Crime: Functionalist, Strain and subculture theories Flashcards
Durkheim: Change of crime over time/societies
-Traditional societies were held together by a strong, religiously
based collective conscience which impeded criminal and deviant behaviour.
-Less geographical mobility = smaller communities = easier to control.
-Industrialisation led to urbanisation = less social control.
-No more inheritance of jobs led to increased competition.
-Secularisation + rapid social change = undermined value
consensus.
-Therefore, industrial societies became more prone to what
Durkheim calls ‘anomie’ (normlessness) – the
disappearance of the norms and values that were
previously common to the society.
-This makes crime more likely to occur
Durkheim: positive functions of crime
- Boundary Maintenance
Crime produces a reaction from society – it unifies its members in condemning the wrongdoer and reinforcing the shared norms and values. - Adaptation and Change
Durkheim argues that without crime and deviance we would be stuck with no change, no new ideas, values or way of thinking. AO2: The suffragettes used violence to campaign for women’s rights.
Others:
Safety valve
Deviance can act as a ‘safety valve’ releasing stresses in society. E.g. mass violent protest demonstrations might be seen as an outlet for expressions of discontent avoiding wider and more serious challenges to social order.
Durkheim: Crime is inevitable
In complex modern societies, people are socialized differently, leading to diverse norms, values, and lifestyles. This diversity results in the formation of subcultures with their own distinct views on what is acceptable behaviour. As a result, there is a greater likelihood that individuals will break the law, as different groups have varying ideas of what constitutes deviance.
Evaluation of Durkheim:
-Functionalists assume we have the same shared norms and values to begin with. But Postmodernists would argue that’s not always the case – so would boundary maintenance even work?
-Ignores victims and their families and the damage done to them.
-Interactionists would 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: Strain Theory
Society (within its value consensus) puts pressure on people to achieve – society presents us CULTURAL GOALS. Society also presents us with INSTITUTIONALISED MEANS (socially approved / acceptable ways) of achieving these CULTURAL GOALS.
When people cannot access the institutionalised means & cultural goals of their society they experience ANOMIE which in turn leads to STRAIN. Merton argues there are 5 responses to this strain.
1-Conformity: Continuing to strive for the American Dream within accepted norms, even if success seems unlikely.
2-Innovation: Seeking new, often illegitimate, ways to achieve success (e.g., crime or fraud).
3-Ritualism: Abandoning the goal of success but rigidly adhering to societal rules and norms.
4-Retreatism: Rejecting both societal goals and means, often leading to withdrawal from society (e.g., substance abuse).
5-Rebellion: Rejecting the existing goals and means and advocating for a new social order.
Examples of Merton’s Strain theory AO2:
Hannon and Defronzo’s study of 406 counties in the USA
-they found that those with higher levels of welfare support had lower levels of crime.
-this is because those who needed the most support felt less strain when helped by the government = this reduced anomie.
Savelsberg argued that Merton’s strain theory can help explain the rapid rise in the crime rate in post-Communist countries.
= crime rate rose by no less than 69% after communism fell
Evaluation of Mertons Strain theory:
-Working class people experience most strain yet they don’t all deviate.
Marxists argue it ignores the power of the ruling class to make & enforce rules/ laws that criminalise the poor but not the rich.
It assumes there is a value consensus – that everyone strives for ‘money success’, but this isn’t always the case.
Doesn’t consider crime amongst successful people who do not feel strain (white-collar crime?).
Ignores non-utilitarian crime e.g. violence, vandalism etc.
Cohen: Status Frustration
Cohen suggested that when young working-class males face blocked opportunities for success, particularly in education, they experience “status frustration.” Unable to achieve the conventional status recognized by society, they form delinquent subcultures with peers who share similar experiences. These subcultures create an “alternate status hierarchy” where criminal and deviant activities are valued, often non-utilitarian in nature. By inverting societal norms and values, they gain status within their own group. This leads to conflict with authorities and further limits their chances for success through legitimate means.
AO2: Paul Willis Stud of The Lads
Evaluation of Cohen Status Frustration AO3:
Postmodernists – do the boys really think about their decisions? Lyng and Katz argue that it is more likely the individual is influenced by boredom or that they are seeking a “buzz”
Miller = delinquency not a product of status frustration, but instead what he refers to as an attached to the six 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 like Cohen suggests.
Cloward an Ohlin: Three subcultural responses
They argued that the varied social circumstances in which w/c
youth found themselves living in will determine what subculture
they join.
The 2 key factors are:
-Where they live.
-Their ‘ability’ to be a criminal.
The 3 Subcultures:
1-Criminal Subcultures= These form in areas with established organized crime. Young people learn criminal skills and values from adult role models, focusing on utilitarian crimes (financial gain) and having the chance to rise in the criminal hierarchy.
2-Conflict Subcultures= These emerge in unstable areas with limited opportunities for success. Without adult crime to guide them, young people resort to gang violence and warfare to gain prestige and recognition within their subculture.
3-Retreatist Subcultures= Born from failure in both legitimate and illegitimate avenues, these young people retreat into substance abuse, supported by petty crime such as theft and prostitution, as they feel excluded from both criminal and conflict subcultures.
Examples for Cloward and Ohlin 3 Subcultures AO2:
Winlow (2001): W/C conflict subculture in Sunderland due to easy access.
South (1997): criminal, conflict and retreatist subcultures are evident in UK society.
Venkatesh (2009): Chicago criminal subculture.
Evaluation of Cloward and Ohlin 3 subcultures AO3:
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.
Miller = delinquency not a product of status frustration, but instead what he refers to as an attached to the six focal concerns they’ve been socialised into: trouble, toughness, smartness, excitement, fate and autonomy. They never held mainstream values in the first place.
Matza (1964) claims that most delinquents are not strongly committed to their subculture (as strain theories suggest), but merely drift in and out of delinquency.
Miller: Conforming to w/c subcultures
Working class is seen as a subculture with its own unique values. This culture emphasizes six core values, which often encourage criminal behaviour among working-class youth. Three key values include:
-Toughness – valuing physical strength and resilience.
-Excitement – a focus on risk-taking and seeking thrills.
-Smartness – being street-smart and able to outwit others.
-These values shape the behaviour and attitudes of young people in this subculture, contributing to criminal activities.
