Topic 2 - Labelling Theory Flashcards
Becker (how laws are made and their effects)
laws are created my moral entrepreneurs (concerned about social issues and think a behaviour should be illegal), go on moral crusades to change the law (e.g. protests), puts pressure on the government to make or change the law effects of laws:
- creates a new group of criminal people, marginalised, creates a group of outsiders
- expansion of agents of social control, more laws means more people needed to enforce them
evaluation of Becker (effects of laws)
Platt’s study
looks at juvenile delinquents, Aries and Shorter no childhood, same judicial system for children and adults, with social construction of childhood moral entrepreneurs went on moral crusade and campaigned for children to have their own judicial system (juvenile delinquency), government introduced child-specific laws (e.g. smoking and drinking) lead to:
- new group of outsiders - children who were not previously criminals became criminals and were then marginalised by society
- explansion of agents of social control - youth magistrate courts and juvenile delinquent centres were built
Becker (who gets labelled)
depends on several factors:
1. social characteristics e.g. race, gender, class
2. social context of offence - e.g. location
3. how person engages with agents of social control e.g. being complient vs disrespecting police
』你
gives example of brawl between WC youths vs MC youths:
WC- act of delinquency
MC - act of high spirits
Piliavin and Briar
agree that police often decide to make an arrest based on physical characteristics
Cicourel
police hold tipifications and common sense theories of the typical criminal, results in police discrimination, e.g. may think WC commit more crime - patrol more WC areas, shouldnt take official statistics at face value, not about who commits crime but about who police target, argues justice is negotiable and not fixed, shows that MC youths get away with crimes because:
- they dont fit the tipifications
- MC parents use their cultural capital to negotiate on the child’s behalf
the social construction of crime statistics
decision gates (stages in criminal justice system requiring people to make decisions):
- police decision to stop and search
- police decision to arrest or give a warning
- Crown Prosecution Service decision on whether to take the case to court (cases often dropped due to cost, is evidence strong enough to convict? is the threat serious?)
- court decision - innocent or guilty
- court decision - length or severity of penalty
interactionists (Cicourel) dont accept patterns of official crime statistics as fact, argue you should not take statistics as a resource, however are useful as a topic of investigation (of people involved in their construction e.g. police), same with suicide rates; useful for investigating what coroners label as suicides
Lemert
looks at effects of labelling someone as criminal or deviant, distinguishes between primary and secondary deviance, primary deviance - the norm, not labelled as deviant so doesn’t affect self-concept, secondary deviance - labelled as deviant by society, can make someone more deviant, status of criminal becomes master status; overshadows all other statuses, society marginalises those with criminal status, thus individual struggles to enter world of work, affects self-concept and forces them down deviant career paths, labelled criminals only accepted by other criminals, only thing in common is criminal identity, leads to the formation of criminal subcultures where crime is encouraged, leads to more crime
Jock Young
study of marijuana users in Notting Hill supports Lemert’s theory, when marijuana was not illegal smokers were integrated members of society, marijuana was a peripheral part of their lives - primary deviance, when marijuana use was made illegal smokers were arrested and labelled as criminal, became master status, societal reaction to marginalise labelled criminals, lead to deviant subculture (hippies), only thing in common was smoking marijuana, became a central activity, secondary deviance, became more deviant as new ideologies and a specific appearance developed
in theory, agents of social control are supposed to reduce crime and deviance, but in reality they amplify it
evaluation of Lemert
- doesnt explain why people commit primary deviance
- (social action theory) deterministic
Stanley Cohen
wrote Folk Devils and Moral Panics, media lebels people as folk devils (appears to be a threat ot wider society), societal reaction is to exclude and marginalise, making them more deviant 1970s brawl on Margate beach, media distorted and exaggerated severity (by exaggerating number involved), implies brawl took place between two subcultures (mods and rockers), media created moral panic by predicting more brawls, moral entrepreneurs went on a moral crusade and called authorities to address the behaviour, lead to increase in youth arrests, teens labelled as folk devils so experienced marginalisation, youths started to polarise into mods and rockers, shows role of media in causing secondary deviance
evaluation of Stanley Cohen
- too deterministic - suggests that if media labels a certain group, everyone within that group will a E conform and engage in secondary deviance
- criticised for the idea that media stories result in moral panics - in post-modernity, it is often not the reaction of media audiences because:
1. we are accustomed to shock-horror stories because these stories get published often, as they garner more attention
2. in postmodern society, the Rapoport’s describe out society as pluralistic - our society is more multicultural and diverse, less people are likely to buy into these stories as they know people from the groups that are being labelled
Braithwaite
not all labels lead to secondary deviance
4) *
distinguishes between two types of labelling:
1. disintegrative shaming - labels the person as deviant or criminal rather than the behaviour, society believes that the person is inherently deviant, discourages forgiveness, results in stigmatisation, marginalisation and social exclusion,leads to secondary deviance
2. re-integrative shaming - only labels the behaviour as bad, not the person, avoids secondary deviance and encourages forgiveness
Durkheim
study of suicide, functionalist, social facts, humans react passively like atoms, principles and
4) *
procedures of science (hypothesis, collect data, find patterns, establish cause-and-effect, uncover universal laws)
looked at official statistics of suicide and found patterns:
- suicide rate is always consistent despite population change
- suicide rate sometimes fluctuates in times of big social change such as war or recessions
- within society, different social groups have different suicide rate
found protestants have higher suicide rates than catholics, unmarried higher than married, argued suicide determined by levels of integration extreme integration - high levels of altruistic suicide too low levels of integration - high levels of egotystical suicide
Douglas
interactionist,, criticises Durkheims use of official statistics, argues you need to use qualitative data w such as personal documents (e.g. diary entries)
argues that levels of social integration do not affect whether people commit suicide, but whether coroners report deaths as suicide, the social network of catholics may deny suicide because it brings stigma, people dont want to say that those who are integrated commit suicide
evaluation of Douglas
Douglas can be criticised for saying that official statistics of suicide lack validity because all they ? & tell you is how the coroner interprets the deaths using tipifications
however, he claims to be able to find the cause of death from investigations, which is also done by the coroner
so how can Douglas be sure he found the right cause when he follows the same method as the coroner
