1)
gender inequality decreases, overtime violence against women will also decrease, as
men learn to accept women’s improved status within society (Whaley & Messner,
2002). In both theories, gender inequality is a crucial construct, yet there is no clear
definition of gender inequality (Hunnicutt, 2009). The lack of an explicit definition
likely contributes to the variation in the operationalization of gender inequality. Thus,
creating inconsistent results in the test of the backlash and ameliorative approaches in
the cross-national literature.
Furthermore, cross-national homicide literature fixates on the correlates of homi-
cide victimization across nations (Rogers & Pridemore, 2016). This fixation is to the
detriment of the possibility that there are real gendered differences in homicide victim-
ization across nations. What accounts for male homicide victimization may not also
account for female homicide victimization (Agha, 2009; Rogers & Pridemore, 2016;
Stamatel, 2018). Gender inequality should account for a significant portion of the
variation in female homicide victimization compared to a smaller but significant por-
tion of male homicide victimization, according to feminist theories (Agha, 2009).
There are few studies at the cross-national level exploring potential gender differences
in homicide victimization across nations for gender inequality (notable exceptions
include Agha, 2009; Rogers & Pridemore, 2016; Stamatel, 2018).
Therefore, we explore (1) whether the operationalization of gender inequality
accounts for the mixed support for ameliorative and backlash theories in cross-national
homicide research, and (2) if gender inequality has a similar impact on both female
homicide victimization and male homicide victimization across nations. We found that
the operationalization of gender inequality matters. In addition, gender inequality
accounts for significantly more variation in male homicide victimization compared to
female homicide victimization (despite female homicide victimization having higher
coefficients of variation).
Literature Review
Backlash Theory
Within the cross-national literature, two opposing theories are accounting for the
relationship between gender inequality and female victimization: the backlash and
ameliorative approaches. Backlash theory contends that as women experience less
inequality and better social statuses, they will be subject to more violence. Primarily,
men respond violently to losing their heightened status, power, and superiority
(Gartner, 1990; Martin et al., 2006; Whaley & Messner, 2002).
Russell (1975) suggested that when gender disparities decrease due to rising levels
of equality between the sexes, men are more likely to react to these changes and
attempt to assert dominance. As gender inequality decreases, violence against women
increases because females challenge men’s masculinity and overall status in society
(Baron & Straus, 1989). Moreover, social structures surrounding gender and power
explain the negative effect of gender inequality on violence against women.
Messerschmidt (1993) suggested that as inequality between the sexes decreases, the
Rogers and Willows
85
importance of defining masculinity and perceived threats to men’s collective interest
heightens. A patriarchal social structure creates conditions conducive to specific forms
of crime, for instance, violence against women (Messerschmidt, 1993, p. 152).
Maintaining this gendered hierarchy of power becomes increasingly essential to men
when structural changes threaten their higher status (Whaley, 2001). The changes in
inequality results in more violence against women as a way for men to assert their
dominance within society.
Amelioration Theory
The amelioration theory proposes that over time there is an inverse relationship
between women’s socioeconomic status and female victimization. The change in the
relationship between gender inequality and violence over time is notable because
many societies are characterized by patriarchal domination. In these societies, wom-
en’s low status is systemically maintained through violence, traditional gender roles,
and limited pathways for social mobility according to cross-national feminist research
(Hunnicutt, 2009; Vieraitis et al., 2007; Whaley & Messner, 2002). Ellis and Beattie
(1983) argue that deep-rooted social traditions of male domination in the sociopolitical
and economic activities in society are leading causes of violence against women. Due
to the exclusion of women from the sociopolitical and economic activities in society,
women are perceived as unequal. Social changes that increase women’s socioeco-
nomic status and political input should shift this relationship between gender equality
and violence.
Specifically, unlike the backlash approach, the amelioration hypothesis anticipates
that women’s advancements toward equality will eventually not be perceived as
opposing men’s status in society. Though there may be an initial uptick in violence
against women as a way of resisting advancements in gender equality (Hunnicutt,
2009; Messerschmidt, 1986; Whaley, 2001). As patriarchal domination declines,
women are granted equal opportunities in society (gender inequality decreases). These
opportunities allow women to compete alongside men in the public sphere. The com-
petition alongside men in the public sphere fosters mutual respect, which reduces the
patriarchal nature of society (Messerschmidt, 1993). The ability to have equal oppor-
tunities in the public sector reduces the acceptability of violence against women
(Martin et al., 2006). Meaning, as women are allowed to participate in sociopolitical
and economic activities within society, they are perceived as equals over time.
Therefore, men are less likely to utilize violence against women to reduce women’s
roles in society.
Measuring Gender Equality
The findings for gender inequality’s association with homicide victimization and gen-
der-specific homicide victimization across nations are as varied as the measures
employed to operationalize gender inequality. There seems to be no real pattern for
86
Homicide Studies 25(1)
why some studies find support for the backlash hypothesis (Avakame, 1999; DeWees
& Parker, 2003; Dugan et al., 1999; Vieraitis & Williams, 2002), the amelioration
hypothesis (Brewer & Smith, 1995; Davies, 1996; Haynie & Armstrong, 2006;
Titterington, 2006), or fail to find support for either (Brewer & Smith, 1995; Chon,
2016; Savolainen, 2000; Vieraitis et al., 2008).
Both backlash and ameliorative theories propose gender inequality to be a measure
that encompasses fundamental sociopolitical and economic gender inequalities
(Hunnicutt, 2009; Russell, 1975; Stamatel, 2018; Whaley, 2001). Therefore, these
theories expect advancements in women’s political and economic power to either
increase (backlash) or decrease (ameliorative) female victimization (Hunnicutt, 2009;
Russell, 1975; Vieraitis et al., 2007; Whaley & Messner, 2002). However, the political
power of females is primarily ignored within the cross-national literature, exploring
gender inequality’s role in accounting for differences of female homicide victimiza-
tion across nations. If a measure of sociopolitical powers of females is included in the
analyses, it is always as part of an index in the...
To continue reading
Request your trial