In all, Durkheim’s writings on the relationship between gender and homicide are incomplete yet provide a hint of why gender differences in homicide rates may change across various stages of societal development. His main statements regarding gender and homicide reject a biological reason for women’s lower homicide rates and posit that because women are less active in collective life, they experience less exposure to the causes of homicide. Main observations related to Durkheim’s theory included the importance of opportunity to the commission of homicide. Durkheim noted that opportunities to commit homicide differed between the genders and also observed that the effects of gendered socialization caused “homicidal passions” to be ignited in men and not women. Thus, Durkheim’s argument is that men have higher rates of homicide than women because their social structural location provides them with greater homicidal opportunities and their socialization has provided them with the “seeds of strong homicidal passions.” Another observation made by the author is that the centrality of anomie to Durkheim’s theory of criminality may have been overblown by later criminological literature. The author argues that while anomie is an important part of Durkheim’s theory, it appears to be of secondary importance. In terms of a feminist critique of Durkheim’s viewpoints on gender, the author contends that some of Durkheim’s statements challenge traditional patriarchal thought and encourage greater gender equality. Footnotes, references