Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Role Conditioning Theory: An Explanation for Disparity in Male and Female Criminality?

Role Conditioning Theory: An Explanation for Disparity in Male and Female Criminality? AUST & NZ JOURNAL OF CRIMINOLOGY (March 1976) 9 (25-35) 25 ROLE CONDITIONING THEORY: AN EXPLANATION FOR DISPARITY IN MALE AND FEMALE CRIMINALITY? Jocelynne A Scutt" Nothing lovlier can be found In woman than to study household good, And good works in her husband to promote. MILTON Lombroso (1895) explained the considerably less numbers of female than male criminals in terms of sexual selection: only the more handsome and better endowed females were preserved for procreative activities. In ancient, time, he contended, deformed females were swiftly dispensed with by cannibalism. Although this proposition today sounds rather extravagant,' a second explanation put forward by Lombroso is more acceptable, and has been subject to vigorous discussion recently. That" is, he considered that the social life commonly led by a woman was more conducive to non-conflict with social mores than was the life of a man: " . . . the female, on whom falls the larger share of the duty of bringing up the family, necessarily leads a more sedentary life, and is less exposed than the male to the varying conditions of time and space in her environment ... [T]he struggle for "life, both for parents and progeny, devolves primarily http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology SAGE

Role Conditioning Theory: An Explanation for Disparity in Male and Female Criminality?

Download PDF
11 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/sage/role-conditioning-theory-an-explanation-for-disparity-in-male-and-jAtPh579JM

References (0)

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
SAGE
Copyright
Copyright © by SAGE Publications
ISSN
0004-8658
eISSN
1837-9273
DOI
10.1177/000486587600900104
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

AUST & NZ JOURNAL OF CRIMINOLOGY (March 1976) 9 (25-35) 25 ROLE CONDITIONING THEORY: AN EXPLANATION FOR DISPARITY IN MALE AND FEMALE CRIMINALITY? Jocelynne A Scutt" Nothing lovlier can be found In woman than to study household good, And good works in her husband to promote. MILTON Lombroso (1895) explained the considerably less numbers of female than male criminals in terms of sexual selection: only the more handsome and better endowed females were preserved for procreative activities. In ancient, time, he contended, deformed females were swiftly dispensed with by cannibalism. Although this proposition today sounds rather extravagant,' a second explanation put forward by Lombroso is more acceptable, and has been subject to vigorous discussion recently. That" is, he considered that the social life commonly led by a woman was more conducive to non-conflict with social mores than was the life of a man: " . . . the female, on whom falls the larger share of the duty of bringing up the family, necessarily leads a more sedentary life, and is less exposed than the male to the varying conditions of time and space in her environment ... [T]he struggle for "life, both for parents and progeny, devolves primarily

Journal

Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology – SAGE

Published: Mar 1, 1976

There are no references for this article.