Crime And Deviance: Functionalist, Strain And Subcultural Theories Flashcards
Durkheim ‘anomie’
Normlessness / a situation where values are unclear
More common in industrial/modern societies where social norms and values were conflicting and less common -> this makes crime more likely
Durkheim: crime is inevitable because…
- Not every member of society can be equally committed to the collective sentiments of society. People are socialised differently, impossible for all of us to be alike.
- In complex modern societies, there is a diversity of lifestyle and values. Different groups develop their own subcultures with distinctive norms and values
What does Durkheim say about crime?
Crime can be functional, becomes dysfunctional when its rate is too high or low
There needs to be a balance between social solidarity and freedom
Durkheim’s 4 positive functions of crime
Boundary maintenance
Adaptation and change
Warning device
Safety valve
Boundary maintenance AO1
Crime produces a reaction - it unifies society in condemning the wrongdoer => reinforces shared norms and values
Function of punishment resulting from crime isn’t to punish the wrongdoer, but to reaffirm society’s rules and reinforce social solidarity
Boundary maintenance AO2
The courtroom - public shaming and dramatise wrongdoing = formal sanctions
Camera’s in trials - watch from home
2011 riots
Lucy Letby
Boundary maintenance AO3
Postmodernist: there is no value consensus to begin with so crime doesn’t reaffirm norms and values
Adaptation and change AO1
Without C+D, we’d be stuck with no change of ideas or values
Deviance facilitates social change
Deviance leads to alterations in the law (positive reaction from society towards deviance -> deviant behaviour becomes normal -> laws change)
Adaptation and change AO2
Homosexuality in the 20th century
Suffragettes
MLK, Malcolm X, Nelson Mandela
Civil rights movement
Adaptation and change AO3
Not always true as deviance can be disruptive and doesn’t change anything
EG just stop oil
Warning device AO1
Trinard - when C+D occurs it sends a message to us that social order is breaking down -> This prompts governments to do something act the problem
Warning device AO2
public sector strikes
Safety valve AO1
Deviance can release stresses in society
Safety valve AO2
Violent protests can be seen as an outlet for expressions of discontent (BLM)
Cohen: prostitution can refresh a man to go back to his family (kind of like the warm bath theory)
What do Durkheim’s 4 positive functions of crime reinforce?
Value consensus
Social solidarity
Social stability
Criticisms of Durkheim’s 4 positive functions of crime
He says society requires a certain amount of deviance to function successfully - BUT he doesn’t say how much is needed
Crime is functional for whom? What about the victims?
Interactionists argue that Durkheim’s theory is too deterministic = it underplays people’s agency - their ability to choose to behave in certain ways, including criminal ways
Merton’s Strain theory : AO1
Society puts pressure on people to achieve - society presents us CULTURAL GOALS and INSTITUTIONALISED MEANS (socially approved ways) of achieving them
If we are able to use institutionalised means and achieve our cultural goals, we conform to society’s value consensus and get along functionally.
When people cannot access the institutionalised means + cultural goals of society, they experience ANOMIE which leads to STRAIN.
Adaptations to Strain: CONFORMIST
Members of society conform both to SUCCESS GOALS and the the INSTITUTIONALISED MEANS of reaching them
Adaptations to Strain: INNOVATOR
(More common amongst lower social classes)
Rejecting the INSTITUTIONALISED MEANS of achieving SUCCESS GOALS and turn to C+D
Lower educational qualifications -> less opportunity in their jobs -> less likely to succeed through conventional channels (more pressure to deviate)
Pressure to innovate is forced on lower classes in societies where all people share the same SUCCESS GOALS.
Adaptations to Strain: RITUALIST
(Lower middle class)
Largely abandon society’s SUCCESS GOALS but are too strongly socialised to turn to crime
Less opportunity in jobs - w/o opportunity, their only solution is to lower/abandon their SUCCESS GOALS
Adaptations to Strain: RETREATIST
(Not class specific)
UNABLE to achieve SUCCESS GOALS AND INSTITUTIONALISED MEANS
‘Drop out’ of society
Adaptations to Strain: REBEL
(Rising class)
REJECT both SUCCESS GOALS AND INSTITUTIONAL MEANS of achieving them
Replaces them with different goals and means
Those who adapt to this alternative, wish to create a new society
Evidence to support Merton’s theory (AO2)
Hannon and Defronzo:
- study of 406 counties in the USA
- those with higher levels of welfare provision had lower levels of crime
- WELFARE provision REDUCED the level of STRAIN felt to achieve material success through legitimate means
- therefore, reduced anomie and any crime that could result from it
Savelsberg (Post-Communist Poland):
- culture of communist societies emphasised collective responsibility rather than individual financial success
- when communism was replaced by free market capitalism, people’s material expectations were raised
- this resulted in ANOMIE and STRAIN towards criminal innovation
Cost of Living Crisis (contemporary)
Strengths of Merton’s Strain Theory (AO3)
Merton recognises that the American Dream is such a central feature of American culture and that class structure militates against equal opportunities to be financially successful
Weaknesses of Merton’s Strain Theory (AO3)
- deterministic: W/C people experience most strain yet they don’t all deviate
- Marxists argues it ignores the power of the ruling class to enforce laws that criminalise the poor but not the rich
- PM: it assumes there is a value consensus that everyone strives for ‘money success’
- ignores white-collar crime
- ignores non-utilitarian crime (violence, vandalism etc.)
Cohen : Status Frustration + case study
- Cohen suggested that blocked opportunities to succeed led young W/C males to form DELINQUENT SUBCULTURES
- Unable to achieve status in education (due to the M/C habitus) - W/C boys suffer from STATUS FRUSTRATION
- Look to obtain status by forming sub cultural groups and construct an ALTERNATE STATUS HIERARCHY - this involves inventing the N+V of society to give status to deviant activities - NON-UTILITARIAN crime
- Frustration is resolved by rejecting success goals and replacing them with N+V which they can achieve success
- Delinquent subculture represents an inversion of mainstream culture
CASE STUDY : PAUL WILLIS - LEARNING TO LABOUR
AO3 of Cohen
Strength:
His theory helps make sense of acts that would otherwise appear senseless - explains how they emerge out of a process that leads to the inversion of mainstream values
Weaknesses:
- PM: do the boys REALLY THINK about their decisions? Lyn and Katz - more likely the individual is influenced by boredom or that they are seeking a “buzz”
- Miller - delinquency is not a product of status frustration, but instead due to the attachment to the 6 FOCAL CONCERNS they’ve been socialised into : trouble, toughness, smartness, excitement, fate and autonomy. They never held mainstream values in the first place
- Matza - those seen as delinquents “drifted” in and out of delinquency without any COMMITMENT to that way of life
Cloward and Ohlin: Three subcultures
C+O drew upon Merton’s ideas of strain. Not only were the W/C not able to succeed the legitimate ways, but also the illegitimate ways
Denied status through legitimate means - W/C males would deviate into 1 of 3 forms of subculture
What did the deviation into the 3 subcultures depend on?
Locality - the geographical area that young W/C boys found themselves in meant they couldn’t become the type of criminal they wanted to be
Ability - their ability to be a good criminal
C+O - Criminal subcultures
- Based in areas where there’s an established criminal network
- boys would be exposed to criminal skills and deviant values = apprenticed into crime as an alternative legitimate career
C+O - Conflict subcultures
In the absence of an existing criminal network, frustrations would be channelled into clashes with other groups based upon ‘turf’, or other factors such as ethnicity
C+O - Retreatist subcultures
Product of double failure
W/C boys fail to be successful legitimately and illegitimately
Rejected by other subcultures, boys would opt out of society and turn to deviant behaviours such as drugs and petty crime to alleviate frustrations
Cloward and Ohlin AO2
Winlow - Industrial Sunderland -> few opportunities to make a living out of crime. Therefore, a CONFLICT subculture developed, characterised by petty crime + violence to gain status
South - CRIMINAL, CONFLICT AND RETREATIST subcultures evident in UK society. Due to drug trades (some trades are disorganised and some professional)
Venkatesh - Chicago CRIMINAL subculture = hierarchical and organised crime
Cloward and Ohlin AO3
Strengths:
Their application of strain theory offers a plausible way of understanding how strain can lead to a variety of delinquent responses
Their concept of illegitimate opportunity structures broadens our understanding of the pathways into crime and delinquency
Weaknesses:
They, alongside Merton and Cohen, ignore the wider power structure, including who makes and enforces the law. E.g. Marxists blame capitalism for forcing the W/C to commit crime.
They draw the boundaries too sharply between the subcultures. In their theory, you can’t be a member of more than one
Miller = delinquency not a product of status frustration, but due to an attachment to the 6 focal concerns they’ve been socialised into: trouble, toughness, smartness, excitement, fate and autonomy. They never held mainstream values in the first place.
Matza claims that most delinquents are not strongly committed to their subculture (as strain theories suggest), but merely drift in and out of delinquency
