999 Words Essay on Female Crime

It was believed till a few decades ago that crime is predominantly a male phenomenon and the world of crime is only a man’s world. The subject of female criminality was totally neglected. No attention was paid to research on women’s crime which resulted in paucity of theoretical material on crime amongst women.

In India, it was after this author undertook research in 1967-68 and published a book in 1969 (Female Offenders in India) presenting a new theoretical paradigm on the causation of female crime those gradually newer studies came to be undertaken in this field.

My study conducted in Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Punjab not only analysed the nature and magnitude of crime among women but also explored the causes of crime and developed Social Bond Theory to explain the etiology of female criminality. The issue of adjustment in prisons was also examined to point out the need for change in punitive philosophy.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

My hypothesis of “family maladjustment” or “role conflict in family” was supported by some other studies that followed in the 1970s, the 1980s, and the 1990s by R.K. Sharma, Rani Bilmoria, Mishra and Gautam, Eswar Shariff and Sekar, Sanyal and Agrawal, and Neera Kuckreja Sohony.

R.K. Sharma Women Offenders of Uttar Pradesh, 1963) studied female offenders in Uttar Pradesh and highlighted social and psychological factors in female crime. In 1985, she also worked on murders committed by women.

Rani Bilmoria (1980) studied 120 female convicts in Andhra Pradesh. By explaining crime in terms of unhealthy marital and family relations, she supported this author’s theory of family maladjustment as the main cause of female crime.

Eswar Shariff and Sekar (1982) studied female inmates of Remand Home in Bangalore and pointed out defective family environment (pathological family patterns), faulty discipline by parents, broken homes, parental rejection, etc. as causes of deviant behaviour.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

Mishra and Gautam (Female Criminality: Causes and Consequences, 1982) too in their study have pointed out that female criminality is largely due to broken homes and crisis of changing social values.

Sanyal and Agarwal (1982) studied a sample of 69 female convicts and found that about 75 per cent criminals had a feeling of insecurity and 80 per cent had a feeling of low self-esteem.

Neera K. Sohony (A Socio-demographic Study of Women Prisoners, 1986) studied prisoners in Pune and found some of the hypotheses of this author on female crime developed in 1969 as true and valid. B.R. Sharma (Crime and Women, IIPA, New Delhi, 1993) studied 36 female offenders in Tihar Jail, Delhi and Borstal Jail, Hissar (Haryana) in 1991-92.

Of these, 39 per cent were below 25 years of age, 39 per cent belonged to the age group 26-43 years, 16 per cent belonged to the age group 44-53 years, and 6 per cent were of 53 and more years. Further, 78 per cent were illiterate, 78 per cent were married, 56 per cent were from the rural areas, and 83 per cent had monthly income of less than Rs.2, 000.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

In terms of nature of crime, 73 per cent females were convicted for very serious crimes like murder (59%) and bride burning (14%), 11 per cent for serious crimes like drug trafficking (5%), dacoity (3%) and abatement to suicide (3%), and 10 per cent for mild and petty offences like immoral trafficking (8%), theft (5%) and vagrancy (3%).

However, Sharma’s study was more psychological than sociological. He mainly administered Rorschach’s test in studying female criminals, while he collected information on socio-demographic background and social factors in crime through an interview-schedule.

A few studies conducted on female criminality in the United States deserve mention here. Mabel Elliott, a female criminologist presented two chapters on female criminality in her book Crime in Modern Society published in 1952.

The first of the two chapters presented a review of theories on female crime, including sex role formulation to account for low rates of crime among women. She also discussed a number of socio-demographic characteristics of women offenders in the US.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

The second chapter contained some case studies of prostitutes, women gangsters and other types of female offenders. Otto Pollak (The Criminality of Women, 1950) has said that though the crime rate among women equals to that among men yet it has a ‘masked character’.

On the one hand, all female crimes are not reported to police and on the other hand, the police and the courts are very sympathetic towards them due to their paternalistic and protective attitudes. The policemen do not like to arrest them and prosecutors and judges do not like to convict them. No wonder, crime rate is inadequately reflected in statistics.

The unreporting and underreporting of female crime is also due to the fact that the social roles of women are excellent covers and homes serve as a smoke screen for hiding crime. Studies on female crime made by Parker (1965), Franklin (1967), Edith de Rham (1969), and Sparrow (1970) while supporting Pollak’s proposition of hidden crimes through case studies throw little light on causes of female criminality.

Rita Simon analysed various dimensions of female criminality like extent and types of crimes committed and their treatment by court and prison officials in her book Women and Crime in 1975.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

She, however, did not study the issue of etiology of female crime. According to her, increase in female crime is due to expanding occupational opportunities for women.

Carol Smart has criticised all above studies in her study of prostitution and rape in 1976 and pointed out the need for developing a new theory. However, she herself did not attempt to propound any new proposition.

Laura Crites (Female Offenders, 1976) studied women criminals but she made no important contribution in any respect except pointing out that women criminals are neglected and are given discriminatory treatment in prisons.

Balman, Berger and Schmidt’s article on “Women, Crime and Deviance” (in Crime and Deviance in America, 1980) used a Marxist perspective and submitted that women commit crime as a result of their socialisation under capitalist structures.