Males being more aggressive on average is pretty well established in psychology (if you need a cite wikipedia cites the International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences for this fact). There are definitely some cases, such as provocation (i.e. messing with one of your babies) where women are just as likely as men to respond with aggression, and when it comes to sports women are just as aggressive as men, but in a more general sense, males start to become more aggressive than females at a very young age, around 2 or 3 years old.
In older children, in their initial response, girls are more likely to respond with aggression than boys. However, once you get past the initial response, girls are likely to retract their aggression, where boys are likely to increase their aggression. Girls are also much more likely to use verbal attacks, where boys are much more likely to use physical attacks.
Actually, I’ve seen studies that have shown that muggers et al have a very good eye concerning their potential victims: they can tell who is a good target, and it is NOT by the size, gender, number of tattoos etc. of the vic, but much more subtle. Kinda like the savannah situation, where every antelope does it’s best to look as fit as possible, but the lion eyeing the group can tell who has just a tiny bit of awkwardness about them, and choose that individual to pursue and kill.
Survival of the fittest cuts both ways. Muggers who suck at victim selection soon find themselves in another line of work. If they’re lucky enough to still be able to work.
I wonder why the percentage is higher in the US? Do women commit more crimes or more serious crimes there, or is because there are longer sentences for the sort of crimes women more often commit?
Now that’s an interesting subject, but it must be very hard to get accurate data.
Anecdotally I know women friends who have had handbags or phones snatched by women assailants, so I’d question at least part of the premise.
If the question is why don’t women attack men, the answer is similar to why guys don’t typically try to mug men stronger or fitter then they are. Even with a weapon, it raises the risk level a lot.
There are a lot more male prisons than female prisons. So your question could easily be expanded to why females less likely to be criminals of any sort.
A 100 pound woman isn’t going to get my wallet from me with brute force, absent some martial arts training or something. But a 100 pound woman armed with a 9mm will. So females are perfectly capable of mugging people, they just don’t, generally speaking. I’m sure there are isolated examples.
Is it biology? Testosterone? Cultural? Beats me, but the fact that women are less prone to criminal activity is fairly apparent.
Mrs MustangSal likes watching those real crime shows, she’s been watching one about wives killing their husbands. I sleep with one eye open.
The impression I get from the statistics below is that while women have much lower rates of violent crimes, when you start talking about non-violent white collar crimes, the gender difference is much smaller. Men make up 89.5% of homicide offenders, but men only make up 51-59% of arrests for fraud, embezzlement or larceny. So with theft the gender gap is smaller.
Nonetheless, more risky/dangerous forms of theft like robbery or burglary have much higher ratios of men to women (85-88% men) vs far less risky forms of theft like embezzlement (men only make up 51% of embezzlers).
