symbolic interactionalist theorists on crime

Question 1

Becker

Answer 1

-just bc someone breaks a rule doesn’t mean it’ll be labelled as deviant
-someone must enforce rules or draw attention to them
-if someone is labelled, consequences follow
-when someone commits a crime etc the response is not uniform
-used study of incest on pacific island

Question 2

incest study

Answer 2

-youth had committed suicide bc he was publicly accused of incest.
-they were tolerant of incest bc it wasn’t uncommon or frowned upon but had to be kept discreet
-they were intolerant if it became public and islanders were often ostracised

Question 3

Kitsue

Answer 3

-75 straight students who had been hit on by ppl of the same sex
-some ppl were hateful, others tolerant
-no definite definition of what was a homosexual advance

Question 4

primary & secondary deviance

Answer 4

-primary= not publicly labelled as deviant, not an organised deviant way of life, don’t see themselves as deviant, a ‘moment of madness’
-secondary deviance= labelled by others (more significance), e.g. coastal inuits of canada: if someone stuttered it was embarrassing due to the importance attached to ceremonial speeches and they are shamed (master status)

Question 5

impact of labels

Answer 5

-someone who is labelled as deviant will eventually see themselves as bad
-status becomes unimportant, their ‘master status’ now decides how ppl will respond to them, leading to a self-fulfilling prophecy

Question 6

Cohen

Answer 6

-labels and the ‘master status’ creates moral panic
-moral panic leads to self fulfilling prophecy & formation of subcultures and an increase in deviant behaviour