The findings revealed that self-control measures did not render false the impacts of variables from classic strain, differential association/social learning theory, and social bonding theories, a finding which refuted self-control theory’s argument that self-control was the only cause of deviance. Self-control measures were significant and consistent with the prediction of the theory: the greater the low self-control, the greater the deviance. Among the six dimensions of the self-control construct, only risk-seeking had significant positive impacts on deviance; self-control was not the cause of deviant behavior. This implies that the rest of the sub-dimensions appear to be redundant. The findings showed that self-control measures worked the same for both sexes which was in line with the self-control theory. In other words, no separate theories for males and females are necessary, which is in line with the general pattern of previous research. Independent of the self-control index and its six dimensions, monetary strain, deviant friends, school commitment, and social class had significant impacts on deviant behavior; however, monetary strain and school commitment were significant only for males. Both classic strain theory and social bonding theory appeared to be a gender-specific theory for males. This finding questions the thesis that criminological theories could work for both sexes. Data were obtained from a sample of 974 students in the newly-established Turkish university using a self-administered survey. Tables, references