Men responsible for more crime and violent crime than women, anyone researching why and what to do about it, please?

[Italiangreyhound]

Is anyone doing research into why commit more crime and more violent crime than women, and in stopping them doing it?

I am gob smacked after millennium no one is working out what the problem is and solving it.

Read this and apart from the utterly ludicrous comment "It may turn out that there are some acts that men are more likely to commit than women, and vice versa. More men than women commit crimes like homicide and aggravated assault. But women are more likely to commit crimes like prostitution. Whether that's because of human nature or that there's a far more complex explanation is still a mystery."

It just left me wondering why no one is doing anything.
science.howstuffworks.com/life/men-more-violent.htm

Actually a female writer in the Times on Sat 18 Ma or Sunday Times Sun 19 May was asking the same thing but I can't find the link!

Googling around just got me depressed!

www.salon.com/2013/02/20/house_goper_men_can_handle_violence_better_than_women/

www.dosomething.org/tipsandtools/11-poignant-facts-about-women-around-world

So I've stopped looking for now!

Crap isn't it!

Because it is pervasive. It seems to be in every society since the dawn of time. Fighting, wars, campaigns of slaughter and atrocity - history is full of it. And it always seems to be men leading it.

We don't know it was in every society since the dawn of time, since we only have historical record going back so far.

Even if we did, I don't follow how that could possibly demonstrate that it has or had an evolutionary use. It's a non-sequitur.

You are right. I have re-thought my position. Men just get bored.

I do wonder if some of it has a link to attitudes to risk. Participating in violence or crime is a high risk activity.

Also, I gather, many of the younger male offenders are benefitted by doing an enhanced thinking course. Quite a bit of which looks at the consequence of ones actions as I understand it.

I would say that society does encourage or value risk taking more in boys than girls.

But LRD my lovely strong uterine muscles aren't much use against a strapping rugby player who wants to assault me, are they.

I am not sure I'm following this.

If women, children and old people were generally physically able to overpower men then you would see a different pattern of violent offending I'm sure.

If it is the case that strength has nothing to do with it then where does that leave people who have been attacked? Why overlook something as fundamental as if a big bloke decides to have a go at you there's not much you can actually do about it? Surely most offences involve a person having a go at someone who is vulnerable in comparison to them?

I am struggling with this a bit.

I know they're not, I never said they were.

I don't follow what you're saying.

I'm saying it's quite possible that the way we construct 'strength' as a concept might be socially determined, and related to the fact we have a society where violent attacks are not uncommon.

Surely in a society where violent attacks weren't common, it wouldn't be that relevant what you could or couldn't do to resist them?

I thought you had said that when louise said at the beginning that men have a huge advantage in physical strength over women and you said no they didn't. But IME they do and if they want to be bastards then that is what enables them to be bastards.

Maybe I am misunderstanding something. Because IME men do have a huge advantage in physical strength over me, generally. That's what whole of rape culture is based on, surely. If I was twice the size of blokes rather than the other way around then the same level of threat wouldn't be possible.

Saying men have a huge physical advantage over women is only true if you measure physical strength in certain ways.

Saying that a big rugby player can beat you up if he so chooses and your uterine muscles can't stop him, is not the same thing.

I think we're miscommunicating because this is a minor point I made, which got blown out of all proportion and then caught up in a conversation full of deleted posts.

However - I don't see how it is an 'advantage' that men can rape women. If we live in a rape culture (as we do), the fact a man is able physically to overpower a woman is one of the relevant factors. Though most rapes aren't like that.

However, if we lived in a culture where strength was conceptualised in a less misogynistic way, I very much doubt it would be a rape culture. That's my point.

(I mean, I don't see how it's an evolutionary/social 'advantage' that men can rape women ... it might possibly be, I don't know, but I don't see that it's very clear-cut.)

Even with rapes by someone known to you the fact they can overpower you is often key. Obviously there is shock / freezing. But if you could just push him off like a child then that would be a pretty big deal.

I just don't think you can overlook it.

However I suspect this is a bit personal for me so will bow out of this one now I think.

Yes, I can see that.

I'm not trying to overlook it, I'm really not.

I think - sorry, but I really do - that you're not understanding my posts. I wish I were explaining them better, but honestly, what you're responding to isn't what I'm actually saying.

Personally I think hormones have a major imapact on male aggression, an increase in aggression will mean a greater tendancy for violence. I suppose you can say we're not like other animals we are capable of greater thought but when someone is caught on an emotional high lets say anger/fury a lot of the time I think they are not thinking any clearer than any other animal.

Also the majority of male violence is towards other males which is why men make up the majority of victims of assaults and murder. You will also find that tall/big men get a lot of hassle from other men because they are big therefore more of a challenge plus the attackers peers will be impressed by it.

A tendency for violence is useful from an evolutionary point of view there isn't many passive species that survive very long and generally especially in mammals males are always more violent.

As we get more and more technologically advanced the original use of agression and violence gets lost in the past but that agression is still there.