# Being female should be an aggravating circumstance in crminal sentencing. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 24, 2013, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/being-female-should-be-an-aggravating-circumstance-in-crminal-sentencing/677052 "2013-12-24T00:32:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2013, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/being-female-should-be-an-aggravating-circumstance-in-crminal-sentencing/677052/41 "2013-12-31T16:00:48Z")
> [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > The suggestion is that even if gender were not a factor in individual cases, women might still end up, on average, with lighter sentences if they tended to commit, on average, less aggravated instances of the same offenses. In other words, if the average simple assault committed by a female defendant is a less severe simple assault than the average simple assault committed by a male defendant, a gender bias would show up in the average sentence even though the defendants’ genders were ignored. Is there evidence of that, though? [This study of intimate-partner homicide](http://www.toddkshackelford.com/downloads/Mize-Shackelford-VV-2008.pdf) found that women were actually more likely than men to use brutal methods of homicide (stabbing and beating), at least against their intimate partners: > [@](#): > > The percentages of intimate partner homicides perpetrated by men coded as Very Brutal and as Less Brutal were 30.7% and 69.3%, respectively. The percentages of intimate partner homicides perpetrated by women and coded as Very Brutal and as Less Brutal were 35.5% and 64.5%, respectively. The prediction (b) that the percentage of killings coded as Very Brutal would be higher for men relative to women was not supported. In fact, the percentage of intimate partner homicides coded as Very Brutal was higher for women relative to men, z = 11.01, p \< .01. ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2013, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/being-female-should-be-an-aggravating-circumstance-in-crminal-sentencing/677052/42 "2013-12-31T16:59:11Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Is there evidence of that, though? [This study of intimate-partner homicide](http://www.toddkshackelford.com/downloads/Mize-Shackelford-VV-2008.pdf) found that women were actually more likely than men to use brutal methods of homicide (stabbing and beating), at least against their intimate partners: While I’d hesitate to accept that particular study as evidence that the phenomenon works in the opposite direction, I really have no idea either way. I think there’s very good reason to believe that the total body of crimes committed by women is significantly different from the total body of crimes committed by men, but how that shakes out in terms of the cluster-eff that goes into sentencing… no idea. ---
**Author:** ![Karrius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/71c47a/32.png) [@Karrius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Karrius)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2013, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/being-female-should-be-an-aggravating-circumstance-in-crminal-sentencing/677052/43 "2013-12-31T17:07:49Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Is there evidence of that, though? [This study of intimate-partner homicide](http://www.toddkshackelford.com/downloads/Mize-Shackelford-VV-2008.pdf) found that women were actually more likely than men to use brutal methods of homicide (stabbing and beating), at least against their intimate partners: I would be very wary of drawing that conclusion. Looking at the actual data: women are far more likely to stab men, but men are more likely to beat women, and gun violence is about the same. Men are also far, far more likely to strangle women, which is classified as “less brutal”, oddly to me. Personally, I’m considering beating or strangling someone to death a lot more “brutal” than stabbing them. In fact, basically the only reason women take the lead in their “brutal” category is that they prefer stabbing as a method of killing - which is classified as brutal. A change of those classifications will radically change the results. I find it very, very strange that they classify grabbing somebody’s neck and holding it so tightly they can’t breathe while they squirm and die in your hands as “less brutal” to jabbing them in the stomach with a kitchen knife. In addition, the report itself notes that it doesn’t take things like self defense into account, which makes it less than useful to compare sentencing. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2013, 5:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/being-female-should-be-an-aggravating-circumstance-in-crminal-sentencing/677052/44 "2013-12-31T17:34:25Z")
> [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > While I’d hesitate to accept that particular study as evidence that the phenomenon works in the opposite direction, I really have no idea either way. I think there’s very good reason to believe that the total body of crimes committed by women is significantly different from the total body of crimes committed by men, but how that shakes out in terms of the cluster-eff that goes into sentencing… no idea. To be clear: I’m not asserting that women on average _don’t_ commit crimes in less aggravated way, and thus receive lesser sentences for the same offenses due to having fewer aggravating circumstances. I’m not just prepared to accept it as true without evidence. > [@Karrius](#): > > I would be very wary of drawing that conclusion. Looking at the actual data: women are far more likely to stab men, but men are more likely to beat women, and gun violence is about the same. Men are also far, far more likely to strangle women, which is classified as “less brutal”, oddly to me. Personally, I’m considering beating or strangling someone to death a lot more “brutal” than stabbing them. In fact, basically the only reason women take the lead in their “brutal” category is that they prefer stabbing as a method of killing - which is classified as brutal. A change of those classifications will radically change the results. It doesn’t, actually. If you reclassify strangling into the “brutal” category, you end up with 34.5% of male murders being brutal, and 35.9% of female. There aren’t many stranglings, so it doesn’t affect the numbers all that much; the gap shrinks, but doesn’t disappear. > [@Karrius](#): > > I find it very, very strange that they classify grabbing somebody’s neck and holding it so tightly they can’t breathe while they squirm and die in your hands as “less brutal” to jabbing them in the stomach with a kitchen knife. Their explanation: > [@](#): > > Using the rationale developed in previous research (e.g., Weekes-Shackelford & Shackelford, 2004), as well as the results of a survey developed to examine the relative perceptions of brutality of homicide methods (Mize, 2006), we decided to further categorize the four variables into two categories (labeled as Less Brutal and Very Brutal). The results of the survey were consistent with the assumptions in previous research in that participants rated the levels of brutality for asphyxiation and shooting similarly and the levels of brutality for beating and stabbing similarly. Thus, for the purpose of determining relative brutality, asphyxiation and shooting are interpreted as reflecting less brutality than beating and stabbing, which arguably inflict greater pain on the victim and require prolonged violence against the victim before he or she expires. Assuming they are honestly representing the Mize study, they intended to mirror the relative popular perception of brutality. It’s well-argued, IMHO, especially for my purposes, which is to suggest that brutality is comparable, not that women are more brutal. > [@Karrius](#): > > In addition, the report itself notes that it doesn’t take things like self defense into account, which makes it less than useful to compare sentencing. It’s not the final word on the subject, no, but it is evidence that women commit crimes in just as aggravated a fashion as men do. I welcome evidence to the contrary. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2013, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/being-female-should-be-an-aggravating-circumstance-in-crminal-sentencing/677052/45 "2013-12-31T17:40:59Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > More female judges. Female judges (and cops for that matter) tend to be quite a bit less soft on women. Do you have a cite for that, because that sounds like sexist speculation. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2013, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/being-female-should-be-an-aggravating-circumstance-in-crminal-sentencing/677052/46 "2013-12-31T18:47:05Z")
In general, people - and particularly men - are conditioned (& very possibly genetically programmed) to view women as passive victims needing protection, and men as people who are or at least need to be responsible for their own actions. Thus in any group of male and female criminals, the females will generally attempt - with some amount of success - to portray themselves as helpless pawns in the hands of male ringleaders, and this gets them off with lighter sentences, if any. And the same applies in cases when men or women are on trial by themselves - women have a much better shot at the “poor poor thing, she needs help more than punishment” approach. Same goes for the various “self-defense” abuse-alleging defenses. Jodi Arias was unsuccessful with this, but it’s worked in other cases with very little evidence. There is one area in which women get hit harder. People on trial for forgetting their kids in cars or otherwise neglecting them get longer sentences if they are female. ---
**Author:** ![Octarine](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/22d042/32.png) [@Octarine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Octarine)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2014, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/being-female-should-be-an-aggravating-circumstance-in-crminal-sentencing/677052/47 "2014-01-02T00:27:11Z")
> [@blindboyard](#): > > The administration of justice relies on all being treated equally. Women are currently given [much shorter sentences](http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2144002) for the same crime. This is the case even when all [mitigating circumstances](http://imgur.com/a/DzDa1/noscript) are taken into account. Crimes with female victims are also punished much more heavily than the same crime committed against a man. > > The obvious solution, then. Force fairness and equality by countering the unofficial but undeniable benefit in being a woman with a countervailing official benefit to men. A law officially favoring men is a very bad idea. As the advantage towards women is subconscious, it varies greatly from person to person (for example, it’s been mentioned in this thread that female judges give harsher sentences to female criminals). The focus should be on making judges aware of that subconscious effect, not fighting fire with fire. An actual law allowing discrimination in the courts would cause incredible amounts of anger. Furthermore, as I see things, the issue of more lenient sentences being given to whites in comparison with blacks (especially in cases of drug possession) is much more widespread and pressing than the male/female divide. Both these problems would be solved by setting up a sort of blind court system, where the gender and color of the criminal is unknown. But that system would have to be very complex. ---
**Author:** ![Carryon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/9fc29f/32.png) [@Carryon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Carryon)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2014, 8:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/being-female-should-be-an-aggravating-circumstance-in-crminal-sentencing/677052/48 "2014-01-02T08:39:16Z")
The day Susan Smith (who killed her kids and blamed a black man) only got a life sentence was the day I stopped supporting the death sentence. Does anyone believe that if a white man killed his two kids and lied about a black man doing it, that he would get anything less than a death sentence? If you can’t apply a sentence fairly than it shouldn’t be there. But that said, we do it all the time. How come a “child” of 17 years and six months will get life but an “adult” of 18 years and zero months get death? Did he really grow up all that much in six months? As a matter of fact, why keep the drinking age at 21? Because it saves lives? True it does but then why not raise it to 25 and save more lives? And so the list goes on and on… ---
**Author:** ![the\_diego](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7bcc69/32.png) [@the\_diego](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/the_diego)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2014, 9:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/being-female-should-be-an-aggravating-circumstance-in-crminal-sentencing/677052/49 "2014-01-02T09:34:13Z")
IANA lawyer but as I understand it, an aggravating circumstance is one that either facilitates the commission of the crime, or makes it more heinous and/or unsavory to both the victim(s) and the public. Committing a crime at night is an AC since it facilitates the act. One exception to this is adultery, since adultery during the day is more scandalous. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2014, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/being-female-should-be-an-aggravating-circumstance-in-crminal-sentencing/677052/50 "2014-01-02T14:44:33Z")
An aggravating circumstance is whatever the applicable legislature says it is. Generally they have little to do with facilitation of crimes and much more to do with public policy (one component of which is the level of heinousness.) ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2014, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/being-female-should-be-an-aggravating-circumstance-in-crminal-sentencing/677052/51 "2014-01-02T15:16:43Z")
> [@Procrustus](#): > > Things get a lot easier to deal with if you stop expecting life to be fair. Said the slave? ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2014, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/being-female-should-be-an-aggravating-circumstance-in-crminal-sentencing/677052/52 "2014-01-02T15:20:11Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > There’s no doubt women get an advantage in the criminal justice system. Certainly at the judicial stage, and (I assume) from the stories I hear, at the arrest stage as well. > > But so what? > > Men get advantages too. We’re bigger, stronger, we don’t bleed every month, and we don’t have to give birth. It evens out. So your argument is that men should go to jail longer for the same crimes because we’re stronger and don’t have periods. How is that logical? ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Lowry](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e95f7d/32.png) [@Sam\_Lowry](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Lowry)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2014, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/being-female-should-be-an-aggravating-circumstance-in-crminal-sentencing/677052/53 "2014-01-02T21:29:21Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > Just to be clear about it, there are some issues in which men are legally discriminated against. Divorce laws and child support payments come to mind. I believe that the government should address these examples of unequal treatment under the law. How are men discriminated against in divorce law and child support payments? Women do get child custody more often, which would equal men paying child support payments more I would assume. But when men contest child custody, [they get custody over 70% of the time.](http://www.amptoons.com/blog/files/Massachusetts_Gender_Bias_Study.htm) [QUOTE=New England Law Review] We began our investigation of child custody aware of a common perception that there is a bias in favor of women in these decisions. Our research contradicted this perception. Although mothers more frequently get primary physical custody of children following divorce, this practice does not reflect bias but rather the agreement of the parties and the fact that, in most families, mothers have been the primary [\*748] caretakers of children. Fathers who actively seek custody obtain either primary or joint physical custody over 70% of the time. Reports indicate, however, that in some cases perceptions of gender bias may discourage fathers from seeking custody and stereotypes about fathers may sometimes affect case outcomes. In general, our evidence suggests that the courts hold higher standards for mothers than fathers in custody determinations. [/QUOTE] I don’t want this to sound like I think discrimination is okay against men. I think discrimination is unfair and should be eliminated, but for many things there’s not a simple solution. For criminal sentencing, it’s often because there’s a subconscious bias in judges and juries that women are weaker and shouldn’t have as harsh of a sentence. I don’t know how you’d eliminate that though, since if you asked a lot of those judges and juries if they thought women were weaker, they would say “no, of course not” or “all my sentences were fair and according to the crime.” They might not realize they’d be sentencing women more lightly unless you showed them the statistics. > [@Octarine](#): > > A law officially favoring men is a very bad idea. As the advantage towards women is subconscious, it varies greatly from person to person (for example, it’s been mentioned in this thread that female judges give harsher sentences to female criminals). The focus should be on making judges aware of that subconscious effect, not fighting fire with fire. An actual law allowing discrimination in the courts would cause incredible amounts of anger. > Furthermore, as I see things, the issue of more lenient sentences being given to whites in comparison with blacks (especially in cases of drug possession) is much more widespread and pressing than the male/female divide. Both these problems would be solved by setting up a sort of blind court system, where the gender and color of the criminal is unknown. But that system would have to be very complex. I agree, I want all the biases eliminated in the courts. The sentencing should be equal for men, women, whites, blacks, immigrants, citizens, rich, poor, well-connected, not well connected, everyone. But it would be complex and I’m not sure how that would work. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/being-female-should-be-an-aggravating-circumstance-in-crminal-sentencing/677052.md?page=2)