+

Examining the various shades of women in crime: Pink-collar criminality

A study had found that men tend to have higher levels of expertise and legitimate power than women do, specifically in the United States. Even though it has been more than two decades since this study was conducted, there are several factors proving that this phenomenon still remains the force. One of the reasons for this would be that people tend to perceive men as more authoritative and more in control than they perceive women.

White collar crimes were officially discussed by Edwin H Sutherland, who pointed out that besides the traditional crimes such as assault, robbery, murder, rape and other violent acts, there were certain anti-social activities that were carried out by people belonging to the upper socio-economic strata. They usually carried on these activities during the course of their occupation or business. In the earlier days, these were considered as an usual part of business tactics, carried out by shrewd professionals in order to succeed in their profession or business. Hence, any complaints against such activities usually went unpunished.

Sutherland further categorized crimes into “White Collar Crimes” and “Blue Collar Crimes”. He deemed “White Collar Crimes” as those committed by an individual who belongs to the upper economic class and who violates the terms and conditions of their occupation. A white collar criminal generally violated the criminal law while conducting their professional duties. It includes activities like misrepresentation through fraudulent advertisements, infringement of patents, copyrights and trademarks, etc.

“Blue Collar Crimes” referred to the violent acts that were carried out by people belonging to the lower socio-economic classes, such as robbery, dacoity, theft, murder, etc.

Now, white collar crimes are of a special kind and belong to a special category because they tend to be more harmful to the society and cause greater financial loss than blue collar crimes do. Apart from that, the society used to lack effective enforcement of criminal laws against people who committed such crimes. The people involved in such crimes were also usually influential people, and were able to resist the enforcement of law against them, by means such as bribery.

An important aspect of white-collar crimes that we need to focus upon would be the way Sutherland had mentioned “respectability” and “high status” as the factors that were necessary for a crime committed by a person to be considered as a white collar crime. Back in 1941, only two decades after universal suffrage was granted to women in the US, the status of women in the country was not at an equal footing with men. Unfortunately, the trend has continued till date, wherein we see gender differences regarding opportunities in all walks of life.

On the other hand, we have seen the gendered notion of crime acting like a bane for men as well. The understanding of the feminine qualities to be one where faultlessness and evil deeds is seen to be rare and almost masculine not only ends up wrongly profiling a number of unreported fraudsters, but also lets go of female corporate criminals scot-free. The gendered nature of viewing fraudsters is stereotyped in a way that views the crime as the ‘con man’ preying on the ‘gullible little old lady’ (Croall, 2003).

Even if these female corporate criminals are found to be guilty, they might be dealt with outside of court, which makes it seem like their offences are less serious (Croall, 2003).

In fact, in popular press, white-collar crimes committed by women are termed as “Pink-Collar Crimes,” and female white-collar criminals are called Gucci-criminals or Louis Vuitto-criminals.

A Norwegian study of 255 convicts presented in newspaper articles found that only 20 were female. However, the researchers Gottschalk and Glasø found it difficult to believe that such an egalitarian society would have such a huge discrepancy between the two sexes when it came to white-collar crimes being committed by them (Gottschalk and Glasø, 2013).

A research conducted by the Financial Services Authority in the UK in 2001 had found that men were willing to take more financial risks as compared to women. This suggests that women generally tend to think about the consequences of their actions more thoroughly and are less impulsive than men (Gottschalk and Glasø, 2013).

A study conducted in 2013 involving 83 corporate frauds showed that out of the four hundred thirty-six defendants, only thirty seven were female (Steffensmeier, Schwartz, and Rochea, 2013). It was also found that none of the groups of conspirators consisted of all female members, and they lacked an initiative to form their own groups.

This study is extremely important in the understanding of this essay, since it revealed a number of characteristics that were associated with white collar crimes and the involvement of women in it.

For starters, it revealed that female conspirators received a lesser amount of personal gain or profit as compared to their male counterparts, irrespective of their role in the crime. In fact, a few females did not even get any financial benefit out of their involvement, and instead did it for the job security. Some of these women were at equal footing in the professional sphere with their male counterparts.

Only a few women had major roles to play in the crime, and most of the times, they shared that position with a spouse or someone else with whom they had a close relationship (Gottschalk and Glasø, 2013).

Two main factors that had contributed to the involvement of females in the crimes were relationships and utility. Either they had a close personal relationship with one or more of the men involved in the crimes, or held a strategic position that allowed them access to and knowledge of specific confidential information.

Now, we cannot directly assume that women are more ethical than men in any way. Involvement in white collar crimes is affected by various factors other than just one’s gender.

A study had found that men tend to have higher levels of expertise and legitimate power than women do, specifically in the United States (Carli, 1999). Even though it has been more than two decades since this study was conducted, there are several factors proving that this factor still remains the same. One of the grave reasons for this phenomenon would be that people tend to perceive men as more authoritative and more in control than they perceive women. In fact, one of the main reasons why some women had conducted these white collar crimes was so that they could attain the “masculine” position and assert themselves as someone in control. This ensured their job security. Lombroso’s Masculinization theory supports this specific claim by stating that female crime is a result of the masculinization of female behaviour and that female criminals are biologically, psychologically and socially more “masculine” than non-criminal females (Islam, Banarjee, & Khatun, 2014).

A study was conducted in 1953 where incarcerated male embezzlers were questioned regarding their motive to commit these crimes. The most common reply was that they were borrowing money with the intention of repaying the employers. They also mentioned personal financial problems such as gambling debts.

On the other hand, another similar study conducted in the year 1981 using a sample of females incarcerated for financial crimes showed that they mostly had necessities relating to family members, such as medical bills that needed to be paid (Holtfreter, 2015).

This again highlights the issue that men may involve in financial crimes for reasons that can be deemed to be of a less serio0us nature than women who take part in these crimes.

Expanding on the issue of the seriousness of crimes committed by men and women, a study in which five thousand four hundred and fourty one fraudulent cases were investigated, from ninety three different nations, between the years 2002 and 2011, it was found that women were three rimes more likely to involve in white collar crimes that involved lesser financial damages. This does not necessarily point towards any socio-psychological differences between the sexes, but show that even to this day, men tend to hold more senior positions and tend to have greater opportunities at causing higher damage than women do.

One of the most burning issues at this point of time would be the way a lot of women’s involvement in white collar crimes are overlooked. In most cases, businessmen may register their assets under their spouse’s name to avoid legal consequences of the crime or conduct tax fraud. Since a spouse cannot be compelled to give evidence against their partner, this allows a lot of financial criminals to go scot free.

A 2019 survey conducted by the Indian National Bar Association (INBA) was rolled out to law firms, media houses and corporate houses in the form of objective questions and answers. It was found that 57% people believed that both males and females committed white collar crimes equally. However, a disparity was found wherein 42% people believed that only men committed white-collar crimes, while only a fleeting 1% believed that primarily women were involved in the same. This shows the disproportionate belief that men are involved in white-collar crimes at a higher rate than women, even in the twenty first century.

A lot of white-collar crimes committed by family businesses and small and medium sized enterprises are very commonly overlooked. A handful of women in these fields do tend to achieve positions of power and authority and achieve autonomy (Gottschalk and Glasø, 2013).

Sometimes, the registered owners’ businesses are actually fake fronts for the real work that is done by them. This may also hide the identity of a lot of female white-collar criminals (Gottschalk and Glasø, 2013).

During the mid-1900s surge in female independence, it was theorized that the increased socio-economic freedom being allowed to women is heightening the crime rates among them. Women had followed men into the workplace, and now they were following them into prisons. Irrespective of their gender, white collar criminals should be held equally responsible, since they cause a greater amount of harm to the society at large and they should face serious consequences for the same.

These issues can be looked into by making changes in the policies that deal with them. The government should indulge more criminologists and take their advice regarding the specific policy changes that can help make this situation better. Gendered policies in understanding and managing white-collar crimes can go a long way in reducing the sufferings of a large number of people.

REFERENCES

Croall, H. (2003). ‘Men’s business’? Some gender questions about while-collar crime. Centre for Crime and Justice Studies no. 53 Autumn.

Gottschalk, P., & Glasø, L. (2013). Gender in White-Collar Crime: An Empirical Study of Pink-Collar Criminals. International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences, 14.

Islam, M. J., Banarjee, S., & Khatun, N. (2014). Theories of Female Criminality: A criminological analysis. International Journal of Criminology and Sociological Theory, Vol. 7, No. 1, 8.

Malerba, A. (2021). Gender Difference in White-Collar Crime and the Importance of Gender Diversity. Academic Event Festival, Sacred Heart University, 16.

Singh, K., Kadan, V., Sharma, B., & Gandhi, B. (2019). White Collar Crime Survey. Indian National Bar Association (INBA).

A lot of white-collar crimes committed by family businesses and small and medium-sized enterprises are very commonly overlooked. A handful of women in these fields do tend to achieve positions of power and authority and achieve autonomy. Sometimes, the registered owners’ businesses are actually fake fronts for the real work that is done by them. This may also hide the identity of a lot of female white-collar criminals.

Tags: