Risk, Socialisation and Roles

• According to Miller and Hoffman, there are three main reasons for women's higher levels of religiosity.

  Firstly, they suggest that gender differences in risk-taking are a reason for differences in religiosity. By not being religious, people are risking that religion might be right and they will be condemned to hell. As men are less risk-averse than women, they are more likely to take the risk of not being religious.
• Interestingly, as Davie notes, the virtual disappearance today of the dangers associated with childbirth that women had always faced throughout history, means that women in Western societies face fewer risks and may be becoming less religious as a result.
• Secondly, women are more religious because they are socialised to be more passive, obedient, and caring. These are qualities valued by most religions, so it follows that women are more likely than men to be attracted to religion.

  Interestingly, men who have these qualities are also more likely to be religious.
• Thirdly, Miller and Hoffman note that women's gender roles mean they are more likely than men to work part-time or to be full-time carers, so they have more scope for organising their time to participate in religious activities.

  Women are also more likely to be attracted to the church as a source of gender identity, and Greeley (1992) argues that their role in taking care of other family members increases women's religiosity because it involves responsibility for their 'ultimate' welfare as well as their everyday needs.
• Similarly, Davie (2013) argues that women are closer to birth and death (through child-bearing and caring for elderly, sick and dying relatives) and this brings them closer to 'ultimate' questions about the meaning of life that religion is concerned with. This also fits with differences in the way men and women see God: men are more likely to see a God of power and control, while women tend to see a God of love and forgiveness.