Effects of labelling

Question 1

Lemert: Primary & secondary deviance – Societal reaction as the ‘cause’ of deviance

Primary deviance

Answer 1

Edwin Lemert distinguishes between primary & secondary deviance. Primary deviance refers to deviant acts that have not been publicly labelled. Lemert argues that it is pointless to seek the causes of primary deviance, since it is so widespread that it is unlikely to have a single cause, & in any case it is often trivial (e.g. fare dodging) & mostly goes uncaught. These acts are not part of an organised deviant way of life, so offenders can easily negotiate them away, e.g. as a ‘moment of madness’. They have little significance for the individual’s status or self-concept. In short, primary deviants don’t generally see themselves as deviant.

Question 2

Secondary deviance

Answer 2

some deviance is labelled & this is more likely to occur to someone committing a deviant act from a low social status. This person is then punished, negatively affecting their self-concept & how others see them. Rejected by law abiding citizens, they may then drift into a deviant subculture as they are surrounded by people who they feel understand them & commit more serious acts which Lemert calls secondary deviance.

this may lead to prison, after which finding a job is harder, so the person may embark on a criminal career & see their criminal identity as their permanent master status. Accepting & acting up to the deviant lead has led to a self-fulfilling prophecy in which the individual acts out or lives up to their label.

Question 3

Master status

Answer 3

Becker suggests that this master status or controlling identity, overrides all others. In the eyes of the world, the person is no longer a colleague, father/mother or neighbour; they are now a thief, junkie or paedophile – an outsider.

Question 4

Overall

Answer 4

The work of Lemert & Young usefully illustrate the idea that it is not the act itself, but the hostile societal reaction by the social audience, that creates serious deviance. Therefore, the social control processes that are meant to produce law-abiding behaviour may in fact produce the deviance/crime. This idea can be used to criticise theories such as functionalism which sees law making & social control in a very positive light as they say it helps to create social stability, not more deviance.

Question 5

A03

Answer 5

Labelling theorists point out that it is by no means inevitable. Labelling theory has been accused of being deterministic, but interactionists such as Becker do argue that we cannot predict whether someone who has been labelled will follow a deviant career, because they are always free to choose not to deviate further. The process of being labelled is open to ‘negotiation’, in that some groups or individuals are able to reject the label.