Running Head: GENDER DIFFERENCES IN CRIME 1

Gender Differences in Crime Explained using General Strain Theory

Mara A. Brown

Murray State University

GENDER DIFFERENCES IN CRIME 2

Gender Differences in Crime Explained Using Strain Theory

Why some people commit crime and others do not has been long speculated in the field

of criminal justice and a multitude of theories have been developed to rationalize each side.

Robert Agnew (1992) proposed one such concept that he called general strain theory (GST),

which has gone on to become one of the most prominent criminological theories today. The

central idea of GST states that individuals commit crime in reaction to particular strains or

stressors, which are certain experiences or situations that a person does not like (Agnew, 2006).

Strain Categories and Types

Categories

Strains can be categorized as either subjective or objective (Agnew, 2013). Experiences

and situations that are disliked by most individuals in a given group are referred to as objective

strains. For example, most people do not like to be insulted or stolen from, so these would be

considered objective strains. On the other hand, experiences and strains that are disliked by the

separate individuals in a given group, are referred to as subjective strains. An example of a

subjective strain would be divorce, as people personally experience divorces differently, or

subjectively (Agnew, 2006). The personal evaluations of the same objective strains are often

different, and GST argues that subjective strains should have a greater effect on delinquency than

objective strains.

Types

According to Agnew, Brezina, Wright, and Cullen (2002), there are three major types of

strain that one can face. The first major type of strain is when a person is somehow prevented from

accomplishing their goals. For example, an individual may want to achieve financial success so
GENDER DIFFERENCES IN CRIME 3

that they can be autonomous and live independently from their parents. However, they cannot

secure a well-paying job to reach these aspirations and strain ensues.

The second type is when a positive stimulus is removed, which may involve the death of a

loved one or the termination of a relationship. The last type of strain is when negative stimuli is

introduced, which can be any range of things from verbal insults to physical or sexual assault.

Experiencing these negative events can generate undesirable emotions like anger or depression,

which then beg for corrective actions, criminality serving as one option. The most important

emotion in relation to general strain theory is anger as it is one of the top emotions that can lead to

crime. Anger spurs the individual to action, reduces inhibitions, and sparks the need to exact

revenge.

Delinquency may be utilized to lessen or break away from strain by stealing, running away

from adverse situations like an abusive home environment, retaliating in the form of violence or

destruction of property, or diminishing the adverse emotions that strain creates through the use of

drugs and alcohol. The effect that strain has on delinquency is dependent on factors like the

importance of ones goals, the effectiveness of ones coping abilities, self-esteem, social control,

and relationships. These elements affect how an individual experiences strain, their ability to

participate in criminal and non-criminal coping, and the costs and disposition of both.

Gender Differences in Crime and Strain

It is no secret that males have a higher tendency to commit crime than females, especially

when it comes to serious violent and property crimes. In 2012, males made up 74 percent of all

arrests and were responsible for 89 percent of murders and nonnegligent manslaughters, 99

percent of rapes, 87 percent of robberies, 82 percent of arsons, and 77 percent of aggravated

GENDER DIFFERENCES IN CRIME 4

assaults (U.S. DOJ & FBI, 2012). While the easiest explanation that GST could provide for the

higher crime rate seen in males would be that they experience a higher amount of strain than

their female counterparts, research has shown that this is not true (Mirowsky & Ross, 1995;

Piquero & Sealock, 2004; Turner, Wheaton, & Lloyd, 1995). In fact, in a study performed by

Mirowsky & Ross (1995), the women reported undergoing 30 percent more distress than the

males. Broidy and Agnew (1997) explain that gender differences in crime rates come not from

the amount of strain, but the types of strain, the emotional response to the strain, and the coping

mechanisms.

Types of Strain

Agnew (2013) claimed that certain types of strain are more conducive to crime than are

others. These strains are usually significant, fresh, recurring, drawn out, unjust, and intentionally

break justice norms. Parental rejection; severe, inconsistent punishment; abuse and neglect;

adverse educational situations; relationship issues; lasting employment; discrimination; inability

to reach goals; criminal victimization; and homelessness are all examples of these significant

strains. These strains can be easily fixed through crime and are associated with exposure to

criminal individuals.

Agnew (2006) found that men are more likely to experience strains that are perceived as

significant and unwarranted, are linked to deficient social control, and are conducive to crime.

Hay (2003) found that, in comparison to females, more males reported that they were rejected by

their parents and physically punished in response to rule-breaking conduct. Harsh punishment

and rejection by parent are two of the strains the Agnew (2013) claimed to be especially

conducive to crime. If males are subjected to even tougher discipline at school, the probably of

delinquency increases even further. Men also tend to be more worried with material and
GENDER DIFFERENCES IN CRIME 5

superficial achievements, so they are more apt to encounter financial and social stresses, which

are also strains conducive to crime (Broidy & Agnew, 1997). Financial strain can be corrected by

stealing and selling stolen goods, participating in drug trafficking, or other means to attain funds,

and interpersonal conflicts with peers can be solved through physical aggression.

According to Broidy and Agnew (1997), womens strains are usually related more to

meaningful relationships and fulfilling their purpose as women. Women are also more likely to

deal with stresses associated with gender roles in the workplace or at home and discrimination on

the basis of gender (Sung Joon, 2007). Women also encounter special types of strain such as

sexual abuse, abortion, issues with childcare, and other gender-specific burdens (Kessler &

Mcleod, 1984), but these strains are not as conducive to crime as the criminal victimization and

social pressures that men experience (Broidy & Agnew, 1997).

Emotional Responses

Males and females have different emotional reactions to strain. Broidy and Agnew (1997)

explain that GST may justify the higher rate of crime in males by claiming that males are more

likely to respond with anger than women. This explanation was confirmed in a study on stalking

done by Ngo & Paternoster (2013). Male victims of stalking responded with greater amounts of

anger than did the female victims. In fact, female victims experienced a reduction in anger but an

increase in other emotions like depression, fear, anxiety, physical illness, helplessness, and

suicidality.

Other research has shown that women report greater levels of anger than men (Mirowsky

& Ross, 1995; Piquero & Sealock, 2004). However, while women may respond with more anger,

they are also likely to respond with depression, guilt, and anxiety as well (Greco & Curci, 2017;
GENDER DIFFERENCES IN CRIME 6

Hay, 2003). These additional responses mean that women are more likely to direct their deviance

inward through self-injurious and self-destructive behaviors such as eating disorders or substance

abuse where men tend to externalize their deviance through fighting and other forms of violence

(Broidy & Agnew, 1997; Hay, 2003; Posick, Farrell, & Swatt, 2013). This could be because

women tend to place the blame on themselves when they experience strain, whereas men have a

habit of blaming others when something bad happens to them (Broidy & Agnew, 1997).

A study done by Greco and Curci (2017) sought to internalized varieties of delinquency

such as substance abuse and gambling. One would assume that since women are more likely to

direct their deviance inward, that they would also be more likely to engage in these activities.

However, Greco and Curci (2017) found the opposite to be true, even if the women reported

facing more or as much strain as the men. This may be because men experience failure to reach

economic goals more often than women, which can be potentially solved through winning at

gambling. Again, it was found that the women in this study were much more susceptible to

depression in reaction to strain than men.

Coping

Broidy and Agnew (1997) claimed that gender differences in crime can also be explained

by the ways that men and women cope with strain. GST (Agnew, 1992) states that strained

individuals may choose from three coping mechanisms to help them manage: emotional,

cognitive, and behavioral coping. There are three separate types of cognitive coping, which

assists the individual in diminishing the strain they are experiencing. One form of cognitive

coping involves lessening the significance of the strain; that is, they decide that a certain goal

(e.g. money or status) is no longer important to them or not as importance as other things.

Individuals may also choose to maximize the positive results or minimize the negative results by
GENDER DIFFERENCES IN CRIME 7

either lowing their standards of altering their approximation of the outcomes. Lastly, those who

cope cognitively may resign themselves to the fact that they simply deserve whatever is

happening to them. Piquero and Sealock (2004) found that males reported higher levels of

cognitive coping than females.

Behavioral coping can also involve maximizing positive outcomes and minimizing

negative outcomes, but if the individual blames their stress on others, they may seek revenge

(Agnew, 1992). Lastly, when one chooses to cope emotionally, they seek to eliminate the

negative feelings associated with their strain, which women do more often than men (Matud,

2004). This may be done through exercise and relaxation methods or it can be achieved with

drugs or alcohol. When cognitive and behavioral coping mechanisms fail or are absent, coping

emotionally is more liable to be used.

As it has been found, women are more likely to respond to strain with nonangry emotions

like depression and anxiety, on top of anger (Broidy & Agnew, 1997; Greco & Curci, 2017;

Mirowsky & Ross, 1995; Posick, Farrell, & Swatt, 2013). In his study, Jang (2007) found that

the inner-direction emotions that women experience are more conducive to nondelinquent,

appropriate coping behaviors (e.g. ignoring or rationalizing the issue at hand) than other-directed

emotions like anger. However, the coping process used by men and women to deal with strain

and the subsequent emotions continues to be one of the least understood components of GST

(Piquero & Sealock, 2004).

Conclusion

Agnews (1992) GST can be used to explain why males have a higher crime rate than

females. According to GST, it is not the amount of strain experienced, as women undergo just as
GENDER DIFFERENCES IN CRIME 8

much, if not more, strain than men. It is the type of strain and the manner in which men and

women respond emotionally and the strategies they utilize to cope that make the difference. Men

experience strains like harsh punishment, financial strain, and interpersonal issues, which are

more conducive to crime than the strains women encounter involving gender roles. While they

respond with just as much anger as men, women also respond to strain with self-directed

emotions like depression or anxiety, which actually diminish the likelihood of committing crime.

Men tend to respond to stress with more anger than depression or anxiety, which can cause them

to externalize their deviance and take it out on someone or something else. These other-directed

emotions that men experience are also more likely to lead to deviant ways of coping. These three

factors are GSTs explanation for the gender differences in crime rates.
GENDER DIFFERENCES IN CRIME 9

References

Agnew, R. (1992). Foundation for a general strain theory of crime and delinquency.

Criminology, 30, 4788. doi:10.1111/j.1745-9125.1992.tb01093.x

Agnew, R. (2006). Pressured into crime: An overview of general strain theory. Los Angeles,

CA: Roxbury Publishing Company.

Agnew, R. (2013). When criminal coping is likely: An extension of general strain

theory. Deviant Behavior, 34, 653-670. doi:10.1080/01639625.2013.766529

Agnew, R., Brezina, T., Wright, J. P., & Cullen, F. T. (2002). Strain, personality traits, and

delinquency: Extending general strain theory. Criminology, 40, 4372.

doi:10.1111/j.1745-9125.2002.tb00949.x

Broidy, L., & Agnew, R. (1997). Gender and crime: A general strain theory

perspective. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 34, 275-306.

doi:10.1177/0022427897034003001

Greco, R., & Curci, A. (2017). Does the general strain theory explain gambling and substance

use?. Journal of Gambling Studies, 33, 919-936. doi:10.1007/s10899-016-9654-2

Hay, C. (2003). Family strain, gender, and delinquency. Sociological Perspectives, 46, 107-

135. doi:10.1525/sop.2003.46.1.107

Kessler, R. C., & Mcleod, J. D. (1984). Sex differences in vulnerability to undesirable life

events. American Sociological Review, 49, 620-631. doi:10.2307/209542

GENDER DIFFERENCES IN CRIME 10

Matud, M. P. (2004). Gender differences in stress and coping styles. Personality and

Individual Differences, 37, 1401-1415. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2004.01.010

Mirowsky, J., & Ross, C. (1995). Sex differences in distress: Real or artifact? American

Sociological Review, 60, 449-468. doi :0.2307/2096424

Ngo, F. T., & Paternoster, R. (2013). Stalking, gender, and coping strategies: A partial test of

Broidy and Agnew's gender/general strain theory hypotheses. Victims &

Offenders, 8, 94-117. doi:10.1080/15564886.2012.749122

Piquero, N. L., & Sealock, M. D. (2004). Gender and general strain theory: A preliminary test

of Broidy and Agnews gender/GST hypothesis. JQ: Justice Quarterly, 21, 125-158.

doi:10.1080/07418820400095761

Posick, C., Farrell, A., & Swatt, M. L. (2013). Do boys fight and girls cut? A general strain

Theory approach to gender and deviance. Deviant Behavior, 34, 685-705.

doi:10.1080/01639625.2012.748626

Jang, Sung Joon. (2007). Gender differences in strain, negative emotions, and coping

behaviors: A general strain theory approach. JQ: Justice Quarterly, 24, 523-553.

doi:10.1080/07418820701485486

Turner, R., Wheaton, B., & Lloyd, D. (1995). The epidemiology of social stress. American

Sociological Review, 60, 104-125. doi:10.2307/2096348.

GENDER DIFFERENCES IN CRIME 11

U.S. Department of Justice & Federal Bureau of Investigations. (2012). Crime in the United

States. Retrieved November 10, 2017, from https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-

u.s/2012/crime-in-the-u.s.-

2012/tables/42tabledatadecoverviewpdf/table_42_arrests_by_sex_2012.xls