A recent study by Professor Steven Shatz of the University of San Francisco Law School and Naomi Shatz of the New York Civil Liberties Union sug­gests that gen­der bias con­tin­ues to exist in the appli­ca­tion of the death penal­ty, and that this bias has roots in the his­toric notion of chival­ry. In a review of 1,300 mur­der cas­es in California between 2003 and 2005, the authors found gen­der dis­par­i­ties with respect to both defen­dants and vic­tims in the under­ly­ing crime. The study revealed that the influ­ence of gen­der-based val­ues was par­tic­u­lar­ly pro­nounced in cer­tain crimes: gang mur­ders (few death sen­tences), rape mur­ders (many death sen­tences), and domes­tic vio­lence mur­ders (few death sen­tences). The authors con­clud­ed: The present study con­firms what ear­li­er stud­ies have shown: that the death penal­ty is imposed on women rel­a­tive­ly infre­quent­ly and that it is dis­pro­por­tion­ate­ly imposed for the killing of women. Thus, the death penal­ty in California appears to be applied in accor­dance with stereo­types about women’s innate abil­i­ties, their roles in soci­ety, and their capac­i­ty for vio­lence. Far from being gen­der neu­tral, the California death penal­ty seems to allow prej­u­dices and stereo­types about vio­lence and gen­der, chival­ric val­ues, to deter­mine who lives and who dies.”

The authors fur­ther con­clud­ed that “[b]ecause women are stereo­typed as weak, pas­sive, and in need of male pro­tec­tion, pros­e­cu­tors and juries seem reluc­tant to impose the death penal­ty upon them.” On the oth­er hand, in cas­es where the vic­tim was a woman, the death sen­tence rate was 10.9%, sev­en times the rate when men were vic­tims (1.5%).

(S. Shatz and N. Shatz, Chivalry is Not Dead: Murder, Gender, and the Death Penalty,” February 19, 2011). See Women and the Death Penalty.

Citation Guide