Sociological explanations of the causes of crime and deviance: an evalutation. http://www.polity.co.uk/giddens7/lecturerresource/lecturerguides/Lecturer_Guide_21.pdf http://www.saylor.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/SOC101_Introduction-to-Sociology_Chapter-7.pdf Crime exists within the broad category of behaviour that sociologists call deviance, according to sociologist William Graham Sumner ‘deviance is a violation of established contextual, cultural, or social norms, whether codified by laws or not.’ and crime is behaviour that breaks a law requiring a legal sanction. Deviance, although comes with a negative connotation, it can also be positive, for instance, when Rosa Parks decided to sit on the wrong section of the bus, she challenged …show more content…
There is so much pressure on achieving success that those without the conventional means may deviate from acceptable norms in order to achieve success, even if it involves criminal activity. He refers to this as a 'strain to anomie '. Functionalism provides a sociological alternative to biological and psychological theories, however, it fails to explain why some people turn to deviance and others don 't, why there are crimes that are not motivated by money, such as gang violence and vandalism, and assumes that all of society is motivated by a desire for monetary …show more content…
Becker (1963) was one of the first to challenge the assumption that sociologists should focus on the causes of crime, as they believe that there are no universal causes to be discovered by sociologists, and stress the view that deviance is relative and defined by each society and each situation, for example nudity is perfectly acceptable in your own home, but seen as deviant and criminal in a public place, it 's the reaction of those around you that make you realise you are committing a deviant act. Sometimes it is also referred to as the labelling theory, taking into account that self-identity can be socially constructed through interactions with the community. Negative stereotyping and social stigma can promote deviant behaviour called a self-fulfilling prophecy, Lermert (1951) distinguished that if the self-concept has been shamed after committing the deviant behaviour (primary deviant act) and the deviant label internalised, the person may return to criminal activity (secondary deviant act) or join a criminal group to escape feelings of rejection. This reinforces the deviant self-concept as it becomes a bigger part of their identity and more difficult to remove, this is called this the deviant
Crime is a unlawful activity while deviance is a behavior that is different from that of the
...ightened by Erikson’s arguments. It is not often that I hear a sociological theory and think “AH HA! I get it.” But in this case I felt as though I could have a very clear understanding of what he was trying to say. However, although the evidence of deviance through our history as humans really does go to show that deviancy brings us together in a joint force for what we believe to be the common good and morality. Erikson’s evidence of mainly court records is not an adequate basis on determining a theory to explain the nature of society and its relationship with deviancy. I think if he had a true record of how the communities he studies reacted to deviance on every level. So far his study is without official statistics. It is my belief however this study could be more accurate if there were to be data collected on processes were enables to provide alternative data.
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
The theoretical study of societal reaction to deviance has been carried out under different names, such as, labelling theory, interactionist perspective, and the social constructionist perspective. In the sociology of deviance, the labelling theory of deviant behaviour is often used interchangeably with the societal reaction theory of deviancy. As a matter of fact, both phrases point equally to the fact that sociological explanations of deviance function as a product of social control rather than a product of psychology or genetic inheritance. Some sociologists would explain deviance by accepting without question definitions of deviance and concerning themselves with primary aetiology. However, labelling theorists stress the point of seeing deviance from the viewpoint of the deviant individual. They claim that when a person becomes known as a deviant, and is ascribed deviant behaviour patterns, it is as much, if not more, to do with the way they have been stigmatized, then the deviant act they are said to have committed. In addition, Howard S. Becker (1963), one of the earlier interaction theorists, claimed that, "social groups create deviance by making the rules whose infraction constitute deviance, and by applying those rules to particular people and labelling them as outsiders". Furthermore, the labelling theoretical approach to deviance concentrates on the social reaction to deviance committed by individuals, as well as, the interaction processes leading up to the labelling.
The TV show, Law and Order: Special Victims Unit, often addresses criminal deviance such as rape and murder. In the episode, “Scorched Earth,” an African immigrant maid becomes a rape victim of a rich, Italian prime minister named Distascio (Wolf). This episode highlights how status can affect perception of certain deviant behaviors. Additionally, it addresses contemporary America’s values toward types of deviant acts, and sanctions that go along with them.
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).
Deviance is a natural part of and necessary for stability and social order in society, this according to functionalist theorist Emile Durkheim (MindEdge, Inc., 2016). Traditionally, society is generally successful in providing motivation for individuals to aspire for goals of some sort, whether through wealth, prestige or perceived power (Henslin, 2011). However, from a functional perspective, theories have been developed in identifying when lawful and equal access is not afforded to certain individuals in the process of obtaining such goals. This restriction and inequality to opportunity for access in the quest to achieve success is what is now referred to as structural strain theory, which was developed by sociologist Robert Merton (Henslin,
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.
There exists conflicting theories among sociologists in the area of determining why a person is considered to be a deviant, and the reasons behind why he or she has committed a deviant act. From a positivistic perspective, deviance is based on biological or social determinism. Alternatively, from a constructionist perspective, deviance is created and assigned by society. Both perspectives seek to give a theory for why a person may become known as deviant. Although they both view similar acts as deviant, the basic differences between positivists and constructionists theories are clear.
"Sociological Theories To Explain Deviance." Sociological Theories To Explain Deviance. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Dec. 2013. .
Crime is some action/omission that causes harm in a situation that the person/group responsible ‘ought’ to be held accountable and punished irrespective of what the law book of state say.
The two theoretical approaches I have chosen to compare to the study of crime are Functionalism and Marxism. I have done so, as I believe both theories are important/ significant to the study of crime and differentiate from each other. I will do this by writing a critique the advantages and disadvantages of both of the theories and thus, resulting in my own personal opinion in the conclusion.
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...
Crime is defined by those in power- People in power shape the criminal law with their values without an objective understanding for right and wrong. Not only are acts labeled, but also people- Labels define a person without even meeting them. A person defined as smart or intelligent are more likely to succeed and stay above the law. In contrast, negative labeling can stigmatize a person into reincarnating the name given, resulting in criminal acts and major long-term consequences. Subject interpretation of behavior involves both positive and negative labels- Negative consequences are labeled only when do the labeling. The act itself can have a negative label but the contributor can be excused of the crime. For instance, a person can kill someone, but not be labeled as a murder due to an individual in take on the crime. The consequences of labeling can unfold a tale of actions, shutting out the individual will result to criminal offenses due to the feeling of detachment as well as, isolation. A label; rumor or suspicion can leave a permanent print on someone’s life. The individual will want to live up to the label depending on the severity and notice of the name. Primary deviance is, crimes or acts that are not recorded or labeled as crimes. Simply, an act within the norm and
Human antisocial behaviour is complex and trying to understand it has always proven to be a daunting intelligent task, especially in modern culturally diverse societies. Crime, broadly defined as behaviour through which individuals obtain resources for others through uncouth means, presents as one of the most refractory internal social dilemmas. Understanding individual criminal acts such a murder, rape or motives behind them is intricate, rather their behavioral definitions and causes offers a more clear platform for argumentative reasoning. Criminal behaviour, regardless of manner, involves use of barbaric methodologies to obtain symbolic or material resources. Criminal behavior results from methodical processes that involve intricate interactions among isolated, societal, and environmental factors in people’s lives.