How female and male offenders are
described by district courts
Rebecca Andersson
Human Rights 180 hp Bachelor Thesis 12 hp Semester 5, Spring 2020 Supervisor: Lena Karlbrink
2
Abstract
The purpose of this thesis is to examine the language used by district courts, more exactly the differences in language used regarding female and male offenders. Previous research has shown that there is a difference in punishment if you are a woman or if you are a man, often men are getting harsher punishments than women for most types of crimes. One explanation for this is the socially constructive perception of men and women and the norms individuals are expected to follow. This study will by using a comparative discourse analysis analyze judgements regarding assault of the normal degree, specifically looking into the language used to describe men and women and their actions.
Keywords: gender-norms, criminal justice, unequal treatment, sentence disparity, discrimination, Cultural norms, masculinity, femininity, perspectives of gender.
3 Table of contents 1. Introduction………...4 1.1 Background………5 1.2 Aim……….………....6 1.3 Research questions……….7 1.4 Definition of terms……….7
1.5 Relevance to Human Rights………...7
1.6 Limitations & Delimitations………...8
2. Previous research………...9
2.1 Differences in judgements……….10
2.2 Masculinity/ femininity………..11
2.3 The ideal /non-ideal victim and the ideal/ non-ideal offender………...13
2.4 Perception of female offenders………..13
3. Theory………...15
3.1 Social constructionism………...15
3.2 Chivalry and paternalism………...17
3.3 The evil woman hypothesis………...18
4. Method………..18
4.1 comparative discourse analysis………..19
4.2 Selection……….19
4.3 Approach………20
4.4 Ethical considerations……….21
5. Material………..21
6. Analysis……….22
6.1 How men and women’s actions and emotions are described……….23
6.2 How parents’ actions are described when accused of harming a child……..26
7. Result……….29
7.1 Differences found………...29
8. Conclusion……….32
8.1 Further research………...33
4
1 Introduction
Men and women are being perceived and treated differently by society, this happens in all parts of society even in institutions where gendered information should not play a part, one of these institutions are courtrooms. All individuals should be prosecuted for offenses committed on equal terms, but a significant amount of evidence has showed that even though the crimes committed are equivalent, men continue to be punished harder than women for most types of crimes. A possible explanation for this is the views and expectations of men and women, which contribute to an individual interpretation of their crimes. Duggan (2018) stated that men are often seen as the ideal perpetrator, women as the ideal victim. Violence is often more associated with men than women, cultural and social norms create certain perceptions of masculinity and femininity, different actions get linked to the genders depending on these perceptions. (Frazier, Bock and Henretta,1983 p. 306) Russell (2013) explained that the social norms humans carry around makes us in society believe that women are not dangerous or that they are not committing offenses, a female criminal is interfering with the established gender roles, women are meant to be passive and nurturing not aggressive or dangerous, however, if a woman commits a crime this is often seen as something she does because she is in an exposed situation, because she herself is a victim or because she is a deviant that has
abandoned the typical behavior of a woman. (Russell, 2013 p.7) If a woman breaks her gender role, the same principles, that men get harsher punishment, do not seem to be true, for
example, if a mother hurts a child, she might get harsher punishment than if a father hurts a child. Gender is an extra-legal factor being, something that is not controlled by law.
Comparing other extra-legal factors with gender, gender seems to be the one that has the most influence in judgement, thus of high importance to study. (Fernando Rodriguez, Curry & Lee, 2006 p.319)
In this thesis a comparative discourse analysis will be used to analyze the language used by two district courts in Sweden, Malmo district court, and Gothenburg district court. By doing this see if the language use differs depending on the gender of the offender, giving further evidence of the different treatment of the genders by courts and showcasing that the
perception of females and males shines through in the language use of the district courts. The judgements that will be analyzed in this thesis will all be about assault of the normal degree which will be further explained under the material. Exploring this research field, it was found
5
that most research is quantitative. Also there seems to be lacking research that analyze
language use by different criminal justice officials. This is the gap this thesis intends to fill by doing a qualitative comparative discourse analysis comparing and analyzing the language used by Malmo, and Gothenburg district courts. By doing this demonstrating that the language used by district courts in Sweden differ depending on gender.
1.1 Background
Researchers have long been interested if men and women are getting different treatment by criminal justice officials, research has been done to study judges, police, public prosecutors, etc. (Turner & Johnson, 2006 p.1) Following, some of the research will be mentioned shortly. Jeffries, Fletcher & Newbold (2003) found that women were given shorter sentencing then men because of pre-sentence recommendations made earlier in the judicial prosses. (Jeffries, Fletcher & Newbold, 2003 p. 342) McKimmie et al., (2013) made a study that examined stereotypically and how this influenced case and defendant- relevant data processing, and in extension guilt related judgements, they found that only men, that was stereotypical for the type of crime were more likely to be seen as guilty. (McKimmie et al., 2013 p.343,347) Turner & Johnson (2006) examined the gender differences in bail amount set, they found that women got a smaller bail amount set to pay than men. (Turner & Johnson, 2006 p.8) The research has shown a similar outcome for many years, that women are in most cases being more leniently treated by criminal justice officials, Visher (1983) found that police officers arrest decisions were influenced by gender, however, they found that older women were more softly treated than younger women and that, depending on if the crime was of a more
masculine or feminine nature, the arrest decisions differed. They explained this trend with paternalism and chivalry, older women were more likely to be treated with chivalry while younger women with a harder attitude and paternalism, making sure that the young women do not continue to violate their gender-roles. (Visher,1983 p.15,17) Frazier, Bock, & Henretta (1983) found that women get more lenient treatment and one of the main reasons to this is the probation officers recommendations, this because probation officer seem to be affected by the traditional gender roles and with this also believe that prison is more appropriate for men than women. (Frazier, Bock and Henretta, 1983 p. 305) When women violate their gender-roles they seem to get harsher punishment instead of the more lenient treatment they get in many
6
other offenses. Weare (2013) explained that women who commit a masculine type of crime, for example, murder will be labeled as mad, bad or a victim, she means that this is a result of how society views a woman, the gender-role of a woman is to be soft and non-aggressive in contrast to men. (Weare, 2013 p.337) Russell & Kraus (2016) examined how strangers
percept victims of domestic assault and the perpetrator, the people participating were asked to analyze a case scenario which depicted domestic assault, the result was that if the victim was a woman and the offender a man the sentence and charges against the offender was higher than if the perpetrator was a woman and the victim a man, they also found that the male was more likely to be perceived as the one to start an attack and to be more aggressive than women. (Russell & Kraus, 2016 p.679)
What this thesis intends to contribute to this field, with a discourse analysis, is to examine what words men and women are being described with, how their actions are being described and to what extent men and women seem to be trusted by Malmo and Gothenburg district courts, since this is something that are lacking in this field. If differences are found people might become more aware of this issue and making a discriminatory treatment visible.
1.2 Aim
The aim of this thesis is to analyze the language used by Malmo and Gothenburg district courts to describe perpetrators, comparing male and female offenders. More precisely to look at the difference in the language used regarding male and female perpetrators looking at the norm-based descriptions of men in relation to women. This description will also be looked into regarding male and female parents, to see if the result of the thesis will be the same or differ regarding, first male and female, then male and female parents.
If differences are found, hopefully this thesis will illustrate an issue in the judiciary that many are not aware of and give a deeper understanding of the issue. This will be done by using a comparative discourse analysis where judgments that have been gathered from two district courts will be compared and analyzed.
The hypothesis of this thesis is the following: By using a comparative discourse analysis differences in the language used by Swedish district courts to describe men and women will
7
be found. Giving evidence for the social norms that result in different treatment of the genders in the judicial system.
1.3 Research
Questions
Two questions arise from the aim in this thesis, these are:
1. Are violent acts described differently in Swedish district courts’ rulings depending on one’s gender?
2. If violent acts are described differently in Swedish district courts’ rulings, do the same patterns show if you are a parent?
1.4 Definition of terms
Assault of the normal degree: This is described under chapter 3 § 5 of the Swedish penal code it follows:
“A person who inflicts bodily injury, illness or pain upon another or renders him or her powerless or in a similar helpless state, shall be sentenced for assault to imprisonment for at most two years or, if the crime is petty, to a fine or
imprisonment for at most six months.” (Law 1998:393)
Offender: Offender is someone that breaks the law. However, in this thesis offender will contain all that is accused of committing a crime, meaning that all individuals that are mentioned as offender in this thesis is not sentenced or are, in a legal sense, guilty of the crimes they are accused for.
8
All people should be equal before the law and be equally treated regardless of what gender the individual belongs to, this is a human right. This is explained in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, article 14:
“All persons shall be equal before the courts and tribunals. In the determination of any criminal charge against him, or of his rights and obligations in a suit at law, everyone shall be entitled to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law.” (Eriksson & Mårsäter,
2015 p.158)
And in article 26 in the same covenant
“All persons are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. In this respect, the law shall prohibit any
discrimination and guarantee to all persons equal and effective protection against discrimination on any ground such as race, colour, sex, language, religion
political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.” (Eriksson & Mårsäter, 2015 p.160)
When it comes to discrimination issues men are often overlooked, women are often the ones that are being focused on, of course, there are many injustices towards women, these are important issues to focus on as well. However, this does not mean that the injustices, whatever the reason, towards men, should be overlooked, one of the places where men are getting an unjust treatment is in courts. However, depending on the offense women are also getting an unjust treatment, in this thesis both male and female discriminatory issues in district courts will be focused on.
1.6 Limitations & Delimitations
Limitations: Only 12 judgements were left of 29 recived after having gone through them, this since the part of the court assessment and the ground of the judgements were non-existing to minimal, without these parts there is no real possibility to make a thorough discourse analysis. Also, some judgements were deselected since the judgements were handling several offenses
9
not only assault of the normal degree, this brings a risk that the offenders' actions and the offender themselves are being described in relation to more than just assault of the normal degree. However, even though the basis of this research is not big, and only 12 judgement has been analyzed and compared, qualitative research often does not need a vast sample size, as long as there is enough data to research or in this case analyze to get an answer to the research question. (Sandelowski,1995 p.179) Qualitative research in this area is sparse, creating a difficulty regarding former research to lean on, however, it also creates a gap that deserves further attention, the same goes for Swedish research in this field, resulting in research from other western states, not only Swedish, being selected to use in the previous research section.
Delimitations: Only one felony has been selected to analyze, being assault of the normal degree, the judgements are selected from the years 2018-2020 as to give a more accurate representation of the present. Factors as former criminal sentences have been deliberately disregarded for the reason that the time for writing this thesis is limited as is the space of this thesis. Another difficulty worth mentioning is that the judgements are on Swedish and will be translated, by translating text one risks meanings and words to be lost in translation, words depending on language can have a different power to them. As Napu & Hasan (2019) mentioned, when translating, especially for beginners they tend to translate a text word for word, thus risking problems of the translations to arise and meanings of words to shift. (Napu & Hasan, 2019 p.1) An attempt to minimize this will be made by thoroughly reading the text and translating it with care and keeping in mind the above-mentioned risk. Lastly, the
correlation of the gender of the offender and the gender of the victim will not be thoroughly analyzed, it might be mentioned if it is of importance for the analysis, however, going to deeply into that relation is not possible with the time frame and space limitation of the thesis.
2 Previous research
In this chapter previous research will be presented, this research shows that men and women are being differently treated by the criminal justice system, men are in a greater extent judged more harshly while women are being treated with leniency, with the exception of women who break their gender role and act un-ladylike demonstrating too much aggressiveness and toughness (Frazier, Bock and Henretta,1983 p. 306-307) The research gathered is from different western states not only Sweden since Swedish research in this field is limited.
10
Because of this one must take into consideration the historical and cultural differences of the states when comparing the research with the result of the analysis in this thesis. As Burr (2003) said the way individuals perceive the world depends on when and where you live. However, even though all states have their own history and culture, western states often share many similarities, thus western states were actively chosen before developing states.
The previous research has been grouped into four parts, these are: Differences in judgment,
Masculinity/Femininity & gender roles, the ideal/non-ideal victim, and the ideal/ non-ideal offender and lastly, perception of female offenders.
2.1 Differences in judgements
Several researchers have seen a trend where men are getting more severe punishments for similar crimes that women. Here a few of these will be mentioned, first, there is Jeffries, Fletcher & Newbold (2003) who made a study that contrasted the sentencing outcomes of adult men and women that were sentenced in New Zealand’s Christchurch High and District Courts over a seven-year period. Matched samplings provided a sample of men and women that in most aspects were similar. Examples of the similarities are the type of offense, the plea, and the offender's role. However, they bring forth a few differences as well, for example, men had a more extensive and serious criminal history than that of women and the remand outcome of men were more severe than that of women, also the pre-sentence reports had content that was more favorable to the female offenders than that of the male offender. (Jeffries, Fletcher & Newbold, 2003 p.345,347)
Jeffries, Fletcher & Newbold (2003) made a Hierarchical regression analysis of the samples and found that the effect of sex in the juridical decision-making proses is a multifaceted process requiring the passage of convicts through many processes in which several juridical agents evaluate them. (ex. judges, probation officers, etc.). By using path analysis, they provided an understanding of how this cycle worked along lines of sex, they found that the difference between the sexes regarding the seriousness of criminal histories made up a part of the explanation for why the sentencing outcomes between man and women differ, however, they also found that sex-based differences at the stage of the penalty were influenced early in
11
the juridical proses by sex-based decision making. The impact of sex and incarceration
decisions, for example, was primarily funneled through recommendations for pre-sentence. In addition, they say that the pre-sentence reports have a gendered nature and are more prone to identify women as being in poor health, which in turn made the sentencing of women even more lenient. Lastly, they mention that even with the above-mentioned variable that could influence judgments (recommendations made by pre-sentencing reports, criminal history, etc.) this did not account for why women got shorter prison terms than men, so women are not only less likely to end up in jail but when they are given a jail sentence they are getting a
noticeable shorter sentence than a man. (Jeffries, Fletcher & Newbold, 2003 p.347)
It is not only in the prison sentencing and the length of prison sentencings there is a
difference, as Turner & Johnson’s (2006) study shows, they explore the differences of gender and judgements, however, they look into the bail amount set. With data that they gathered from District Court files of Lancaster County, Nebraska in the United States, they got cases with 708 males and 161 females. Going through the cases and counting for the legal factor that has a legitimate role setting the bail amount, such as previous criminal records and the seriousness of the crimes they still found that extra-legal factors ( gender, age, ethnicity) also plays a role in the bail amount set. (Turner & Johnson, 2006 p.5)
They found that non-white and white females both in general receive lower bail amount set then white males. However, white females had a much lower bail amount then white males. While non-white females only had somewhat less then that of white males. And the persons who had the highest bail amount set was non-white males. These results show that not only the extra-legal factor gender plays a part regarding differences in bail. (Turner & Johnson, 2006 p.8-9)
2.2 Masculinity/Femininity & gender roles
Russell & Kraus (2016) wrote about heteronormativity, gender roles, and hegemonic masculinity and they believe that these gendered stereotypes are a reason for the
inconsistencies when evaluating offenders of different genders. They refer to Connell (1995) who say that hegemonic masculinity is a major aspect of our social construct that maintains a hierarchical patriarchal order where masculinity is the ruling sexuality and other sexualities are inferior, he believes that the heteronormative assumptions regarding sexuality and the
12
hegemonic masculinity continue to establish the societal image of masculinity and maleness. According to Russell & Kraus (2016) This tradition also incorporates idealized aspects of femininity and masculinity, in which women are considered physically weak and expected to demonstrate obedience while men are expected to use their brute power, influence, and violence in the face of confrontation. (Russell & Kraus, 2016 p. 680) However, while
violence is one component of the gender-role belief and masculinity, it is often assumed that men would be paternalistic and defend subordinates which may contribute to greater leniency granted to women within criminal justice. These rules of chivalry can lead to tougher
punishment for men when they target a woman since they are seen as weaker and requiring protection because of their femininity (Russell & Kraus, 2016 p. 680-681; Curry et al.,2004 p.336)
Another study about gender roles and the correlation of women getting a more lenient
treatment and a man getting harsher treatment by the justice system is the one Frazier, Bock, & Henretta (1983) wrote. They found that there is a clear connection between the final provisions of the penal court and the offender’s gender and regardless of all possible factors, being female significantly increases the probability of receiving a recommendation for a non-incarceration sentence which, in essence, is the primary determinant of the final outcome of the criminal court. According to them females are more leniently treated in final criminal court dispositions and this is coherent with the prediction of chivalry. Their analysis reveals that a significant proportion of the gender impact exists through the presentation advice of the probation officers. Among other possible factors, being female increases the probability of a referral for non-incarceration by 22 %, and the incorporation of this recommendation into the sentencing process eliminates by about a third the reported impact of gender on the
regulations. These results offer some credibility to perceptions that criminal court rulings are affected by conventional gender role socialization. (Frazier, Bock, & Henretta, 1983 p-315-317) A more recent study conducted by Ahola, Christianson, & Hellström (2009) found that facial features play a role in the juridical system, they made an experimental study with 232 undergraduate psychology students, half were given a booklet with pictures of female
defendants and the other half with male defendants, the defendants were of Nordic appearance and were young adults between the age of twenty and twenty-six. The crimes the defendant was on trial for ranged from petty crime to grave assault and murder, all the defendants claimed they were innocent. (Ahola, Christianson, & Hellström, 2009 p. 94-95) Later on, the student was asked about the credibility of the defendants which gave the result that the female
13
defendants were much less likely to be found guilty and were seen as more credible then the male defendants, the study also showed, if only slightly, that females that were rated as more attractive were even more leniently treated. (Ahola, Christianson and Hellström, 2009 p. 90)
2.3 The ideal /non-ideal victim and the ideal/ non-ideal offender
Society perceives male and female offenders differently, as mentioned above, females are often perceived as victims instead of offenders and males as offenders instead of victims even when this is not the case. Duggan (2018) paints a good picture of the ideal/no-ideal victim also the ideal and non-ideal offender. The ideal victim is someone that weak, very old or very young most often a woman, they are doing something respectable, they are in an environment that they cannot be blamed for being at, for example, walking to the bank at daytime. The offender is a brute, most often a man and the victim and offender have no relationship. The non-ideal victim, however, is most often a man, strong, not doing a respectable project, for example, drinking at a bar, the offender and victim are equally big, the victim should have been protecting himself by not being in the situation and he has a relationship to the offender. (Duggan, 2018 p.12-13) This gives an indication as to why men are getting more severe punishment than women, women are victims, and men are the offenders. Women quite simply are seen as being less violent than men (Russell, 2013) and when a woman actually commit a crime it is often minimized by thinking that she is mad, bad, or a victim.(Weare, 2013) which will be more thoroughly explained further down in this chapter. In opposition to the ideal victim there is the ideal offender, the ideal offender is most often a man that inhabits specific masculine traits as opposed to the victimhood femininity holds, he as big and is seen as a predator. (Duggan, 2018 p.19,86) This might explain why men are being judged more severely for violent acts and predatory crimes. (Sinden, 1981 p.49-50)
2.4 Perception of female offenders
Weare (2013) gives a thorough explanation of some ways women offenders, in her case murderers, are perceived, she means that women who commit murder, are perceived as either mad bad or a victim, she explains these perceptions as following. The mad woman:
historically female violence has been medicated since there was a firm belief that the reason she was violent or committed crimes was because of her mental instability or because of
14
hormones that were uncontrollable, female criminals were described as abnormal. Weare (2013) means that this idea has not left and is still visible in the modern age, she takes infanticide, (killing one’s own child before the age of 12 months), as an example. Women who commit infanticide are in theory required to suffer from puerperal psychosis, which is a rare condition that affects few women, about one up to two women of 1000, most often within the first weeks after childbirth. Puerperal psychosis has several symptoms ranging from mania, delusions psychosis, and severe depression. However, research suggests that about half the cases of women who commit infanticide have no mental illnesses. (Allison & Wilczynski 1994 p. 206-208) Thus, the women who are being convicted without mental disorders, are being labeled “mad” without evidence to support this. Labeling like this reinforce the gender stereotypes instead of challenging it. A conviction of influence without the mental illness that is required for the conviction results in the woman not getting a prison sentence however with the cost of being labeled mad, this Weare (2013) suggested that the Criminal Justice System rather label a mother who has committed this type of crime mad than recognize her
accountability for her actions. (Weare, 2013 p. 343-345)
When Weare (2013) continues to explain the bad women, she means that there is an extra element of bad that enforce the crime committed more than needed. The extra element of bad is due to the violation of numerous violations of gender norms and societal norms, making it problematic to label the woman mad or a victim. For example, a woman who kills her child without a mental disorder that would get her categorized as mad, will instead be categorized as bad, by killing her child without a mental illness she is, without any “excuse” violating the norm of the role of a woman, that is being a good, nurturing and loving mother. (Weare, 2013 p. 346)
Lastly, Weare (2013) talks about the perception of women being victims, more precisely she talks about the battered women syndrome, being, women who are battered in relationships, and because of this kill or harms the person battering them because they lose control. Weare (2013) means that by using the battered women syndrome as the reason or excuse for the killing, women once again are not being held responsible for their actions, they are instead victims, the deed they have done is because they were in a position of a victim. Furthermore, women who are not suffering from the battered woman syndrome, may use this excuse, many times this is not questioned since by doing so she conforms to the gender norms and suitable femininity. By many, women are not seen as being able to kill if they are not a victim, bad or
15
mad. That would mean that they would be responsible for their acts, and by that breaking the gender and societal norms. (Weare, 2013 p.239–241)
3 Theory
The theories that will work as a lens to look at the judgements gathered and analyzed with discourse analysis are social constructionism and chivalry/paternalism theory. Theories are a tool used to understand events and clarify different trends. The theory chosen in a thesis will influence how the thesis is performed and formulated furthermore it will influence how the results are interpreted (Burr, 2003 p.3; Winther Jörgensen & Phillips 2000 p.142)
First social constructionism will be explained later chivalry and paternalism which have been chosen to be written together since these are similar in many ways, with some differences, this will be explained in more detail further down. Also, a strand of paternalism called the evil women hypothesis will be presented.
3.1 Social constructionism
There is no single description to describe social constructionism, it can be seen more as a family of resemblances, Stob (2008) makes a parable that might help one understand, he said that humans use symbols that build our social realities, similar to the way a contractor uses the materials and labor that build a house. Therefore, the realities that we face are not inherent in nature but are constructed discursively and can thus be reconstructed as we alter our
discursive customs. (Stob,2008 p.131) Also Burr (2003) gives a well-formulated explanation of social constructionism and some key ideas of social constructionism, first social
constructionism takes a stance against the knowledge that is taken for granted, Burr (2003) means that the way we understand the world is taken for granted, this includes how we
understand ourselves. Social constructionism can be seen as an invitation for individuals to be critical of the “truth” of the world, to help individuals to challenge the traditional knowledge, instead look at the world with an unbiased and objective view. Social constructionism makes us cautious and skeptical of norms that dictate how the world is (Burr, 2003 p.2-3) this last sentence gives an excellent description of why social constructionism has been chosen as one
16
of the theoretical lenses to look at the language used in judgements, the language used can be seen as a social construct in itself.
The second key perception of social constructionism Burr (2003) brings will be explained shortly since it is not of much importance for this thesis, however, it is important for the understanding of social constructionism, which is the cultural and historical specificity. In short, the way individuals perceive the world depends on when and where you live, children are a good example of both the culture and history part. What is concorded normal for a child today (playing, going to schools etc.) was not normal if we go back not so far in time, children back then were adults in a smaller body, they worked and helper with chores, education was mostly not an option. Regarding the cultural part, the same example can be used, in some parts of the world it is considered normal that children work and help their parents instead of going to school, getting an education, and having the freedom to play as people in the richer states take for granted. (Burr, 2003 p. 3)
The third assumption burr (2003) mentions is that knowledge is continued by social practices. When our understanding and knowledge of the world is not obtained from nature as it really is in the world, where does it then come from? A social constructionist answer to this would be that individuals fabricate amongst themselves. Through daily life and socials connections, this is where the knowledge becomes fabricated, language is one of the most interesting things from a social constructionist view, language is one of the social interactions that particularly create fabricated knowledge. By socializing with other people that share visions and
knowledge, it is therefore not an objective observation of the society and world that create knowledge and visions it is instead a social prosses that create our agreed ways of
understanding the world. (Burr, 2003 p.3) As mentioned here, language is seen to be a big part of the social constructionist explanation of how we as a society share knowledge, making a parallel with this thesis the shared knowledge of how we perceive male and female
offenders might shine through the in the language used in district court assessment regarding men and women.
Lastly Burr (2003) brings up that social action and knowledge go together; the truth is built socially by intertwined patterns of actions in communication. Truth is characterized not so much by individual acts within a social group or society, but by complex and coordinated patterns of continuing behavior. Burr (2003) gives the Temperance movement as an example
17
before this movement people who were drunk were seen as entirely responsible of their actions and often were put in jail just because they were drunk, today we see this type of drunkenness as an illness and individuals that are under its influence many times are not seen as entirely responsible since they are victims of a sort of drug addiction, instead they get help with their addiction. (Burr, 2003 p. 3-4)
3.2 Chivalry, paternalism
Chivalry and paternalism are closely related to some key differences. Paternalism is a variant of chivalry, the chivalry hypothesis suggests that in the criminal justice system that is (at least was) overwhelmingly male-dominated, the men in the higher roles in the criminal justice system have a chivalrous attitude against women offenders resulting in them treating women with greater leniency than they do male offender. The idea is that women are considered to be unable to participate in serious criminal activity thus are put in a position of high esteem, the man’s role here is to be a protector of the woman, to act chivalry and by this minimize the pain and suffering for the woman, that is considered to not be able to cope with, for example, prison. The gender stereotypes make men the protector of women who are considered weaker and sometimes childlike thus in need of male protection. Moreover, the women because of the view of them, are not considered completely responsible for their criminal actions. (Turner & Johnson, 2006 p.4; Fernando Rodriguez, Curry & Lee, 2006 p.320-321)
Paternalism, as mentioned before, is a variant of the chivalry thesis and more complicated, since the chivalry thesis does not provide an explanation of the research that has found certain circumstances where women get harsher punishment then men some analyst implemented paternalism. Turner & Johnson (2006) explained that both chivalry paternalism suggests that women are seen, predominantly by men, as childlike and therefore not fully responsible for their actions and need safeguarding, this does not only regard criminal actions but others as well. Moreover, paternalism and chivalry share the view that women are considered as the “weaker sex” thus cannot handle a prison environment or the disgrace that a criminal record provides. Where paternalism differs from chivalry is that it does not necessarily result in women getting a more lenient sentence or treatment, it might instead result in women getting harsher punishments as a way to hold women in traditional gender roles, a female should be pure, feminine and submissive. Simply put, women should not violate traditional roles that are
18
expected of them and if they do, they might be treated more severely the men. (Turner & Johnson, 2006 p.4; Moulds, 1978 p.418)
3.3 Evil woman hypothesis
Paternalism has a strand called the “evil woman” hypothesis this hypothesis claims if women transgress the expectations they have on them for being women and act in a manner that is not “lady-like” they might get denied the chivalry that is reserved for “normal women”. The evil woman can be seen to make a double violation, first the violation of the legal norm, by committing a crime, and second, they are violating the gender norm by acting unladylike. (Turner & Johnson, 2006 p.4-5; Fernando Rodriguez, Curry & Lee, 2006 p.322) Being
ladylike includes being passive, respectable, and being submissive, being unladylike is when a woman is demonstrating, toughness, and aggressiveness. While men are to some degree
encouraged to show aggressiveness, since it fits with the masculine gender role while females are socialized to be nonaggressive. (Frazier, Bock and Henretta,1983 p. 306-307; Turner & Johnson, 2006 p.4-5)
Chivalry and paternalism and its component evil women hypothesis, as a complement to social constructionism, might help to give an explanation of the language used by the district courts, why men and women are being described in manners that on one hand increases their aggressive and criminal behavior and on the other hand minimize the agency of this behavior. The evil woman hypothesis might give some insight on why females that in most assault cases with no children involved are being more leniently treated, talked about and described, are being treated in the opposite way when children are involved. A woman hurting a child, more precisely, a mother hurting a child is breaking the gender rules in one of the most apparent ways, a mother should be caring for and loving children not harming them.
4 Method
In this chapter the following will be presented, comparative discourse analysis, which is the method used to analyze the material, followed by selection where an explanation on how the material and the important parts of the material was selected, then the approach is explained, and lastly ethical considerations are mentioned.
19
4.1 Comparative discourse analysis
This thesis is qualitative, that being a study that emphasizes words instead of numerical data that a quantitative study would, a qualitative research strategy is said to be interpretive, inductive, and constructionistic. (Bryman, 2008 p.340) Qualitative studies bring with them some difficulties, one of which is the difficulty to generalize the research, meaning that the research done in this thesis might not be completely representative regarding all district courts in Sweden. However, as Bryman (2008) wrote, the result of a qualitative research shall
instead be generalized to theory and not populations as a quantitative research does. (Bryman, 2008 p.369)
A comparative method and a discourse analysis will be the scientific method used to collect and interpret the data in this thesis. The comparative method is when you take two or more cases and make a comparison of these, this is done because one wants to create a greater understanding of certain social phenomena. (Bryman, 2008 p. 80- 85) Discourse analysis stresses the role language has as a power resource, it relates to socio-cultural change and ideology. (Bryman, 2008 p.448) Comparative discourse analysis is a suitable method for this thesis since the purpose is to examine how female and male perpetrators are being described and how they are talked about by judges in swedish district courts and make a comparison of these. The language that will be analyzed is the language that minimizes the agency of the crimes or enlarges the agency of the crimes committed, also words that describe the offenders as more or less aggressive, for example, angry, violent, victim, brute or confused, scared, regretful, etc., also described emotions of the offenders and victims will be looked into. There will be some discourse analysis and comparison of children and adults as well, however, this will only be a small part since the main issue is the language used to describe adult females and males. Although some of the judgements involve children and it serves some importance to bring forth the language used while talking about children and compare this to the relation, they hold with the adult depending on the adult’s gender.
20
Malmo and Gothenburg’s district courts were reached out to get judgements from them, District courts have been used since they are the first agency to handle criminal cases and disputes, providing a more thorough and detailed judgment and a clearer description, thus, of the advantage of using discourse analysis. A request was made to only hand out judgments that were about the assault of the normal degree, the question was asked if the district courts could make the sample 50 % male and 50% female, this couldn’t be done since the database where they have their judgements did not provide for a search function of whether the accused is male or female. Besides the request that the judgements should be assault of the normal degree the judgements are a random selection. First, there were 29 judgements however after going through them only 12 remained so there was a loss of 17 judgements, this for the reason that the courts' assessment and the ground of the judgements where non-existing or extremely minimal making a discourse analysis hard to execute, also a few of the judgements had offenders that were on trial for more offenses than just assault of the normal degree, these were unselected as well, since these judgements would bring a risk that the language use is rougher because of the numerous offenses the offender was on trial for instead of only assault of the normal degree, which is the offense this thesis focuses on. A choice was made to keep the judgements were the accused was found not guilty, since these judgements also need justification by the district court, thus, making the possibility to find language use that is useful for this thesis plausible. One of the judgements is about two offenders, two parents, a mother and father that are on trial for harming their children, this judgement was kept since the construct of the two parents in relation to each other might give a strong testimony for the difference in language use looked for.
4.4 Approach
The approach will be to read the entirety of the judgements, even if the most important part of the judgements are the court's assessments on the guilt. However, by reading the entirety there might be parts that can be of importance for the thesis. The judgements will be closely
scrutinized more than once, by reading the judgement more than one time there might appear new information that was missed the first time reding it.
The purpose of discourse analysis is to find central themes in written text or the spoken word. (Bryman, 2008 p. 483) Therefore while reding the judgements important words, expressions
21
and paragraphs will be highlighted and gone through again later. After going through the paragraphs the ones that display words and sentences of the importance for the thesis will be analyzed in the text. There will also be some comparisons made between the cases in
conjunction with the discourse analysis. Positive and negative themes and words that minimize or strengthens the agency of the offenders will be looked for, such as, anger, aggression, disappointment, or regret these will later be described in the analysis and result.
4.5 Ethical considerations
This study uses judgements as the material to analyze, judgements contain data that is highly personal, such as names and social security numbers which might create an ethical problem. however, the personal integrity of the individuals in the judgements is valued, meaning that by just reading this thesis no individual will be exposed. Information such as the social security numbers will not be revealed, and the names will be shortened to the initials of the offenders and victims thus not risking that people might be able to look them up with that information. However, the judgement number will be used as references since this is required. Most judgements in Sweden are public documents, meaning that anyone who wants
information of this sort can ask for these documents. Nevertheless, no information regarding any individuals will be shared in any way, the information these judgements hold will only be used in this thesis (with the exception of the social security number and names of the people which will not be used) by doing this, the individuals' identities are protected and will not be exposed from only reding this thesis. The information that will be used in this thesis is what the individuals have done or have been accused of, and what the victims have been exposed to. And of course, the language used to describe the individuals, deeds, and emotions.
5 Material
The material that will be used to analyze in this thesis is judgements from two district courts in Sweden, Malmo district court, and Gothenburg district court. 29 judgements were received, 20 from Malmo, and 9 from Gothenburg. After going through the Judgements only 12 were kept being used to analyze, where the focus will be on the ground of the judgements. As Granström (2006) said the ground of judgement can be seen as the core of a judgement.
22
male and female offenders, however that requires the court's assessment and grounds of judgement to be large enough for a basis to analyze. The judgements selected range from 2018-2020, this was asked for the district courts to arrange so the material is close in time to minimize the risk of new laws being established. With new laws established there is a risk of the present not being truthfully represented. All the judgements are about assault of the normal degree. The reason only one type of crime was selected is, first because of the time and space limit this thesis is written under, nevertheless, it is also about making the material as closely related to each other as possible, by only having one type of crime there is some certainty that the criminal acts are somewhat related in likeness, making a comparative discourse analysis more accurate than if one would select, for example, gross assault and assault of the normal degree and comparing them. The judgements will be further described and discussed in the analysis chapter.
District courts were selected to receive the judgements from since they are the first agency handling criminal cases and disputes, they have a more thorough and detailed judgement and giving a more clear description which is an advantage while using a discourse analysis, the court of appeal and the supreme court are the agencies that go through the judgements if an individual wants to appeal against the judgement they have been given. (Sveriges domstolar, 2019)
6 Analysis
Going through the judgements there were some clear differences in the language used to describe the men and women, as an example, the men’s actions were much more likely to be described with words that enhanced their violence, for example, instead of writing “he hit him in the face”, it was written, “he hit him with a heavy blow or with force in the face”. This type of language was seen in many of the judgement where the offender was male an in none of the judgements were the offender was female. Also, the word violence is used more
frequently in the judgements where the offenders are male, and females are often described as more trustworthy, lastly in the judgements where the offenders are men and the victims' women men were less likely to be seen as acting in self-defense. However, if the offender is a parent that hit a child the roles turned, of the judgements where the offenders are parents and hitting a child women are being talked about in a much more harsh manner and are also
23
judged harder than the men, and in these cases, women instead of men seem to be seen as less trustworthy. A possible explanation to this difference can be explained with social
constructionism, women are expected to behave a certain way, as are men, however a woman that is a mother is seen in a different way, as Weare (2013) wrote, mothers are expected to protect children not hurting them. By hurting a child as a mother, the expected behavior of the mother is broken. This will be further explored further down in the analysis and in the result chapter.
6.1 How men and women’s actions and emotions are described
One of the most visible differences in the language used to describe the events of men and woman as offenders are that the men’s violent acts were described with words that enhanced the violence used which in turn enhance the seriousness of the crime. In judgement B 280-19 (male) HM hit two men in the face with his fist because of an argument that arose, the court is using the phrasing “heavy blow” to describe the hit HM gave one of the men. RP, the man that was hit with the heavy blow received a cracked and swollen lip. HMs hit was described as a “heavy blow” and a “powerful” hit several times through the judgement. Men are many times seen to be somewhat encouraged to be aggressive, it plays a part in masculinity, people in society are brought up with the idea that men are, by nature or nurture, aggressive, have troubles with emotional expression and are dominant. (Frazier, Bock and Henretta,1983 p. 306; Harmful masculinity and violence, 2020) Taking this in relation with a case where a female is the offender and the violence creates similar injuries one can see that the language uses in this judgement is more forgiving, that is in judgement B 6617-19 (female) EA hit her boyfriend WK, who she had an on and off again relationship to, not once but twice, the first time she got jealous since WK was talking to another woman in the bar, it is described in the judgement that WK had been unfaithful before in their relationship, EA went up to WK and hit him in the face with her fist, it struck his nose and resulted in a gash on the bridge of his nose. In this event EA is described as “disappointed” at WK since he was talking to another woman, not angry. Disappointed is a word that minimizes the gravity of the violence EA was using, this might be because in some situations, female aggression especially physical
aggression is assessed less disapprovingly then male aggression, however, depending on the situation. (Bogaerts, 1997 p.11) In this judgement the woman is described as in being in a sort of emotional distress, her disappointment can almost be assessed as being a valid excuse for
24
her to hit WK. The next event happened later that night when the couple was in a taxi on their way home. EA and WK had made up for the moment and continued the night, EA later saw WK talking to a group of women he was acquainted to. This made EA jealous again. When they got in the taxi EA started to hit WK repeatedly with both fists, however, the violence was not described with more than “hits” even though the violence committed caused WK to get several injuries including the one he got from the first event at the bar. WK had stated that he tried to get help from the taxi driver that just shook his or her head at the situation. The taxi drivers' rection, if true, gives a clear view of the social construct of men and women. Russell & Kraus (2016) mentioned an analysis of male victims and how the media often portray them. Often they are portrayed with humor and/or their victimization is minimized. In this situation the violent act seems to be reduced in contrast to case B 280-19, and the fact that WK had been unfaithful in correlation with the description of her being disappointed and jealous is described in a way making it seem as her violent acts were more understandable. There are several more cases where the violence men use is being described as more powerful and forceful painting a picture of the male aggression being more severe. In cases, B 4931-19 and B 1054-19 (both male) the violence as in the first case is described in such a manner that the violent acts seem more severe if comparing them to the judgement of women. In case B 4931-19 EF shoves NE resulting in NE falling and hitting his head, EF does this because he sees NE kissing a girl EF has a romantic relationship too, the violent act is because of jealousy as in the case B 6617-19 where the woman hit the man. The shove EF gives NE gets described as “very forceful”, EF himself said that he felt violated and upset however EFs emotions gets described as “indifferent” by the court in its assessment, not as disappointed or hurt. Again, men seem to be seen as having troubles with their emotional expressions in contrast to women, it is more likely to believe that a woman is in any sort of emotional distress. (Wall and Kristjanson, 2005 p.88) The same pattern is shown in judgement B 1054-19 (male) where the violent acts are being described as forceful, one can note the language used here enhances the violence in the act, the offender, AU hit YK in the face and head several times, this event is mentioned numerous times through the courts' assessment being described as hard, heavy and forceful blows. Compare this to judgement B 4164-19 (female) where the offender PW carries out a greatly similar violent act as AU in judgement B 1054-19. PW also hits the victim with several blows that hit the face, head, and the back of the head. In the court's assessment this act is only described once in contrast to the previous judgment, no words that enhance the violence is used and they mention that PW regrets her behavior and that she has called the victim and asked for forgiveness. By showing remorse and by asking for
25
forgiveness this woman is not departing from the gender role she as a woman has, meaning that she is a candidate to be treated with chivalry. (Fernando Rodriguez, Curry & Lee, 2006 p. 318-319)
It is not only that men and women’s acts are being described differently, but their emotional states are also something that is being described with different words, as mentioned in judgement B 6617-19 where the woman is being described as disappointed on the man she hits and in judgement B 4931-19 where the man in a similar situation as the women is being described as indifferent. Another case revolving around jealousy is judgement B 4756-18 (male). This case shares similarities with both the above mentioned especially judgement 6617-19. A jealous man at a dance performance who is not trusting his girlfriend and is accusing her of being unfaithful, according to the woman he shoved and kicked her while lying down, according to the offender he only shoved her. However, this is not the most important part, the important part is that the man was being described as aggressive and angry a number of times, this might be absolutely true, none the less the woman in judgement 6617-19 who committed a fairly similar violent act under similar conditions is, as mentioned before, being described as disappointed, and the violence the women in judgement B 4164-19 committed is more accepted since she regretted the act and called her victim to ask for
forgiveness. Again, making one think about what Russell & Kraus (2016) said, men are expected to be violent, especially when confronted. Also, that women are considered to be physically week, the harm by her violence is not considered to be as serious as male violence.
In judgement B 4597-19 AE, (male) headbutted another man LN since he believed LN was harassing his girlfriend ES, what is interesting in this judgement is how ES (the girlfriend) is described, she gets describes as “frightened” and “uncomfortable”, while the victim, LN who was accused of harassing ES gets described as “uncomfortably intrusive”, AE gets sentenced for assault, although the language used to describe him is not as harsh as the language used in the other judgments where the offenders are male. An explanation to this is that the offender acted chivalrous by protecting his girlfriend, thus acting in accordance with his gender role and in extension not being described as harshly as the men in the other judgement, especially the ones where a man harms a woman. As Frazier, Bock and Henretta (1983) explain, even though men are portrayed as aggressive by society men also have been socialized not to be aggressive towards females, to show them respect and treat them with courtesy. (Frazier, Bock, and Henretta,1983 p. 306-307)
26
In judgement B 7038-1 a woman AC assaulted her husband SS, AC hit him repeatedly in his face and scratched him creating scratch marks and resulting in SS bleeding. The event
happened at SS work when AC came there since she was upset and wanted to talk, she started to scream at him and started to wave her arms against him, he took her arms resulting in her starting to hit him, she confesses to scratching him although it was because of the tumult the situation had resulted in, she was not convicted. The way AC is described is as “upset”, again a word that minimizes her anger thus minimizing the severity of the act. The fact that AC was not convicted, even though it is clear that she actually harmed SS, was that the court trusted AC when she said that the injuries happen during a tumult. This judgement demonstrates the lenient treatment women seem to get, at least in this type of judgement. To add to this
judgement is that SS had some changes in his story from the first to the second hearing he gave, he explained this by saying that the first hearing he had with the police differed some to the second because he was in shock from the event that had happened, this was one of the reasons why the district court rules in favor of AC. The judgement by the district court might be correct, however in judgement B 11621-17 where the offender is male and the victim is a woman a similar incident happened where she left out some details in the first statement which is excused with the fact that she was “shaken” and “unnerved” when giving her statement to the police. In this judgement, as opposed to the previous judgement the victim was trusted and was found reliable. Again, as Bogaerts (1997) said, female aggression in some situations is not viewed as negatively as male aggression, and as Ahola, Christianson, and Hellström (2009) found, females are trusted to a greater degree regarding their innocence then males are. (Bogaerts, 1997 p.11; Ahola, Christianson and Hellström, 2009 p. 90)
6.2 How parents’ actions are described when accused of harming a child
As shown above, the language used differs if the offender is male or female, the females are being described less harshly while the males are being described with words that enhance the violence and actions committed, however, regarding parents that are on trial for hitting a child, their own or someone else’s, the circumstance seems to shift. Mothers violence is being described more thoroughly and the children that are accusing the mothers are being seen as more reliable in contrast fathers' violent acts against a child get a briefer description and the children are being described as less reliable.
27
Judgement B 2762-19 (Male) A father, SA, is being accused by his child for choking him and hitting him with a toy and a shoehorn, RS, the child gave a statement that is just about
belittled by the court, RS had given his statement twice the first one he said that his father had choked him and hit him with the toy and shoehorn, in the other interrogation he had changed his story regarding the choking and changed parts of how the blow to his buttocks had happened making the court distrust his story, however, in the courts' assessment they use quotation marks over the words choking and blow, in the translated text it looks like this,
“he provided other information about how the dad grabbed him in the hall and
also how the “blow” to his butt had happened” and “However, it is impossible to ignore that at the second hearing he no longer maintains his information that Dad would have "strangled" him”
the use of quotation marks is to quote someone, however, this is the only judgement of the
ones analyzed in this thesis where a quotation of the violent act is used, quotation marks can also be used as a way to show irony or sarcasm, the use of the quotation marks in this
judgement makes it seen as there is sarcasm wedged to the words. To add the child had been placed in a foster care home after the first questioning, this is something that can have resulted in the child’s change in the story, even according to the district court. Nevertheless, even if the child was lying using quotation marks over the words that described the violence, he might have been put through can be perceived as condescending. SA, the father is not being described as angry, or anything in the likeness of that. Taking this in contrast to judgement B 16252-18 where WN the mother is being on trial for attacking a child that her son was in a fight with, she kicked the child’s left leg, shoved him against the wall, and had a grip around his throat. WN is being described as “angry” and the sentence “the chokehold of the neck of a
physically inferior child” makes one wonder why the father actions in judgement B 2762-19,
who most likely is bigger than the mother in this judgement is not being described in a manner like this. Furthermore, the incident in the judgement with the father was not remotely as descriptive as the case of the mother. Mothers are expected to be caregiving, loving, and present, Martins, Abreu, and Figueiredo (2014) it is their social role, if a mother harms her child, she is breaking this role. A father in contrast to the expectations of the mother is many times mostly expected to be of help to the mother, providing support when needed and guaranteeing that everything is taken care of that surrounds the family, especially when the
28
child is young. (Martins, Abreu and Figueiredo, 2014 p.126) The lack of expectation of fathers being nurturing can be an explanation as to why they seem to be more kindly treated in these judgements regarding children, the expectations on mothers being loving and caring is far more prevalent. However in this particular judgement the offender is not harming her own child instead she is actually protecting her child by harming someone else’s, one could expect this to be an situation creating extenuating circumstances, nevertheless her actions is still harshly described and judged, thus it is chosen to get described and analyzed in this thesis.
In judgement B 3942-18, a mother and a father both are being accused by their children for committing the same type of offense, however only the mother gets sentenced with
committing the offense, the father instead gets sentenced with an unlawful threat, both children had said that both parents had slapped them on the bottom with a slipper at two occasions, the father AR said that he never hit his children although he committed to raising the slipper in an attempt to get the children to calm down and listen to him, the mother said that she might have touched the daughter with a slipper at one occasion, however, nothing that had caused an injury or pain. The children are being described as giving logical descriptions of the events where they say that both parents have hit them with the slipper, further down in the court’s assessment this is said:
“According to the district court, there is no reason to fear that they (the children)
have submitted incorrect information about what they stated that ZR and AR exposed them to”
here it appears that the district court trust the children’s statements although it is only the
mother that gets sentenced for assault of the normal degree, the father seems to be trusted more when he said that he “only” raised his hand with the slipper in it while the mother is getting a harder sentence and does not seem to be as trustworthy, one can almost see a hierarchy, in this case, the father is the most trustworthy followed by the children and lastly, the mother is the least trustworthy. The court nearly describes ZR as not trustworthy saying that she is “fading” the severity of the incident, while the father's words, in contrast, are being trusted. Taking this judgement in correlation with the strand of the paternalism theory that Turner & Johnson (2006) brought up, the evil woman hypothesis, the assumption can be made that the mother in this judgement is the “evil woman”, just the reality of being accused of harming your children is a violating of the female gender-role and the role of a mother that is
29
supposed to be protecting, caring and loving one's children. Further, the evil woman hypothesis explains that “not normal” women, being a woman that acts in a fashion that women “ should not” do not only violating the gender norm but the legal norm as well, taking away her candidacy of chivalry. (Fernando Rodriguez, Curry & Lee, 2006 p.322; Turner & Johnson, 2006 p.4-5)
7 Result
Some patterns are reviling themselves in the analysis, men seem to be talked about and
described in a harsher manner than women. The analysis shows that men and their actions are described with words that seemingly enhance the power and violence of the act as
demonstrated in the judgements about men and women and the description of them. Women on the other hand are being described in a more lenient and understanding manner, sometimes almost as if the violence is excused. The questions asked at the beginning of this thesis was, Are violent acts described differently in Swedish district courts’ rulings depending on one’s gender? and If violent acts are described differently in Swedish district courts’ rulings, do the same patterns show if you are a parent? The analysis shows that the language differs
depending on your gender and there is still a difference in language regarding parents, although instead of males being described in a harsher manner, females seem to be, this will be demonstrated further down in the result chapter.
7.1 Differences found
In judgement B 4931-19 (male) Where EF shoved NE which resulted in NE falling and hitting his head, in the courts' assessment the acts are described as following:
“The violence used by EF has been so forceful that he must have realized that there was an imminent risk of NE being harmed”
And followed by the court calling EF indifferent because of his emotions that EF himself described:
30
“Given that EF himself says that he felt violated and upset, the district court concludes that he was indifferent to the danger to which he exposed NE”
Take this in relation to judgment B 6617-19 (female) where EA got jealous since her boyfriend talked to other women:
“WK was talking to an unknown girl. Since she and WK had previously had a lot of problems in their relationship with infidelity and jealousy, she was very disappointed in him.”
Later followed with:
“EA came to WK at the bar and said something like "what are you doing?" and then hit him with her fist straight to his face”
Taking these two judgements in relation to each other one can distinguish a change in deminer going from male offender to female offender. The male offender is being described as
indifferent and his violence is described as forceful, the female offender however is being described as disappointed and her violent act is not being described with any words than enhance the violence committed. This is a pattern that is repeated numerous times in the judgement presented in the analysis concerning men and women who are not parents. Also, regarding emotions, men seem to be more likely to have their emotions minimized while women’s emotions are taken in regard more consistently in the judgements. Moreover, the violent acts in the judgements are mentioned more often if the offender is male, this result is coherent with the prediction of chivalry and the social construct of gender. There lies an expectation on men to be aggressive, masculine, and rough and to use their brute power when confronted, (Russell & Kraus, 2016 p. 680) an expectation of this sort might result in the harsher language use regarding males since there is already a deep belief that men are more aggressive, thus using language that enhances their actions is not considered out of the norm. Women, on the other hand, are expected to be soft, non-aggressive and nurturing, they are often considered to be incapable to partake in serious criminal activities, (Turner & Johnson, 2006 p.4) they are considered to be incapable of coping with the harsh environment of prison and other punishments, furthermore, women can sometimes be seen as childlike and not fully responsible for their actions, (Fernando Rodriguez, Curry & Lee, 2006 p.320-321) all of
