Crime has long been studied through patterns that predominantly reflect men’s experiences. Within this framework, women have largely been positioned at the margins of criminological inquiry, not as central subjects of analysis but as secondary figures whose relationship to crime is defined in limited ways. As a result, women are still imagined as caregivers rather than offenders, and as victims rather than agents of harm. Feminist criminology challenges this imbalance by arguing that women’s pathways into crime are shaped by different social conditions and constraints (Heidensohn & Silvestri, 2012; Steffensmeier & Allan, 1996). A gendered perspective does not imply that women’s crimes are fundamentally different; rather, it acknowledges that the world in which they offend is.
The Gendered Landscape Of Women’s Offending
One of the central findings in gender-and-crime research is that women are subject to distinct forms of social control that shape their pathways into offending. Compared to men, women tend to be more closely monitored within families and communities and face stronger normative expectations surrounding caregiving, emotional regulation, and respectability (Steffensmeier & Allan, 1996). These expectations can limit access to certain criminal opportunities while simultaneously intensifying the social, relational, and reputational consequences of norm violation.
Accordingly, women’s lower overall crime rates should not be interpreted as evidence of greater conformity or moral restraint; rather, they reflect differential access to criminal opportunities, stronger informal controls, and higher relational costs associated with transgression (Heidensohn & Silvestri, 2012). As a result, women’s offending often unfolds within narrower social spaces, frequently linked to family relationships or economic survival rather than peer-driven or status-oriented crime.
Building on this framework, research from Turkey illustrates how culturally specific constructions of femininity further shape women’s relationship to crime. İlbars (2003) notes that women are commonly associated with roles centered on caregiving, sexual modesty, and moral responsibility. These norms may discourage criminal involvement but can also increase vulnerability by reinforcing dependency and limiting exit options from violent or exploitative relationships. Similarly, a study examining Generation Y women’s views on female criminality found that women’s offending was often interpreted through experiences of social pressure, discrimination, and psychological exhaustion rather than inherent aggression (Küçükbükücü & Çamur, 2022). These findings suggest that women’s offending is produced within gendered social worlds characterized by intensified control, constrained opportunity structures, and culturally specific expectations.
The Relational Context Of Women’s Homicide
Cases in which women commit serious violent crimes, particularly homicide, tend to attract significant academic and public attention. Qualitative research suggests that these cases are frequently embedded in long-term relational contexts involving abuse, coercion, and institutional inaction. In their study of women convicted of killing men, Akgün and Çifci (2014) document repeated patterns of prolonged victimization, failed attempts to obtain protection, and gradual narrowing of perceived alternatives.
These findings do not suggest that violence is an inevitable outcome of abuse, nor that it should be understood as justified. Rather, they indicate that women’s violent offending often emerges after extended periods of constraint, where formal and informal mechanisms of protection prove insufficient. From a gendered perspective, the focus shifts from isolated acts to cumulative processes that precede them.
Importantly, this relational framing highlights how women’s lethal offending is often shaped by ongoing interpersonal dynamics rather than momentary intent. Within such contexts, experiences of fear, dependency, and coercive control accumulate over time, progressively limiting perceived avenues for safety or escape. As a result, acts of homicide may come to be understood not as sudden deviations, but as outcomes embedded within sustained relational entrapment and structural failure.
From Explanation To Intervention
The literature reviewed suggests that effective responses to women’s offending cannot be limited to punitive or individualized interventions. Because women’s criminal involvement is consistently linked to gendered social control, victimization, and constrained opportunity structures, prevention efforts must primarily target the social conditions that shape these pathways. Thus, addressing women’s offending requires a shift from crime-centered responses toward structural and preventive strategies.
One critical area of intervention concerns the prevention of violence and victimization. Research conducted in Turkey indicates that prolonged exposure to physical, psychological, and sexual violence, combined with repeated institutional failure, plays a central role in women’s involvement in serious crime, including homicide (Akgün & Çifci, 2014). Strengthening protective mechanisms, ensuring timely and effective responses to reports of violence, and reducing women’s dependency on abusive relationships are essential steps in preventing criminal outcomes. Without reliable institutional protection, women may continue to experience narrowing alternatives that increase the risk of extreme forms of offending.
In addition, sociocultural norms that regulate women’s behavior must be addressed as part of crime prevention efforts. As İlbars (2003) and Küçükbükücü and Çamur (2022) demonstrate, expectations surrounding obedience, caregiving, and moral responsibility simultaneously discourage overt criminal involvement while increasing vulnerability and psychological strain. Policies that promote women’s economic independence, access to education, and participation in the workforce can reduce structural dependency and expand socially acceptable exit options from harmful environments. Such measures position women’s offending not as an individual failure, but as a preventable social outcome.
Conclusion
Examining women’s offending through a gendered perspective highlights the extent to which crime is shaped by the social environments in which it occurs, without denying individual responsibility for criminal acts. The literature reviewed indicates that women’s involvement in crime is strongly influenced by restrictive norms, unequal access to resources, and sustained forms of social regulation that limit available choices over time. Lower crime rates among women therefore reflect constrained opportunity rather than greater compliance, while the forms of offending that do occur are frequently situated within intimate, economic, and relational contexts.
This pattern is particularly visible in cases of serious violence, where prolonged abuse and repeated institutional failure shape the conditions under which lethal acts occur. Recognizing these structural influences does not justify criminal behavior or replace the need for legal accountability; rather, it clarifies why punitive responses alone are insufficient. Effective responses must retain punishment while placing greater emphasis on prevention, protection, and early intervention to reduce the conditions under which such offences emerge.
References
Akgün, R., & Çifci, E. (2014). Kadınlar neden adam öldürür: Suça götüren dokuz sebep.
Heidensohn, F., & Silvestri, M. (2012). Gender and crime. In M. Maguire, R. Morgan, & R. Reiner (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook Of Criminology (5th ed., pp. 336–373). Oxford University Press.
İlbars, Z. (2003). Suç antropolojisi: Kadın ve suç. Ankara Üniversitesi Dil Ve Tarih-Coğrafya Fakültesi Antropoloji Dergisi, 1–13.
Küçükbükücü, R. A., & Çamur, G. (2022). Kadın suçluluğu olgusu üzerine toplumsal cinsiyet odaklı bir değerlendirme: Y kuşağı kadınlarının gözüyle. Samsun Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi, 7(2), 551–566. https://doi.org/10.47115/jshs.1129570
Steffensmeier, D., & Allan, E. (1996). Gender and crime: Toward a gendered theory of female offending. Annual Review Of Sociology, 22, 459–487. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.22.1.459