Functionalist perspective Crime and deviance Flashcards
Functionalism
The first sociological approach to crime and deviance Growing from Emile Durkheim work Functionalists see society as a system with a shared value consensus Which is disrupted by crime and deviance However they see deviance as inevitable and in some instances even good for society
Sociologists ask
Do certain conditions foster crime?
Why do subcultures of delinquency exist; how and why do they come about?
Functionalism : The view that society is a system of interrelated and interdependent units Held together by a value consensus
Sharing of culture creates = social solidarity This shapes how we think and behave
Functionalists believe society therefore has two mechanisms : Socialisation - Helps individuals to internalise society norms and values
Social control - Mechanism which rewards compliance / conformity and punishes deviance Therefore upholding expected behaviour
The inevitability of crime
One would assume Functionalists would be wholly negative regarding crime and deviance Because it upsets optimum societal functioning
However Functionalists say that while too much crime / deviance can destabilise a society Crime and deviance is present in all societies
It is normal, natural, in all societies
Sociologists ask Why is crime inevitable?
Not everyone is socialised into the shared norms and values of our society to the same degree Leading to difference and therefore deviation
In complex modern societies, diverse lifestyles can lead to creation of subcultures which have their own values and norms (culture) which may contradict the mainstream They are seen as deviant
Durkheim study 1893 :
Argued in modern societies There is a tendency towards anomie or ‘normlessness’
Increasingly complex societies like ours breed increasingly complex individuals
Greater diversity means greater differences between individuals
This weakens rules which govern behaviour Leading to deviance
Positive functions of crime
- ‘Boundary maintenance’
Maintains boundary between good, law-abiding ‘us’ and evil, law-breaking ‘them’ Reinforces moral code Reinforces norms Reinforces values
-‘Adaptation and change’
All changes in society begin with an act of deviance Without any deviance there would be no change This could be a sign of a society which is controlled too tightly Examples include Votes for women End of slavery Legalisation of homosexuality
Criticism of Durkheim
Durkheim say some deviance is good But too much is bad - How much is too much?
Might explain its function (to promote social solidarity) But does not explain why it exists in the first place Why doesn’t moral compass stop it
Functional for whom? Punishment of a murderer may help society But it is clearly not functional for the murdered victim
Crime does not always promote social solidarity In fact for some people it can promote fear and cause isolation
Other functions of crime / deviance
Kingsley Davis (American sociologist) :
Prostitution is a safety valve for men sexual frustration Does not threaten monogamous nuclear family
Ned Polsky (American author) :
Pornography is a safe channel for sexual desires Does not threaten monogamous nuclear family In the way that adultery would
Albert Cohen (American criminologist) :
Deviance acts as a warning signal that something in society is not working properly A signal to policy makers and political leaders
Kai Erikson (American sociologist) :
Institutions in society actually exist to ensure crime occurs (Including police) as this ensures society stays together
Sociologists ask Can there ever be sanctioned rule breaking?
E.g. Festivals Carnivals Demonstrations Even student RAG weeks Do they exist to give individuals the opportunity to commit low-level crime and deviant behaviour To let off some steam To prevent them from committing serious crime?
Turning a blind eye for the ‘greater good’ Ease transition from childhood to adulthood Where these crimes may be seen as ‘Kids will be kids’ to being punished
Merton strain theory
Robert K Merton study 1938 :
People engage in deviant behaviour when they are unable to achieve socially approved goals by legitimate means
Adapted Durkheim idea of anomie (normlessness) to explain deviance
Structural factors : Society unequal opportunity structure
Cultural factors : Strong emphasis on success goals Weaker emphasis on using legitimate means to achieve them
Therefore for Merton deviance = strain between The goals that a culture encourages individuals to achieve + What the structure of society allows individuals to achieve legitimately
Merton pulled upon ideas of The American Dream to explain this
The American Dream
The American culture values big money success Americans are expected to pursue the Dream by legitimate means Americans believe in meritocracy whoever works towards their goals conscientiously will achieve them
The reality in American society is very different There are widespread disadvantages, discrimination, poverty Keeping people from achieving the Dream by legitimate means
The goal of money and success + And the lack of opportunity via legitimate means to achieve it = Stress and strain = potentially deviance
The norms to prevent deviance are not strong enough Americans want to achieve success by any means “To the victor the spoils”
Deviant adaptations to strain
Individuals position in the social structure Affects the way that they respond to strain / anomie
There are 5 types of adaptation depending on whether an individual Accepts Rejects Replaces approved cultural goals and legitimate means of achieving them
1. Conformity - People who accept goals and legitimate ways to achieve them E.g. Get a job and work as conscientiously as possible Conforming to norm
2. Innovation - Accept goals But not the way they should be achieved E.g. Turn to crime
3. Ritualism - No longer accept goals as possible But still go through means to try to achieve them Life has become a ritual for them
4. Retreatism - Reject goals and ways to achieve them Retreat into themselves away from society E.g. Drug addicts
5. Rebellion - Outrightly reject goals and ways to achieve them Want to create a new society with new goals and new means of achieving them E.g. Marxists
Evaluation of Merton
Shows how normal and deviant behaviour can arise from the same goals E.g. Most crime in America is property crime Because material wealth is valued so highly and W / c crime rate is higher Because they have the least opportunities
The problem is W / c crime is over-represented in crime figures W / c experience the most crime But yet most do not deviate
Marxists say there is Ignorance of powers of the ruling class Who enforce laws in a way that criminalises the poor but not the rich
Assumes all people share ‘money success’ value goal Assumes all crime is towards these ends this goal But what about violence vandalism
Accounts for individual deviance But what about group deviance E.g. subcultures
Subcultural strain theory
Seeks to criticise Merton theories and build upon them Claims deviance is a product of delinquent or deviant subcultures who possess different values to mainstream culture
Creation of alternative structure of merit and achievement Mainly W / c phenomenon
Albert K Cohen 1955 study :
Status frustration - Deviance largely a lower class phenomenon There is an inability of lower classes to achieve mainstream success goals via legitimate methods
Cohen criticises Merton - Focus on individual deviance Rather than group deviance Merton focuses on crime for a purpose (Theft and fraud) Ignores assault and vandalism
Cohen focused on W / c boys ‘frozen out’ of M / c education system and legitimate path to status These boys suffer status frustration Being forced into a ‘low status’ They rebel against M / c status system Thus forming or joining delinquent or deviant subculture
Alternative status hierarchy: Delinquent or deviant subcultures are characterised by inversion of mainstream cultural values and norms What society praises Subculture condemns
Having failed in legitimate M / c opportunity structure The subculture offers boys an alternative status hierarchy to ‘achieve’ within Individuals win status / respect from peers via activity / behaviour that runs counter to mainstream
Criticism of Cohen subcultural strain theory
Big ideas: Status frustration Value inversion Alternative status hierarchy
Helps to explain non-utilitarian crime and deviance
However there is an assumption that W / c boys share M / c goals before / originally What if they never shared these goals / values?
Cloward and Ohlin Three subcultures
Agreed w / c youths frozen out of ‘big money success’ Legitimate opportunity structure
Not everyone however innovates and engages in utilitarian crime like property crime
Some have unequal access to illegitimate opportunity structure Not everyone who fails legitimately Succeeds illegitimately
3 subcultures:
Criminal youths - Youths gain an ‘apprenticeship’ in crime; mafia
Conflict - Areas with high population churn Loose gangs fighting for territory; east London
Retreatist - Double failure Drug abusers
Criticisms Cloward and Ohlin
They agree with Merton and Cohen that most crime is W / c Thus ignoring crimes of the wealthy
Their theory too deterministic Over-predicts extent of W /c crime
They ignore wider power structure Including who makes and enforces law
Draw boundaries too sharply between the different types As if it would not be possible to belong to more than one of these subcultures simultaneously
Assume everyone starts off sharing same mainstream success goal
Matza claims most delinquents not strongly committed to their subculture as strain theorists suggest Actually merely draft in and out of delinquency
