Chivalry is a proposition that maintains that women are subject to “chivalrous” treatment by the criminal justice system. The thesis leads to the understanding that man is merciless to woman from the perspective of personal behavior (Moulds, 1978). The paternalism hypothesis limits the freedom and choices of individuals to protect them from themselves, particularly to prevent interference with their freedom of action that could compromise their overall wellbeing, happiness, welfare, and interests (Béal, 2011). The chivalry and paternalism hypotheses depict that there is preferential treatment of women in the corridors of justice. The criminal justice system is characterized by the practice of chivalry since observers of female violators barely take action against the offender. There is a lack of support from law enforcement officers because the police officers neither make on-the-spot arrests nor book and hold women violators for court action.
In the United States, chivalry is the major cause of the existing disparate treatment in the criminal justice system. Women have been the beneficiaries of the chivalrous culture, and the criminal justice system still holds the belief that they should be protected against the “dragons” and “devils”, which in this case represents the patriarchal society (Moulds, 1978). The US criminal justice system is characterized by superficial elements of male-female relationships, as evident in the access to social amenities that are based on gender-based power wrangles and male domination; hence, paternalism. Nevertheless, chivalry and paternalism have psychological, social, and political implications in the criminal justice system. Generally, the hypotheses have adverse effects on the democratic tenets of society (Moulds, 1978). Therefore, the preferential treatment of women emanates from the idea that they are defenseless and need support and guidance regarding the right to property and other privileges.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
References
Béal, C. (2011). Can Paternalism Be “Soft”? Paternalism and Criminal Justice. In: Raisons politiques , 44(4), 41-56. https://www.cairn-int.info/article-E_RAI_044_0041--can-paternalism-be-soft-paternalism.htm?contenu=article
Moulds, E. F. (1978). Chivalry and Paternalism: Disparities of Treatment in the Criminal Justice System. The Western Political Quarterly , 31(3), 416-430. University of Utah. https://booksc.org/book/50129224/be0653
