Sie sind auf Seite 1von 37

Title: The Socio-economic Cause of Female Criminality

: A Study in Alamdanga Thana.

Chapter 1
1.1 Introduction
The term female criminality refers those kinds of crime which is committed only by
female. It was believed till a few decades ago that crime is predominately a male phenomenon
and the world of crime is only a male phenomenon and the world of crime is only a man’s world.
The subject of female crime was totally neglected. But now a day the subject of female
criminality has come into focus as the rate of female criminality is increasing at an alarming rate.
The women are no longer thinks themselves uncompetitive with men and they are involved with
every activity with men and as a result they are not getting fear to do risky and illegal jobs like
crime. Most often the female are not directly associated to commit these crimes but they are
directed by some situational factor like social and economic cause which influences them to
commit crime.

1.2 Background of the Study


In early age the concept of female criminality was a unique matter to society because the
society was male dominated and the women had a little scope to contribute with the works of
men. The main duty was to house works and rearing children. As they couldn’t go outside the
concept of crime was unknown to them and they were frightened to do any illegal work. But due
to the change of time and development in the field of science and technology the negative and
dominating attitude towards women began to disappear. Women represent the fastest growing
criminal population, growing by almost a third over the course of the 1990s, and almost a third
of all incarcerated women report having been on welfare in the period just prior to their arrest.
And yet despite this apparent dramatic increase in the criminal behavior of poor women, the
study of women’s criminality remains in its infancy. Drawing on life course theory, however,
some feminist scholars are taking steps to address this hole in the literature, and the most striking
finding to emerge from the field of feminist criminology is that the best predictor of female
criminality is a history of sexual or physical abuse victimization. In the mid 1970s several factors
converged to convince the public that changes were occurring in the rate and nature of crime
among women and the female offenders also began to receive more attention during this time.
In the last few years the rate of female criminality is increasing in our country in an alarming rate
and women are committing new types of crime and most of their crimes remain hidden because
it is very difficult for the law enforcement agency to detect them as they are adopting new policy
for committing crime. The chief type of female criminality in Bangladesh is drug trafficking,
goods trafficking, status offender, hijacking, cheating, theft, prostitutions etc.

Page 1 of 37
1.3 Statement of the problem
Most of the people observe the nature and types of female criminality and blame and
react harshly towards the female criminal but it is true that most of them come in the profession
of crime by influencing some factors. The reality is that in most cases women commit crime by
various social and economic factors.
So there is a relation between socio economic factor and female criminality.

1.4 Objective of the study


In my study I want to show the relationship socio-economic cause and female criminality.
My major objective of the study is how social and economic factors lead a female to involve
herself in criminality. The main objects of our study is
 To find out the social cause of female criminality
 To find out how family influence female to involve in criminality
 To find out how defective family environment such as separation divorce influence
female to involve in criminality
 To find out the economic cause of female criminality

1.5 Importance of the study


Women are always neglected in our country and due to the attitude of the society they are
deprived from their rights .Sometimes it becomes difficult for them to survive in the society. As a
result they adopt illegal policies to survive in the society and ultimately they become involved
with crimes. Finding no way for livelihood they have to commit crime which is very much
shocking. So the importance of this study lies on finding the social and economic factors that
influence them to come in the world of crime.

1.6 Review of Literature


There is several literature of female criminality where female delinquency is described in
different perspective and the cause of female criminality is discussed.

Biological theories (Cesare Lombroso, 1903)


The most investigated "difference" between the sexes was biological. Cesare Lombroso
(1903) identified the female physiognomy thought most likely to determine criminal propensity.
This was the new science of "criminal anthropology" matching the general fascination with
Darwinism and physical anthropology, where scientists sought pathological and atavistic causes
for criminal behavior. While he credited criminal women as being stronger than men, the
consequence was that prison would hardly affect them at all. Lombroso concluded true female
criminals were rare and showed few signs of degeneration because they had “evolved less than
men due to the inactive nature of their lives”. Lombroso argued it was the females’ natural
passivity that withheld them from breaking the law, as they lacked the intelligence and initiative
to become criminal.

Page 2 of 37
Sigmund Freud
Sigmund Freud theorized that all women experience penis envy and seek to compensate
an inferiority complex by being exhibitionistic and narcissistic, focusing on irrational and trivial
matters instead of being interested in building a just civilization. William I. Thomas (1907)
published Sex and Society in which he argued that men and women possessed essentially
different personality traits. Men were more criminal because of their biologically determined
active natures. Women were more passive and less criminally capable. In The Unadjusted Girl
(1923) he argued that as women have a greater capacity to love than men they suffer more when
they do not receive social approval and affection. The "unadjusted girls" are those who use their
sexuality in a socially unacceptable way to get what they want from life. The female criminal
forgoes the conventional rewards of domesticity by refusing to accept prevailing modes of
sexuality and seeks excitement, wealth, and luxury: a pursuit that may conflict with the interests
of the social group as it also exercises the freedom to pursue similar goals.

Sociological theory of female offending (Adler 1975)


Adler (1975) proposed that the emancipation of women during the 1970s increased
economic opportunities for women and allowed women to be as crime-prone as men. While
"women have demanded equal opportunity in the fields of legitimate Endeavour’s, a similar
number of determined women have forced their way into the world of major crime such as
white-collar crime, murder, and robbery" (Adler, 1975: 3). She suggested that as women are
climbing up the corporate business ladder, they are making use of their 'vocational liberation' to
pursue careers in white-collar crime. But feminism has made female crime more visible through
increased reporting, policing and the sentencing of female offenders and, even then, the
statistical base is small in comparison to men. Carlen (1985) argues that Adler's 'new female
criminal' is cast as the 'biological female' who is essentially masculine. The 'new female' criminal
turns out to be the 'old maladjusted masculinist female' of traditional criminology, rejecting her
proper feminine role such as institutionalizing rather than incarcerating women who commit
'male' offences such as robbery, i.e. Adler's 'sisters in crime' appears to work within the
frameworks of traditional criminology rather than a feminist one. For an examination of gender
in crimes of violence, Alder).

A debate in the recent criminology literature has focused on the handling of female
offenders as they are processed through the criminal justice system. There are two competing
perspectives. The chivalry or paternalism hypothesis which echoes the perception of female
inmates as victims, argues that women are treated more leniently than men at various stages of
the male-dominated justice process as a function of the male desire to protect the weaker (Crew:
1991; Erez, 1992). The "evil women" hypothesis which parallels the female inmate as subhuman
perspective holds that women often receive harsher treatment than men in the criminal justice
system and suggests that this different treatment results from the notion that criminal women
have violated not only legal boundaries but also gender role expectations (Chesney-Lind, 1984;
Erez, 1992). Simon (1975) predicted that the criminal justice system would start treating men
and women offenders equally. There is mixed empirical evidence for this emancipation or
liberation thesis, and some would say that absolutely no empirical evidence exists for it and the
notion is discredited (Chesney-Lind & Pasko 2004). Sex differentials in sentencing are subject to
a variety of interpretations, and not all feminists want the criminal justice system to treat women
equally. It seems that women are not committing the "big take" offences like stock fraud and

Page 3 of 37
other white-collar crimes, or bank robberies. Instead, they are admitted to the justice system
charged with committing different crimes. Wundersitz (1988) and Crew (1991) consider the
chivalry and paternalism factors in the process.

Farrington and Morris (1983)


Farrington and Morris (1983) found some empirical evidence that women did receive less
severe punishments, but female offenders are far more likely to be first-time offenders, and to
have committed a less serious form of the relevant offence; they stole smaller or fewer items,
used less violence, and so on. Prior history of offending, and seriousness of offence, is
fundamental factors in determining severity of sentence, for any offender. Once these variables
are entered into the equation, it is possible to conclude that female offenders are not being treated
any differently from males in equivalent circumstances. However, the evidence does suggest that
married women with a caring role are more likely to be treated leniently. This may be because
they are expected to remain in the home to continue their dependent "maternal" function.
Unmarried women or those in unconventional relationships tended to receive more harsh
treatment, confirming a sentencing model based a cultural need to reinforce gender roles within a
framework of heterosexual marriage or family life. Kruttschnitt (1982) who investigated the link
between economic independence, informal social control, and heavier sentences for women. In a
study of convictions in a Californian population in the 1970s Kruttschnitt found that sentence
may differ with the extent to which a woman is economically dependent upon someone else for
her day-to-day existence: the more dependent she is, the less severe her disposition. Thus, the
degree to which a female offender can be shown to be under informal social control may produce
a lighter formal sentence.

Chapman (1980)
Chapman (1980) studied the connection between labor force participation, and revealed
an increase in female criminal activity during times of economic hardship. The smallest increases
in arrests coincided with periods of the greatest increase in economic activity with the most
common offence being that of shop lifting. These findings would seem to support a theory of a
relationship between employment and crime rather than that offered by the 'women's liberation
thesis'. When times are good, the offending woman appears to stabilise rather than escalate. An
absence rather than availability of employment opportunities (liberation thesis) would seem a
more plausible explanation for increases in female crime. Naffine (1987: 99) believes the
criminal woman's motive appears more rational and straight forward than manifesting her
gender-role concerns or seeking to compete with the criminal male.

Studies of patriarchy tend to look at everything from female membership in male-


dominated professions to the "rape culture" with promotes female victimization. The study of
patriarchy has also allowed feminists to uncover hidden forms of violence against women. For
example, feminist critiques of pedagogy (how teachers teach) have become quite common, as
education, particularly criminal justice education, becomes the domain for discovering examples
of male-dominated thinking and examples of the marginalization thesis (women being reminded
that they are only women, or men being reminded that they are bad - simply because they are not
women).

Page 4 of 37
Blocked Opportunity Theory
Blocked opportunity theory explains that juveniles are pushed into delinquency as a result
of lack of access to opportunities that are legitimate avenues for the realization of a set of success
goals. Thus, thos4e who are denied legitimate achievement of the success goals often turn to
delinquency as a means of reaching desired goals or of striking back at an unfair system

Strain theory (Robert k.Merton, Albert K. Cohen, and Richard Cloward and Lloyd Ohlin – 1938)
Strain Theories are criticized by feminists as betraying a double standard. When male
offenders commit a crime under certain conditions of opportunity blockage, their commission of
crime is somehow seen as a "normal" or functional response. When women commit crime, Strain
Theory views it as some sort of "weakness". Naffine (1987) probably represents the best example
of this critique, but there are other critiques, such as the characterization of females as
"helpmates" or facilitators of crime in the Strain Theories of Albert K. Cohen, and Richard
Cloward and Lloyd Ohlin.

The research methodology in Social Learning Theories, such as Edwin Sutherland's


Differential Association Theory, is criticized for relying on male examples, using case studies of
males only, and being a male-dominated perspective that glamorizes the male criminal, or at least
the sociable, gregarious, active, and athletic characteristics of the male criminal. Similarly, Social
Control Theories, such as Hirsch’s Social Bond Theory, focuses almost exclusively on social
class at the expense of gender and race.

Feminists therefore concluded that the failure of criminology to research the issue of
female criminality fairly either reflected a male-dominated discourse in which men primarily
research male issues, or betrayed the rigidity of male stereotypes which allowed men to justify
their prejudices with pseudoscience.

Economic Theory (Carl Marx (1818-1883), BongerVoltaire Rousseau, Beccaria and Bentham)
The proposition that economic life is fundamental, and, therefore, has the determining
influence upon the social and cultural values is as old as the human civilization itself. This
connotes that economic factors influence the nature and form of all social patterns and controls
all other aspects of human life. Thus criminologists have tried to explained crime in terms of
economic determinism. In the words of Carl Marx (1818-1883) economic conditions determine
the general character of social political and spiritual processes of life and with the change of
foundations, the inter superstructure is also rapidly transformed. Those who support this view
concentrate on the economic aspect of crime and analyses the impact of economic condition on
criminality. There assertion that economic forces have been interacting right from the inception
of the human society has a historical background.
It is well known that in early societies and in early times when the economic resources
were limited struggle for existence and survival for the fittest was the law of nature. There after
as the society advance increase in production yielded surplus as a result of which the system of
barter and exchange originated. Gradually money gained importance in human life so much so
that it has now become the sole determining factor of a person’s social status in modern society.
Aristotle the Greek philosopher commented that crimes are commented not merely fort the seek
of meeting the necessities of life but also for acquiring superfluous things. He believed that
crimes are mostly committed because of the acquisitive tendency of man and his greed for

Page 5 of 37
acquiring surplus wealth. Thinkers like Voltaire Rousseau, Beccaria and Bentham has agreed that
economic structure is one of the causes of criminality.

1.7 Theoretical Framework


Different writers have expressed different explanations on the causes of female
criminality. For the purpose of my research I used the following theories and explanations.

Blocked Opportunity Theory


Blocked opportunity theory explains that juveniles are pushed into delinquency as a result
of lack of access to opportunities that are legitimate avenues for the realization of a set of success
goals. Thus, those who are denied legitimate achievement of the success goals often turn to
delinquency as a means of reaching desired goals or of striking back at an unfair system.

Social Control Theory


Travis Hirshi’s Social Control Theory states that criminal activities result when a female’s
bond to the existing social bond become weaker though the family ties of female are more
stronger then men due to their sex role in family.

Social Learning Theory


According to the learning theory criminal activities is a learned behavior’s the female can
learn it from their family member, peer group, relatives and others. They can influence her to
commit criminal activities.

Economic theory
According to economic theory the rate of crime increases when the economic condition
are low such as poverty, unemployment are greater and crime decreases comparatively when
economic condition if society remains better. So female involves more in criminality when do
not earn their livelihood and get a suitable job

Page 6 of 37
1.8 Conceptual Framework
Conceptualization is the process through which we specify precisely what we will mean
when we will use particular terms.

Concepts: Here the concepts are socio-economic cause of youth criminality


Variable: When concepts can have two or more degrees and values, they are referred to as
variable.
Independent variable: The variable that causes effect is called independent variable
Dependent variable: The variable that depends up or is a consequence of other variable is
termed as independent variable
Socio-economic cause Female criminality
Here socio economic cause is in Independent variable and female criminality is dependent
variable

Operationalization: Operationalization is the development of specific research procedures


(operations) that will result in empirical observations representing those concepts in the real
world. In a word it is the development of operational definitions.

Female Criminality

Social cause Economic cause

Broken family Poverty

Relation within and outside the


Unemployment
family

Social environment Dependency on male

Negative attitude of society


towards female

Police connection

Dowry

Page 7 of 37
1.9 Hypothesis of the Study
A hypothesis is a tentative answer to a research problem, expressed in the form of a
relation between independent and dependent variables. Hypothesis is tentative answers because
they can be verified only after they have been tested empirically. Now my research hypotheses
are given bellow:-
• Support of family is the cause of involving in criminality
• Defective relation with family is the cause of involving in criminality

Page 8 of 37
CHAPTER 2 - Research Methodology

2.1 Methodology
Research methodology is a way to systematically solve the research problem. It may be
understood as a science of studying how research is done scientifically. It is necessary for the
researcher to know not only the research methods but also the methodology. The survey method
is used to data collect in our research

2.2 Types of Research


There are mainly two types of research qualitative and quantative research. My is a
quantative research as it is concerned with quantative phenomenon.

2.3 Field selection


I have selected my field in Alamdanga thana of Chuadanga district as the rate of female
criminality is high here.

2.4 Population
The inter set of relevant units of analysis or data is called population and a sample is a
sub-set of population. The population of our research is the female criminals of Alamdanga thana
of Chuadanga district.

2.5 Sample Selection


As the total population is unknown to me so I have used non probability sampling and I
have selected my sample both by judgment and snowball sampling.

2.6 Sample size


The size of my sample is thirty-two respondents from whom I collected my data.

2.7 Data Collection Method and technique


There are two sources of data, primary & secondary. I collected primary data from the
field and secondary data from secondary sources that are book, journal, and paper.
Data for this research have been collected from survey method. The technique of data collection
is the use of questionnaire and i have collected data through questionnaire-interview. i used close
ended, open ended and contingency questions for data collection from the respondents.

2.8 Data Processing and Analysis


Data will be analyzed by using both descriptive & inferential statistical tools. Findings
are analyzed for survey data using descriptive & inferential statistics. The result will is presented
in table form by univariate analysis (frequency distribution) bivariate analysis (correlation, cross
table). Data have been processed& analyzed through SPSS software in computer.

Page 9 of 37
Chapter 3 - Univariate Analysis

Findings: Here results are discussed through the following frequency tables and other statistical
tools. These statistical tools show the clear picture of my research findings. The findings of my
research are given below

Frequencies

Table-1: Age of the respondent

Frequency Percent

20-30 8 25.0
30-40 9 28.1
40-50 8 25.0
50-60 6 18.8
60-70 1 3.1
Total 32 100.0

Fig 1: Histogram

10
28%

25% 25%
8

18.8%
6

2
3.1% Std. Dev = 1.16
Mean = 2.5
0 N = 32.00
20-30
1.0 30-40
2.0 40-50
3.0 50-60
4.0 60-70
5.0

age
From the above histogram we find that 28% belong to the age group 30-40, 25% of the
respondent belongs to the age group 20-30, 25% belong to the age group 40-50 19% belong to
the age group 50-60 and 3% belong to the age group 60-70%.

Page 10 of 37
Table-2: Religion

Frequency Percent

Muslim 24 75.0
Hindu 8 25.0
Total 32 100.0

From the above frequency table we find that 75% respondent is Muslim and 25% are Hindu.

Table-3: Family type

Frequency Percent

Nuclear 14 43.8
Joint 9 28.1
Extended 9 28.1
Total 32 100.0

From the above frequency table we find that 44% of the respondent bears nuclear family
28% bear joint family and 28% bear extended family

Fig 2: Bar chart

15
43.8%
14

13

12

11

10
28.1% 28.1%
9
Count

8
Nuclear joint extended

family

From the above frequency table and Bar chart we find that 44% of the respondent bears nuclear
family28% bear joint family and 28% bear extended family.

Page 11 of 37
Table-4: Marital status

Frequency Percent

Married 12 37.5
Unmarried 6 18.8
Separated 7 21.9
Divorced 7 21.9
Total 32 100.0

Fig 3: Bar chart

13
37.5 %
12

11

10

8 21.9 % 21.9 %

7
18.8 %
6
Count

5
married unmarried seperated divorced

Marital status

From the above frequency table and bar chart we it is found that 38% are married 19% are
unmarried 22% are separated and 22 % are divorced.

Table-5: Education

Frequency Percent

Illiterate 12 37.5
Class I-V 10 31.3
Class Vi-Ix 7 21.9
Secondary 3 9.4
Total 32 100.0

Page 12 of 37
Fig 4: Histogram

14
37.5 %
12
31.3 %
10

8
21.9 %

4 9.4 %

2 Std. Dev = 1.00


Mean = 1.0

0 N = 32.00

S.S.C
0.0 Primary
1.0 Illiterate
2.0 Class3.0vi-ix
illiterate
education

From the above histogram we find that maximum respondents are illiterate and only few have
Passed S.S.C exam.

Table-6: Occupation

Frequency Percent

Housewife 22 68.8
Small
9 28.1
Business
Other 1 3.1
Total 32 100.0

From the above frequency table we find that 69% are housewife 28 % are in small business and
3% do other job.

Page 13 of 37
Table-7: Total family income (monthly)

Frequency Percent

2000-3000 3 9.4
3000-4000 2 6.3
4000-5000 7 21.9
5000-6000 4 12.5
6000-7000 2 6.3
7000-8000 9 28.1
8000-9000 2 6.3
9000-10000 3 9.4
Total 32 100.0

From the above frequency table we find that 8% respondent’s monthly family income is
7000-8000.

Fig 5: histogram

10
28.1 %

8
21.9 %

12.4 %
4
9.4 % 9.4 %

6.3 % 6.3 % 6.3 %


2
Std. Dev = 2.09
Mean = 4.6
0 N = 32.00
2 -1.0
3 3 -2.0
4 4 - 3.0
5 5 - 4.0
6 6 -5.0
7 7 -6.0
8 8 -7.0
9 9 -8.0
10

Total family income(monthly)(In Thousand)

From the above histogram we find that28% respondent’s monthly family income is 7000-8000.

Table-8: Total family expenditure (monthly)

Page 14 of 37
Frequency Percent

2000-3000 3 9.4
3000-4000 4 12.5
4000-5000 3 9.4
5000-6000 6 18.8
6000-7000 3 9.4
7000-8000 8 25.0
8000-9000 3 9.4
9000-10000 2 6.3
Total 32 100.0

From the above frequency table we find that25% respondent’s total monthly expenditure are
between7000-8000.

Table-9: Father's occupation

Frequency Percent
business 12 37.5
job 6 18.8
farmer 14 43.8
Total 32 100.0

From the above frequency table we find that 38 % respondent’s father occupation is business
19 % are job and 44% are farmer.

Table-10: Mother's occupation

Frequency Percent

Housewife 26 81.3
Small Business 3 9.4
Job 3 9.4
Total 32 100.0

From the above frequency table we find that 81% respondent’s mother is housewife 9 % are in
small business and rests are in job.

Table-11: Husband's occupation

Page 15 of 37
Frequency Percent

Business 13 40.6
Job 5 15.6
Farmer 8 25.0
Total 26 81.3
Missing System 6 18.8
Total 32 100.0

From the above frequency table we find that 41% respondent’s husband occupation is business
15.6 % are job and 25% are farmer and rest are unmarried.

Table-12: Total family member

Frequency Percent

1-4 8 25.0
4-8 17 53.1
8-12 7 21.9
Total 32 100.0

From the above frequency table we find that 53%, respondent bear to the member of 4-8.

Table-13: House type

Frequency Percent

own
12 37.5
house
rented 20 62.5
Total 32 100.0

Fig 6: Pie Chart

own house

37.5%

rented
62.5%

From the above pie chart we find that 37% live in own house and 63% in rented house.
Table-14: stay in family

Page 16 of 37
Frequency Percent

yes 15 46.9
no 17 53.1
Total 32 100.0

From the above frequency table we find that 46% female criminal stay with family and 53% do
not stay with family

Fig 7: Clustered Bar diagram

20

53.1%

46.9%
18.8%

Reason for not stayi


10
29.4%
seperated

divorced

9.4% poverty

for getting job


Count

9.4%
0 Missing
Yes
yes no

stay in family

From the above clustered bar chart we find that 46.9% respondent stay with family and 53.1% do
not stay with family. Among the non staying respondent 18.8% do not stay with family for
separation with husband, 29.4% for divorce, and 9.4% for poverty and the same for getting job

Table-15: Reason for not staying in family

Frequency Percent Valid Percent


For Getting Job 3 9.4 17.6
Poverty 3 9.4 17.6
Divorced 5 15.6 29.4
Separated 6 18.8 35.3
Total 17 53.1 100.0
Missing System 15 46.9
Total 32 100.0

Page 17 of 37
From the above frequency table we find that 17%respondent do not stay with family for getting
job18% for getting job 29% for divorced and 35% for separation.

Table-16: Time of separation or divorce

Frequency Percent

1-2year 4 12.5
2-3year 2 6.3
3-4year 3 9.4
4-5year 3 9.4
5-6year 4 12.5
7-8year 2 6.3
Total 18 56.3
Missing System 14 43.8
Total 32 100.0

From the above frequency table we find that 12.5% respondent’s time of separation or divorce is
one to two year.

Table-17: Cause of divorce

Frequency Percent

Husband's Attitude 5 15.6


Poverty 3 9.4
Husband's Unemployment 4 12.5
Dowry 6 18.8
Total 18 56.3
Missing System 14 43.8
Total 32 100.0

From the above frequency table we find that maximum female’s cause of divorce is either dowry
or husband’s attitude.

Table-18: Cause of loosing relationship


Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Defective Family Environment 1 3.1 20.0
Parent's Separation 2 6.3 40.0
Parental Rejection 2 6.3 40.0
Total 5 15.6 100.0
Missing System 27 84.4
Total 32 100.0

Page 18 of 37
From the above frequency table we find that 20% loose relationship for defective family environment
40% for parent's separation 40% for parental rejection

Table-19: Previous job

Frequency Percent
Trafficking 6 18.8
Drug Selling 4 12.5
Theft 5 15.6
Cheating 3 9.4
Prostitution 6 18.8
Worker 8 25.0
Total 32 100.0

From the above frequency table we find that18.8% of the respondent’s previous job was
Trafficking 12.5% respondent’s previous job was drug selling 15.6% respondents previous job
was theft 18.8% respondent’s previous job was prostitution and 25% was worker

Fig 8: Bar Diagram


9

25%
8

7
18.8% 18.8%
6

15.6%
5

12.5%
4

9.4%
Count

2
traf f icking drug selling thef t cheating postitution w orker

Previous job

From the and bar diagram we find that18.8% of the respondent’s previous job was Trafficking
12.5% respondent’s previous job was drug selling 15.6% respondents previous job was theft
18.8% respondent’s previous job was prostitution and 25% was worker.

Page 19 of 37
Table-20: Cause of leaving job

Frequency Percent
Risk 8 25.0
Lack Of Money 11 34.4
Being Abused 7 21.9
Police Harassment 6 18.8
Total 32 100.0

Fig 9: Pie chart

police harrasment
Risk

18.8%
25%

21.9%
being abused

34.4%

lack of money

From the above frequency table and pie chart we find that 25% female left their previous job for
risk 34.4% left their job for lack of money 22% left after being abused 18.8% left after police
harassment.

Page 20 of 37
Table-21: Present job

Frequency Percent
Trafficking 11 34.4
Drug Selling 16 50.0
Theft 2 6.3
Cheating 3 9.4
Total 32 100.0

Fig 10: Bar Diagram


20

50%

34.4%

10

9.4%
6.3%
Count

0
trafficking drug selling theft cheating

Present job
From the above frequency table and bar diagram we find that 50% respondent’s present job is
drug selling 34.4% lead trafficking 6.3% lead theft and 9.4% lead cheating

Table-22: Time of involvement with job

Frequency Percent

0-1year 14 43.8
1-2year 8 25.0
2-3year 6 18.8
3-4year 1 3.1
4-5year 3 9.4
Total 32 100.0

Page 21 of 37
From the above frequency table we find that about 44% respondent involved with present job is
between o to one year 25% between one to two year and only 9.4% involved between four to
five year.
Table-23: Cause of involvement

Frequency Percent
Pressure Of Family 4 12.5
Poverty 15 46.9
Not Getting Other Job 8 25.0
By Cheating 1 3.1
Parental Rejection 4 12.5
Total 32 100.0

Fig 11: Bar Diagram


16
46.9%
14

12

10
25%
8

6
12.5% 12.5%
4

2 3.1%
Count

0
pressure of family not getting other jo parental rejection
poverty by cheating

Cause of involvment
From the above frequency table and bar diagram we find that 46.5% came into criminality for
pressure of family, 46.5% came for proverty, 25% for not getting other job 3.1% for cheating and
12.5% came after parental rejection

Table-24: Person by whom introduced


Frequency Percent
Family Member 8 25.0
Peers 6 18.8
Relatives 15 46.9
Others 3 9.4

Page 22 of 37
Total 32 100.0

From the above frequency table we find that 25% came into criminality first by family member,
18.8% came by their peers group 46.9% came by relatives and 9.4% by others
Fig 12: Bar Diagram
16 46.9%

14

12

10

25%
8
18.8%
6

4
9.4%

2
Count

0
family member peers relatives others

Person by whom introduced

Table-25: Family knowing

Frequency Percent

Yes 21 65.6
No 11 34.4
Total 32 100.0

From the above frequency table we find that 66% respondent’s family knows about involving in
criminality and 34% do not any.

Table-26: Support of family

Frequency Percent

Yes 18 56.3
No 4 12.5
Total 22 68.8
Missing System 10 31.3

Page 23 of 37
Total 32 100.0

From the above frequency table we find that 81% family has support on criminality and rests do
not have.
Table-27: Involvement of family members

Frequency Percent

Yes 15 46.9
No 17 53.1
Total 32 100.0

From the above frequency table we find that 47% respondent faced police case while doing
criminality and 53% didn’t face.

Table-28: Facing police case

Frequency Percent

Yes 15 46.9
No 17 53.1
Total 32 100.0

From the above frequency table we find that 47% respondent faced police case while doing
criminality and 53% didn’t face.

Table-29: Type of case

Frequency Percent

Drug Selling 4 12.5


Theft 2 6.3
Trafficking 6 18.8
Prostitution 4 12.5
Total 16 50.0
Missing System 16 50.0
Total 32 100.0

From the above frequency table we find that 12.5% respondent faced police case for drug selling,
6.3% for theft 18.8% for trafficking and 12.5% for prostitution

Table-30: Connection with police

Frequency Percent

Yes 22 68.8

Page 24 of 37
No 10 31.3
Total 32 100.0

From the above frequency table we find that 68.8% female criminal have connection with police
and 31.3% have not.
Table-31: Help of police

Frequency Percent

Yes 22 68.8
No 10 31.3
Total 32 100.0

From the above frequency table we find that 68.8% female criminal run their business but the
help of police and 31.3% do not take

Table-32: Mode of job running

Frequency Percent

individually 9 28.1
in group 23 71.9
Total 32 100.0

Fig 13: Pie chart

indiv idually

28.1%

71.9%
in group

Page 25 of 37
From the above pie chart we find that 28.1% run their business individually and 72% in group.

Table-33: Group member in job

Frequency Percent

Family Member 7 21.9


Peers 4 12.5
Relatives 4 12.5
Known Person 4 12.5
Unknown 2 6.3
Total 21 65.6
Missing System 11 34.4
Total 32 100.0

Fig 14: Bar Diagram

12
34.4%

10

8
21.9%

12.5% 12.5% 12.5%


4

9.5%
2
Count

0
Individually
Missing peers know n person
family member relatives unknow n

Group member

From the above frequency table we find that 21.9% respondent’s group member is his family
member per 12.5% are peers, relatives and known person respectively and 6.3% are unknown.

Page 26 of 37
Table-34: Job mode
Frequency Percent
Daily 10 31.3
Weekly 8 25.0
Monthly 4 12.5
Occasionally 10 31.3
Total 32 100.0

From the above frequency table we find that 31.3% run their job daily 25% run weekly 12.5%
run monthly and 31.3% run occasionally.

Table-35: Amount of money from job

Frequency Percent

2000-3000 7 21.9
3000-4000 17 53.1
4000-5000 6 18.8
7000-8000 1 3.1
8000-9000 1 3.1
Total 32 100.0

From the above frequency table we find that 53% respondent’s monthly income is between 3000-
4000 22% earn between 2000-3000 18.8% earn between 4000-5000 monthly.

Page 27 of 37
Table-36: Area of spending money

Frequency Percent
In Family 20 62.5
Only For Myself 12 37.5
Total 32 100.0

Fig 15: Pie chart

only for myself

37.5%

62.5% in family

From the above pie chart we find that 62.5% spend their money in family and 37.5% spend only
for themselves.

Table-37: Managing police

Frequency Percent
0-10% 13 40.6
11-20% 12 37.5
Total 25 78.1
Missing System 7 21.9
Total 32 100.0

From the above frequency table we find that 40.6% spend 0-10% money of their income for
managing police monthly and 37.5% spend 11-20% money of their monthly income

Table-38: Income satisfactions

Page 28 of 37
Frequency Percent

Yes 21 65.6
No 11 34.4
Total 32 100.0

From the above frequency table we find that 65.6% have income satisfaction and rest do not
have satisfaction over their monthly income.
Chapter 4 – Bivariate Analysis

4.1 Correlations between total family income and expenditure

Total Family
Total Family
Expenditure(Month
Income(Monthly)
ly)
Pearson Correlation 1 .978(**)
Total Family Income(Monthly) Sig. (2-Tailed) . .000
N 32 32
Pearson Correlation .978(**) 1
Total Family
Sig. (2-Tailed) .000 .
Expenditure(Monthly)
N 32 32
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

From the above correlation we find two variables that are monthly total income and monthly
total expenditure. Here the value of coefficient of correlation is .978 so we can tell that there is a
positive correlation between total monthly family income and total monthly expenditure. So
expenditure varies a little according to the change of expenditure.

4.2 Cross tabulation between Support of family *and Involvement of family members

Involvement Of Family Members


Total
Yes No

Support Of Yes 14 4 18
Family No 1 3 4
Total 15 7 22

From the above cross table we find that 22 that means 68.8% respondent’s family have support
on criminality and among them 15 respondent’s family member are involved with criminality so
we can tell that the family in which most members are criminal that family has more support on
involving criminal activities.

4.3 Cross tabulation betweenstay in family and * Reason for not staying

Page 29 of 37
Reason For Not Staying
For Getting Total
Poverty Divorced Separated
Job
Stay In
No 3 3 5 6 17
Family
Total 3 3 5 6 17

From the above cross table we find that 17 respondents do not stay with family and the cause are
mostly for divorce and separation.

4.4 Support of family and* Present job Cross tabulation

Present job
Total
trafficking drug selling theft cheating
Support yes 5 9 2 2 18
of family no 3 1 0 0 4
Total 8 10 2 2 22

From the above cross table so we can tell the female whose family has support on her criminality
that respondent are more involved with criminal activities

4.5 Cross tabulation between Connection with police and * Help of police

Help of police
Total
yes no
Connection yes 22 0 22
with police no 0 10 10
Total 22 10 32

From the above cross table we find that 22 respondents have connection with police and only ten
have not and the respondents who have connection with police all of them get the help of police
in running their criminal activities. So connection with police helps in running criminal activities

4.6 Cross tabulation between stay in family and * Present job

Present Job
Total
Trafficking Drug Selling Theft Cheating
Stay In Yes 2 3 1 2 8
Family No 12 7 2 3 24
Total 14 10 3 3 32

From the above cross table we find that twenty four respondents do not stay in family and most
of them are involved with trafficking so we can tell that the respondent’s who do not stay with
family are mostly involved with criminal activities

Page 30 of 37
4.7 Test of Hypothesis 1
Alternative: Family knowing is the cause of involving in criminality

Family knowing * Present job Cross tabulation

Present Job
Total
Trafficking Drug Selling Theft Cheating
Family Yes 8 8 2 3 21
Knowing No 3 8 0 0 11
Total 11 16 2 3 32

Chi-Square Tests

Value Df Asymp. Sig. (2-Sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 4.597(A) 2 .204


Likelihood Ratio 6.112 2 .106
Linear-By-Linear Association .673 1 .412

N Of Valid Cases 32

The Chi-Square Tests is shown between Family knowing and Present job in which
The calculated value=6.112
Here the degrees of freedom is 2
And for 2 degrees of freedom at 5% level of significance level the table value is=5.99
Comment
As calculated value>table value
So the null hypothesis is rejected and research hypothesis is accepted so we can tell the female
whose family knows about her criminality are more involved with criminal activities

Page 31 of 37
4.8 Test of Hypothesis 2
Alternative: Defective relation with family is the cause of involving in criminality

Stay in family * Present job Cross tabulation

Present Job
Total
Trafficking Drug Selling Theft Cheating
Stay In Yes 2 3 1 2 8
Family No 12 7 2 3 24
Total 14 10 3 3 32

Chi-Square Tests

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 15.641(a) 3 .001


Likelihood Ratio 18.363 3 .000
Linear-by-Linear Association .055 1 .814
N of Valid Cases 32

The Chi-Square Tests is shown between stay in family of the respondents and * Present job in
which
The calculated value=18.363
Here the degrees of freedom is 3
And for 3 degrees of freedom at 5% level of significance level the table value is=7.815
Comment
As calculated value>table value
18.363>7.81
So the null hypothesis is rejected and research hypothesis is accepted so we can tell the female
who does not stay with family are more involved with criminal activities

Page 32 of 37
Chapter 5 – Concluding Remarks

5.1 Summary

Mainly in my research I tried to show the social and economic cause of involving female in
different criminal activities. Among the social cause I found that mostly family condition,
relationship with family and support of family leads to female in involving criminality. The main
findings are

 The female who doesn’t stay with his family are mostly involved with criminality
 the family in which most members are criminal that family has more support on
involving female in criminal activities
 Good connection with police helps the female criminal in running criminal activities
 Poverty, unemployment compels the female in choosing criminal activities
 Most divorced and separated female are involved with criminal activities than married

Page 33 of 37
5.2 Limitations
Although I have tried to complete our research very tactfully and responsibly, hence I
have faced some problems which I have indicated as my limitations. These are discussed below:-

1. I have some questions in our questionnaire which most respondents did not agree to
answer. So; it was difficult to take answer.
2. As a new researcher, i have little experience in this field.
3. It is very difficult to communicate with our respondent’s because they live in different
places & they do not have strong communication with each other.
4. The respondents did not give adequate time to fulfill the answer of all questions.
5. The respondents feel fear to provide information

5.3 Conclusion
After completing my research I can now commence that the female are not always
directly responsible for choosing the job of criminality. Rather mostly the socio economic factor
influences them to come in the job of criminality. Though my research was applied over a small
quantity of respondent and in a small area but the findings shows that the social and economic
cause influences more strongly than other variable.

5.4 Recommendation
From my research I suggest some recommendation to lessen the social and economic
cause which tends to involve the female in criminality. These are
 The family should always stand behind the women who is in the situation of difficulty
 The Government should provide more job opportunities for female
 The divorced or separated women should be rehabilitated properly

Page 34 of 37
GLOSSARY:

Bar chart: A graphic device used for displaying nominal or ordinal data.
Histogram: A graphic presentation used to display frequency distributions of interval and ratio
level data.
Pie chart: A graphic presentation used to show differences in frequencies or percentage among
categories of nominal and ordinal variables.
Hypothesis: A tentative answer of the research which state relationship between two variables
Cross tabulation: A table showing the relationship between two or more variables by
presenting all combinations of categories of variables.
Degrees of freedom: A characteristic of the sample statistics that determines the appropriate
sampling distribution
Population: The inter set of relevant units of analysis or data is called population and a sample
is a sub-set of population.
Sample: When the data serving as the basis of generalization is comprised of a subset of
population that subset is called a sample

Page 35 of 37
BIBLIOGRAPHY:

Bartollas Clemens (1990), Juvenile Delinquency. University of Northern Iowa, Macmillan


Publishing Company ,New York.

Ahuja Ram (1996), Sociological Criminology, Rajasthan University, New age International (P)
Limited

Monte, Lindsay. and Lewis, Dan. "Sexual Victimization & Female Criminality: An Ethnographic
Exploration of the Link" http://www.allacademic.com

Akers L. Ronald (1903), Criminological theories: Introduction and Evaluation: University of


Florida.

Vito, G. and Holmes, R. (1994). Criminology. Theory, Research and Policy. International
Thomson Publishing, California.

Smart, C. (1976). Women, Crime and Criminology. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.

Burke, R. (2001) An Introduction to Criminological Theory. Willan Publishing, Devon.

Muraskin, R. and Roberts, A. (2002). Visions for Change. Crime and Justice in the Twenty First
Century. Prentice Hall, New Jersey.

Carlen, P., (1992) ‘Criminal Women and Criminal Justice, the Limits to and the Potential of,
Feminist and Left Realist Perspectives’, in Matthews, R., and Young, J., (eds), Issues in Realist
Criminology. Sage, London.

Adler, Freda. (1975). Sisters in Crime.

Alder, Christine. Explaining Violence: Socioeconomics and Masculinity.


Carlen, Pat. (1985). Criminal WomenLombroso, Cesare. (1980) The Female Offender. Littleton,
Colorado: Fred Rothman.
Baker Thersher L.: Doing social Research, California State University, San Marcos, Third
edition.

Blalock, H.M.(1979), Social Statistics, New York: McGraw Hill Book Co. Inc.

Page 36 of 37
Lind Douglas A. (2005), Statistics Technique in Business & Economics, New York: McGraw
Hill Book Co. Inc.

Maxfield, Micheal G. (1995), Research Methods for Criminal Justice and Criminology,
California: Wadsworth publishing Co. Inc.

Nachmias, C. Frankfort & Nachmias, David: Research Methods in social Science, University of
Wisconsin, Milwaukee.

Page 37 of 37