Overview of why women in CJS part 2 - due in 24 hours

Adler.pdf

Home >Law homework help >Criminal homework help >Overview of why women in CJS part 2 - due in 24 hours

Adler, Freda CALLIE MARIE RENNISON

Contemporary criminology and criminal justice bear the indelible mark of the research of Freda Adler (1934 – ). While Adler’s research agenda encompassed many important areas such as inter- national crime, social control, and drug use, per- haps her greatest contribution was to bring attention to feminist theory. By doing so, Adler’s contributions changed criminology by ushering in a new and (at the time) controversial way of viewing female deviants and offenders during a time of great social change. This attention has not waned as research on females as deviants and offenders is an area of active research even today. This entry presents an overview of Adler’s theoret- ical contributions by first describing her profes- sional background. Next, her feminist theoretical contributions are introduced and described, followed by a critique of this important work.

Freda Adler is frequently described as the most distinguished female criminologist in the field based on a lifetime of important contributions in criminology and criminal justice. Adler’s career began with her earning a BA in sociology, an MA in criminology, and a PhD in sociology from the University of Pennsylvania. Working under the guidance of Marvin Wolfgang, Adler com- pleted a dissertation on the disparity of sentenc- ing between black and white females. She spent almost her entire academic career on faculty at Rutgers University. She started in 1974 as an Assistant Professor. Following several promo- tions, she ultimately earned the title of Professor Emeritus in 2005. She currently serves as a Visit- ing Professor in the Department of Criminology at the University of Pennsylvania.

Adler is an extremely prolific writer, having published 17 books as author or coauthor, nine books as editor or coeditor, and more than 100 peer-reviewed journal articles. Adler’s career includes too many prestigious appointments to enumerate. Among them is that she was elected as President of the American Criminological Society from 1994 to 1995.

The Encyclopedia of Theoretical Criminology, First Edition. Edited by J. Mitchell Miller. © 2014 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Published 2014 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd. DOI: 10.1002/9781118517390/wbetc007

Many agree that Adler’s most significant the- oretical contribution came with the publication of Sisters in crime: The rise of the new female criminal (1975). In this book, she presented her argument for the relationship between the feminist liberation movement and its influence on female criminality. Prior to discussing this work however, it is important to understand the environment in which it was introduced.

Sisters in crime was published at a time of sig- nificant changes in society as well as criminology and criminal justice. This period saw the second wave of female liberation resulting in incre- ased opportunities outside the household for females. This included greater professional, edu- cational, and economic opportunities for females. At the same time, criminology and criminal justice continued to be entrenched in its focus on male behaviors and experiences. This was no surprise as the discipline was dominated by male researchers and students. In general, research on delinquency and criminality focused on males, and any findings were merely gener- alized to females. When considered explicitly, females were assumed to be simple creatures guided by biological determinism. Deviant or criminal females were considered pathological, ill, and/or simply evil. No consideration was given to the important role of social, economic, rational choice, or a myriad of other influences on legitimate or illegitimate female behavior.

Adler’s theoretical work departed drastically from the predominant old-fashioned views of females. She argued that as social and economic conditions shifted during the second wave of the feminist movement, more opportunities for females became available. And the greater avai- lability of opportunities led to an increase in female criminality and deviance. As women moved into positions previously unavailable outside the home, they became subject to similar temptations, pressures, challenges, and stresses that only men had experienced in these envi- ronments previously. With the increase in the number of females in the workforce, Adler pre- dicted an analogous rise in female offending and criminality. That is, as females were afforded more opportunities in previously male-dominated

2 A D L E R, F R E D A

spheres, they would begin to think and behave (including engaging in deviant and criminal acts) like males. Adler argued that increased opportunity for females leads to increased legal opportunities; it also leads to an increase in criminality for females.

To demonstrate support for her theory, Adler used arrest statistics published by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). These statistics indicated that differences in levels of male and female criminality decreased greatly as a result of the second wave of female liberation began in 1960. According to Adler, FBI arrests statistics demonstrate that arrest of females grew dramat- ically in response to an increase in female labor force participation. For example, from 1960 to 1972, arrests of female robbers grew 277%. Arrest of female burglars increased 168%. And, over the same period, a 280% increase in arrests of female embezzlers was recorded by the FBI. Not only do these values indicate substantial growth in arre- sts, but they demonstrated that increases in arrests of females greatly exceeded increases in male arrest for the same offenses.

Additional work by Adler offered greater sup- port for her theory. For example, research focus- ing on female juvenile criminality offered similar support. And work focusing on female criminal- ity in other nations offered much the same. Thus, comparative data from Germany, Japan, Norway, and Poland (and other nations) indicated that the increase in female offending and delinquency was not restricted to the United States. And like the findings from Sisters in crime, cross-national evi- dence demonstrated that the increase in female criminality exceeded their male counterparts over a broad range of crimes.

Adler’s theory strongly rejected determinism as the root cause of female behavior. Instead, this work indicated that like males, females behave rationally and that sociological, political, and economic factors are important considerations when examining criminal behavior. While sig- nificant research, Alder argues that her theory is not especially profound. Rather she describes it as having benefitted from good timing. Tim- ing or not, Adler’s work is in part responsible for the remarkable growth of feminist theories that have shaped criminological research and continue to do so. Further, Adler’s work (with others) helped to launch feminist empiricism and

unleashed several questions, which continue to be addressed today. These questions include, but are not limited to: Is there a new female criminal? Does she commit more crime than she did in the past? Does she commit different types of crime than she once did? Is chivalry dead in the criminal justice system?

Once published, Adler’s work was extremely controversial. Some feminists were concerned that Adler’s research would be used by antifemi- nists to shuttle females back into the domain of the home only. More scientific criticism was also leveled at this work. One line of critique focused on the use of percentage change to support the theory. Given the low base numbers of arrests, some argued the use of percentage change was misleading. Specifically, percentage change statis- tics based on low base numbers results in large change statistics. For example, if arrests increase from one to four in a given year, the resulting percentage change is a 300% increase. If on the other hand, arrests increase from 1000 to 1004, the percentage change suggests a very different outcome: 0.4% increase. Thus, though the change in the number of arrests for each example is iden- tical (a gain for 4 arrests), the resulting percentage change, while accurate, paints a very different story.

Some argued that a second problem with the statistics used by Adler is that they may not accu- rately reflect true levels of female or male crimi- nality. That is, arrest statistics do not necessarily accurately reflect the actual number of crimes being committed. For example, robbery may actually be increasing, but police may not be making arrests for that crime due to a lack of personnel or other resources. Or policies may move attention to some other pressing issue (e.g., shoplifting) and other types of crimes are not as heavily monitored. Finally, arrest statistics may reflect a focus on a particular type of offender (e.g., females, minorities, young) which directly influences arrest statistics.

Some criticism stems from the possibility that the relationship identified by Adler may be spurious. In other words, the described rela- tionship between female participation in the workforce and increases in female criminality may be due to some unidentified factor. This unknown factor may lead to both increases in female arrests/criminality as well as the

A D L E R, F R E D A 3

increased opportunities brought about by female liberation.

Finally, the passage of time and use of vic- timization surveys indicates little support for Adler’s theory. Victimization surveys such as the National Crime Victimization Survey provide data that are not subject to the issues associated with official police records. Work using victim- ization data failed to demonstrate the type of con- vergence in the gender gap for violent crimes such as robbery and aggravated assault identified by Alder’s work. No support was found across types of crime and when controlling for offender’s age, race, and gender. In general, no convergence in the gender gap in offending was identified. And, in the rare case convergence was noted, it was to a decrease in male criminality and not an increase in female criminality. In general, research using victimization surveys finds no evidence of “girls gone wild” and it demonstrates that violent and property offending continue to be a male-dominated activity.

While the passage of time offers little support for Dr Adler’s theory, her contributions to the discipline are significant. Her theory and research moved the viewing of females as biologically predetermined home-bound creatures to inde- pendent humans influenced by the same external forces acting upon males. And Adler’s research brought forth an important focus on the role of gender in the field of criminology. Adler’s work is rightly viewed as the cornerstone research establishing female deviance and offending as a legitimate and important field of study.

SEE ALSO: Criminal Careers; Gender and Crime; Gender-Based Violence.

References

Adler, F. (1975). Sisters in crime: The rise of the new female criminal. New York: McGraw-Hill.