A recent meta-analysis has found that the recidivism rate for female sex offenders remains remarkably low at just 3%, significantly lower than the 13% rate observed among male offenders. Conducted by Franca Cortoni, a professor emeritus at Université de Montréal, this study analyzes data from 4,208 women over a span of 25 years, from 1998 to 2023. These findings challenge traditional perceptions and highlight the need for a more nuanced understanding of criminal behavior across genders.
Cortoni’s research, which updates a previous meta-analysis from 2010, emphasizes that women commit far fewer sexual offenses than men and are less likely to reoffend after returning to society. She points to evolutionary factors that may contribute to these differences, suggesting that traditional gender roles have instilled distinct behavioral patterns. “Historically, men were responsible for protecting the clan and hunting, while women took care of children and the group’s well-being,” Cortoni explained. “These roles have shaped enduring behavioral differences.”
The underlying causes of criminal behavior further differ between men and women. The majority of incarcerated women have a history of experiencing severe physical or sexual violence before engaging in criminal activities. In contrast, men often externalize their trauma, leading to aggression and anger. Cortoni notes that this distinction is crucial in understanding the pathways to crime. For women, substance abuse often precedes criminal acts, while for men, it typically accompanies a delinquent lifestyle.
Addressing Blind Spots in Criminology
Cortoni argues that the field of criminology, much like medicine, has historically relied on male-centric data, resulting in significant blind spots. “Research conducted solely on men has left some serious blind spots,” she remarked. Recognizing the differences in criminal behavior, recidivism rates, and reintegration needs is essential for scientific rigor, according to Cortoni. “Crime is not gender-neutral,” she stated.
For decades, rehabilitation programs for women offenders mirrored those designed for men, often overlooking the unique needs of female offenders. Since the 1990s, there have been reforms aimed at making correctional services more attuned to women’s realities. These changes include a shift away from security-focused approaches to providing more psychological support and addressing past trauma, along with considering aspects of motherhood. Cortoni emphasizes that this is not about offering preferential treatment but about recognizing that men and women function differently within the justice system.
As this new analysis sheds light on the recidivism rates among female sex offenders, it underscores the necessity of tailoring approaches to rehabilitation and reintegration. The findings advocate for a shift in perspective within the criminal justice system, moving beyond outdated models that do not account for gender differences.
The study, titled “The Sexual Recidivism Rates of Women Are Still Low: An Updated Meta‐Analysis,” is set to be published in Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health. For further reading, the full citation is available: R. Karl Hanson et al, DOI: 10.1002/cbm.70014.
In conclusion, as society continues to address issues of crime and rehabilitation, understanding the distinct pathways and needs of female offenders is crucial. The evidence presented in Cortoni’s research provides a pathway for more effective policies and practices that can lead to better outcomes for women in the criminal justice system.
