Labelling theorists are interested in why and how some acts are seen to be criminal in the first place and the effects of being labelled criminal has on an individual rather than seeking the causes of their criminal behaviour. (Webb et al, 2009). They argue that no act is criminal until society labels it to be so. Therefore society has defined a crime to be ‘An action or omission which constitutes an offence and is punishable by law’ (Oxford Dictionary, 2000) for example, stealing a car, or murder. Whereas deviance is defined as ‘The fact or state of diverging from usual or accepted standards, especially in social or sexualbehaviour’ (Oxford Dictionary, 2000) for example, dying your hair green or not respecting your elders. Therefrom, Becker (1963) notes ‘Social groups create deviance by creating the rules whose infraction [breaking] constitutes deviance, and by applying those rules to particular people and labelling them as outsiders.’ Implying that deviant individuals have accepted their given label of ‘deviant’ and therefore act upon this creating deviant acts. This is then why labelling theorists take a constructionist approach to crime and …show more content…
Labelling theory tends to look more at the negative effects of labelling and the status this gives the individual who committed the deviant act for example, they are labelled a victim and a fuss is made over them in terms of court hearings and police prosecution. Whereas labelling theorists do not look in detail at the victim of the crime for example, in such terrible acts such as rape, this criminal is not a victim - they are the perpetrator and the individual in whom they raped should be seen as the victim yet labelling theory does not address
Bohm and Brenda L. Vogel, the Labeling theory is used to explain why people commit crimes and conceive themselves as criminals. Overall the Labeling theory consists of social groups creating rules and then applying those rules to particular people and labeling them as outsiders. This theory is split into two types of deviances: primary deviance and secondary deviance. Primary deviance is the initial criminal act, for example, a man robs a bank. A secondary deviance is committing a crime after the first criminal act and accepting the label of a criminal. Following the previous example, after the man robs the bank, he decides to do it again because he now sees himself as a criminal bank robber and wants to continue doing it and is okay with being seen that
Labelling theory, stemming from the influences of Cooley, Mead, Tannenbaum, and Lemert, has its origins somewhere within the context of the twentieth century. However, Edwin Lemert is widely considered the producer and founder of the original version of labelling theory. This paper, not a summary, provides a brief history of labelling theory, as well as, its role in the sociology of deviance. It attempts to explore the contributions made by labelling theorists, the criticism towards labelling theorists, and the discussion surrounding its reality as an actual theory. In essence, the main focus of this paper besides proving an understanding of Howard Becker, is to describe and evaluate `labelling theory` to the study of crime and deviance, by way of an in depth discussion.
According to Becker, the labelling theory of deviance looks at what happens to individuals after they are labelled as deviant (Skatvedt & Schou, 2008) The symbolic interactionist approach focuses on the role of social labels and sanctions that pressure individual gang members to continue engaging in deviant acts (Skatvedt & Schou, 2008).The labelling theory suggests that when an individual is labeled as deviant they are more likely to be rejected by families, friends, and societies which ultimately leads to further deviant acts (Becker, 1973). The deviant identity is thus complete when the individual gang member integrates himself into the gang subculture (Becker, 1973). Two high school gangs, the Roughnecks and the Saints, were constantly involved in deviant acts such as drinking, petty theft etc.,; however, high school teachers labelled the Saints as those headed for success and the Roughnecks as those headed for trouble (Chambliss, 1973) After high school, almost all of the Saints went to college and became doctors, lawyers, etc. while only two Roughnecks went to college and others were involved in killings and dropped out of school and so forth (Chambliss, 1973) This case study demonstrates that labels are powerful; they can trigger a greater involvement in deviant acts through social
Much of society mistakenly interchanges the two concepts of crime and deviance, assuming that they are one in the same. "A crime is what the law proclaims it to be, and is an act punishable by law" (Winterdyk 9). Deviance, on the other hand, is a contested concept; it can be defined as differing from a norm or accepted standard of society (dictionary.com). Deviance involves acts that fluctuate from social norms; although such actions can be, they are not necessarily against the law (Winterdyk 9).
Labeling theory of deviance suggests that when one is labeled constantly on the basis of any minority it gives rise to deviant behavior in order to prove the strength of the minority. The minority has been labeled so by people for a long time. They have been labeled because of their race. The gang is labeled anti-social because of their criminal behavior which turns them further to deviance. The use of the labeling theory can be seen being implemented very judiciously
As mentioned in lecture, labeling theory asks two critical questions: what is crime, and who is criminal? This is the central tenet of labeling theory because the focus is on what activities constitute criminal behaviour within the context. This means that over time, the general perspective changes in regards to what can be labeled 'crime.' For instance, society is known to react negatively towards prostitution in the past; whereas the contemporary reaction is primarily to legalize it.
Deviant behavior is sociologically defined as, when someone departs from the “norms”. Most of the time when someone says deviance they think against the law or acting out in a negative behavior. To sociologists it can be both positive and negative. While most crimes are deviant, they are not always. Norms can be classified into two categories, mores and folkways. Mores are informal rules that are not written; when mores are broken, they can have serious punishments and sanctions. Folkways are informal rules that are just expected to be followed, but have no real repercussions.
Social learning theory is one of the most known theories and has been studied by many. Social learning theory programs that are available are mainly crime control programs. This program involves people to think about what they have truly done and to change the negative into positive behavior. Labeling theory does not offer any real programs but as society learns more about these specific theories so has our treatment of others. Since labeling theory can occur anywhere it is believed that society give the person a different outcome. So instead of shaming a person you should use it as a learning tool not to commit the act again. This will be a way for the person to change their label and be more open to changing their outlook.
2. When looking at the labeling theory, those who are deviant get labeled which unfortunately results in isolating from the society they live in. deviant activity means those actions contrary to the norms whether discovered or not. Labeling shows a distinction between breaking the rules and deviance with deviance being that rule breaking that is labeled. Conflict theory focuses on different interests of members of society.
Sociologists suggest deviance is a violation of any societal norm. Yet some have suggested deviance is a socially outmoded concept based on a Durkheim’s model of social solidarity. Therefore suggesting now it is obsolete, there is no longer a use for it in a (post) modern progressive and diverse society like Australia. According to Roach Anleu (2004) Colin Sumner was one such claimant. Sumner suggested that the sociological concept of deviance and any coherent theoretical development stagnated in mid 1970s, as no agreement on how deviance should be set never happened, therefore there was never an answer to the question, “deviant from what”? Secondly, Sumner states there is no explanation for why deviance is the chosen subject of research, instead of the norms that specify deviance. He believed it only made sense to examine deviance within the framework of social disapproval. Sumner also believed the relationships between deviance, crime, and difference to be unclear. Lastly he thought that the search for a general concept to encompass such a assorted range of activities, problems and situations was misguided because there can be no behavioural unity for such a diverse range of practices. Sumner (1994) suggested that the focus should analysis how deviant categories are constructed and managed by the power relationships that are continually changing. (Sumner 1994), (Roach Anleu 2014) Roach Anleu (2014) describe norms as reflecting some level of consensus and can be laws, rules, regulations, standards, or unspoken expectations. However, within large communities, there can be individuals, and groups whose behaviour is perceived as deviant according to the accepted norms. Those individuals and or groups may not necessarily be consider...
Labelling theory: The theory that the terms crime, deviance, or punishment are labels, variously applied by act of power and not some natural reflection of events – American criminologist Howard Becker
Deviance is defined as actions or behaviors that violate socials norms. In turn the concept of deviance is dependent on the social observation and perception. “By it’s very nature, the constructionism through which people define and interpret actions or appearances is always “social.” ”(Henry, 2009 , p. 6) One’s perception of a situation may be completely different from another depending on cultural and social factors. The way someone talks, walks, dresses, and holds themselves are all factors that attribute to how someone perceives another. In some cases what is socially or normally acceptable to one person is deviant in another’s eyes. For this reason there is a lot of gray area involving the topic of deviance because actions and behaviors are so diversely interpreted.
The labelling theory became dominant within society during the 1940’s and 1950’s, when a group of graduate students from the Chicago school tried a different approach to applying theory to deviant behaviour. Within this group was a highly influential young man, Howard S.Becker who became the person most recognised for his work with the labelling of crime (Williams.F. McShaneM. 2010.p110). Becker argued that labels could be applied through the social reaction of others when a deviant or criminal act had been committed he stated that “Labelling is the process of identifying, categorising and stereotyping social categories such as delinquents” (Davies.M.et.al.2010.p30). When an individual becomes labelled a criminal, people do not consider all the praiseworthy things they may have done previously, they just see that they have committed some form of deviance and are now judged within societ...
Label theory is based in the idea that behaviors are irregular when the society labels them as irregular. The label theory implies that a person commits a crime in some time of a life, but that person is not seen as deviant, while other people are deviant. Label theory explains how a behavior of a person conflicts with the norms of the society. For example, A black young men, who lives in a neighborhood controlled by gangs may be labeled as a gang member. In consequence, that young man can start to act as gang member or became one. He incorporates the label that was given to him.
Labelling theory outlines the sociological approach towards labelling within societies and in the development of crime and deviance (Gunnar Bernburg, and D. Krohn et al., 2014, pp. 69-71). The theory purposes that, when an individual is given a negative label (that is deviant), then the individual pursues their new (deviant) label / identity and acts in a manner that is expected from him/her with his/ her new label (Asencio and Burke, 2011, pp. 163-182).