The life giver can also be the life taker. Sunita V Chelam delves into the lesser known link between women and crime

When we think of crime, the first instinct is to think of the criminal as ‘Him’. Why don’t we ever consider that a criminal might be a woman? That’s because a woman is considered a life-giver and nurturer, and so would be naturally inimical to aggression.

Although that is usually the case, there have been many recorded cases of macabre crimes committed by women. The truth is that women are capable of the most menacing misdemeanours.

Sinister Sister
Believe it or not, notorious crimes pulled off by women have been chronicled even in the Victorian era, where they contrasted sharply with their feminine ideology of sensitivity. Mumbai-based psychiatrist Dr Ajit Dandekar says, “By and large women do not commit aggressive or violent crimes.

Aggression and violence is attributed to high levels of testosterone, which is a characteristic male hormone. And there are studies that show that aggressive women criminals have higher testosterone levels than usual.”

Since evolution, the primary responsibility of providing for and protecting the family —even if it meant using aggression — was the male’s. And that’s why men have higher levels of testosterone. For time immemorial, males have been conditioned to be aggressive.

Boys got trains and trucks; girls got Barbie dolls. Men fought in wars and women bandaged their wounds. When it comes to women, biological and cultural theories of the female capacity for violence are based on ‘socialisation’. This means that although both sexes have a capacity for crime, the intensity is diluted in women.