Post on 16-Jan-2016
Part II
Lombroso (1867/1920): Criminals like primitive beings resembling
their ape-like ancestors; women inferior to men; deviant behavior innate
Goring (1913) & Hooton (1939): Physical inferiorities (shorter) indicated
criminal typesSheldon (1949):
More active & muscular, more aggressiveMore recent:
XYY syndrome creates “double male” or “super male” predisposed to violence
Durkheim first advanced the view that society is a moral phenomenonMoral beliefs largely determine how
people behave, their wants, and their identities
Morality (norms, values, laws) are acquired in childhood
Societies with high social integration (bonding and community involvement with others) generally have high conformity with little deviance
Anomie occurs when people become distanced from each other, they lose a sense of belonging, and norms and values become ill defined
Durkheim was concerned that social disintegration and anomie were more prevalent in modern society which was causing more deviance
Yet Durkheim also subscribed to the view that deviance was functional for society
Violations of norms gives rise to a social response of public outrage rooted in the collective conscience of moral belief
This public response to deviance serves to remind people what is acceptable and what is not
Summation: the structural perspective locates the root
cause of deviance and crime outside of the individual in the invisible social structures of society
Structuralists locate the causes of crime in two main factors:Differential opportunity structure Prejudice and discrimination toward certain
groupsMembers of groups with less structural
access to legitimate opportunities will have less effective means to succeed by conforming to morally approved ways
Merton extended Durkheim’s ideas into strain theory
Culture dictates success goals for all but institutional access limited to certain classes: American dream shared by all but only legitimately attainable by some
Some of those excluded retaliate by choosing deviant alternatives
The source of deviance lies in the social structure not the deviant individuals
Anomie for Merton results from this contradiction in social structure
Critical reformulation of Merton: he was correct that some groups have less opportunity for achieving success legitimately
But he was wrong to assume that members of excluded groups could always choose deviance
They suggest that not all disadvantaged persons have the same opportunity for participating in illegitimate activities
Three types of deviant opportunities are present:Criminal: arise from access to deviant
subculturesConflict: attract persons with propensity
for violence Retreatist: persons (drug users) who seek
to withdraw from society
Such opportunities are affected by several factors:Neighborhoods rife with crime, gangs, drugsEthnic or racial people dominate certain
illegal businesses or organizations making it easier for members of those groups to join
A glass ceiling for women exists with men in leadership posts
Conflict over definitions of deviance can occur between various groups based on economics, race/ethnicity, gender, religion, cultural identity, etc.
Structural but not functionalist view of deviance and crime
Society is seen as pluralistic, heterogeneous, and conflictual
Incompatible interests of diverse groups leads to conflict arising from these structural arrangements within society, including crime and deviance
Patriarchal structure of society responsible for the discrimination and oppression of women
Patriarchy pervades culture, social structures and social institutions
This includes laws, the family, the economy and political system, religion, the media and education.
Women are systematically disadvantaged as a result and subject to verbal, physical and sexual abuse
Feminists maintain theories of society and deviance are also male-centered
Belief that deviance was a collective act carried out by groups of people
Building on conflict theory’s view that multiple groups exist in society, subcultural theorists pointed to factions within and across such groups
Each group has its distinct norms and values; it is its own subculture
Overlap between American culture and subcultures suggests some parallels but not exact fit: Differences may lead to conflict
Disparities and different cultural codes between subcultural groups likely to arise in three situations: (see next slide)
When people from one group “migrate” or cross into another’s territory
In a “takeover” situation when one group invades another’s turf
In “border’ areas where contact between members of two groups find themselves in occasional but regular contact
Cohen in Delinquent Boys builds on subcultural conflict idea
Focus on working-class teen males who develop subculture with a value system different from dominant American culture
Lower class boys try but cannot succeed fulfilling middle-class expectations since they are ill equipped at meeting such different standards
In response they develop a blockage, or strain, leading to “status frustration”
From this results an oppositionally reactive subculture based on non-utilitarian, malicious and negative behavior
Lower-class subculture at odds with values of middle-class so that the young who conform to their own culture are likely to adopt behavior that will be seen as deviant
Focal concerns of lower-class culture:Getting into troubleShowing toughnessMaintaining autonomyDemonstrating street smartsSearching for excitementFatalistic
Left unaccounted for in the previous theories are the actual situational dynamics and interactional processes between macro structures and micro individuals
Sutherland and Cressey posit the view that deviant behavior is socially learned
Most significant in this process of learning are the values, beliefs and norms of a person’s closest intimates: Family, friends, and others known well and
respected
As this circle of contacts shifts to a set of deviant values and norms, one is more likely to begin adopting and displaying deviant attitudes and acts as well
Movement into deviant subcultures occurs through a process of drift
Old circle of associates is gradually left as one becomes enmeshed into new group
As this process occurs, a person “drifts” between deviance and conformity
This may go on indefinitely for some time without one making a commitment to either
Drift between deviance and conformity may no longer be an option once one is publicly identified and branded as a deviant
Labeling theory examines how people are defined as deviant, why some acts are ignored, and the circumstances surrounding the act of labeling and the consequences of so being labeled
The key here is the interaction between society and the individual, and the consequences for the individual and society of that and subsequent forms of interaction
Focus on micro level, less on interaction, more on relationships between persons and society
Reverse the question to be asked: Does NOT ask why people commit deviance:Deviance may not only be fun, but even
offers shortcuts and tangible benefitsInstead control theory asks:
Why do people conform? What holds people back from committing
deviance?
Hirschi’s Answer: Social control resides in the extent to
which people develop a stake in conformity, a bond to society
Such persons will be less likely to risk loss of job, status, reputation, friends and family, and thus avoid deviance and conform willingly
The more society is able to foster greater social bonds and a greater stake in conformity, the less deviance there will be
How does feminist theory view deviance in comparison to conflict theory?
Compare the structural-functional theory of deviance to that of the interactionist perspective.
Part II Chapter 6
Part 2: Ch. 6
Crime is constant, though its form/content and extent varies
Crime is increasing in modern societies (300% in France in Durkheim’s time)
Crime therefore must be seen as a normal part of collective life and societies
Part 2: Ch. 6
A society exempt from crime is impossible because of the very nature of crime.
Crime is an act that offends strong collective sentiments (moral values)
Since society is at root a moral order predicated on specific collective values, as long as those societies exist, certain acts will always potentially be offensive
Part 2: Ch. 6
In order for a “serious” crime such as murder to be eliminated, collective sentiments against it throughout society would have to become extremely strong
Yet even as a “serious” crime like murder was eliminated, those same increased collective sentiments would then become more intolerant of “less” serious crimes such as assaults or robberies, and the cycle would continue
Part 2: Ch. 6
Durkheim notes even a society of saints would have “crime” although nothing we recognize: Crime would consist of minor, very trivial
offenses Collective values cannot be shared to the same
degree among all members of the group: There cannot be a society where every individual
is identical in every possible wayThere will always be some group members less
attached to certain values than are others;Some persons more willing to commit deviance
Part 2: Ch. 6
Societies must be able to adapt to change and so be capable of change
This means the collective sentiments must not be so rigid that their alteration would be impossible or social change could not occur
Yet for crime to be totally eliminated, collective values have to be so absolutely rigid and universally adhered to as to make any social innovation impossible
Part 2: Ch. 6
Hence the function of crime: some acts offensive to collective sentiments today may become harbingers of a new, progressive moral order
Durkheim cites the example of Socrates. Contemporary examples include acts of
civil disobedience – crimes at the time reflected in the civil rights movement and individuals such as Martin Luther King
Part 2: Ch. 6
According to Durkheim, why is crime impossible to avoid in societies?
In what ways is crime thought to be functional within society?
Part 2: Ch. 6
Part II Chapter 7
Part 2: Ch. 7
Two major elementsThe first defines goals, purposes &
interests held as legitimate objectives for all or selected members of society
Things “worth striving for” – basic component of design for group living (Linton)
The second defines, controls & regulates acceptable means of attaining goals
Part 2: Ch. 7
No society lacks governing codes of conduct but they do differ in degrees to which folkways, mores, and institutional controls are effectively integrated with goals in hierarchy of cultural values
Technically most effective procedure takes precedence over institutionally prescribed conduct, which leads to an unstable society & hence what Durkheim termed anomie
Part 2: Ch. 7
In sports: when winning becomes the ultimate goal
Injuring the “star” player; using illegitimate means to win
In general: the accumulation of wealth as a goal in itself
Part 2: Ch. 7
The goal of monetary success is entrenched in American society
The family, school & workplace join to provide intensive disciplining required to retain intact a goal that remains elusively beyond reach
Thus, indoctrination of the idea of “American Dream” & pursuit of lofty goals
Cultural manifesto - “not failure, but low aim, is crime”
Part 2: Ch. 7
Thus, acceptance of three cultural axioms:
First, all should strive for same lofty goals since these are open to all
Second, present seeming failure is but a way-station to ultimate success
Third, genuine failure consists only in the lessening or withdrawal of ambition
Part 2: Ch. 7
Psychologically, these axioms represent:A symbolic secondary reinforcement of
incentive Curbing threatened extinction of response
through an associated stimulusThird, increasing the motive strength to
evoke continued responses despite the continued absence of reward
American culture heavily emphasizes wealth as a basic symbol of success, without a corresponding emphasis upon legitimate avenues to attain this goal
Part 2: Ch. 7
Sociologically, these axioms represent:Deflection of criticism of social structure
onto one’s selfPreservation of structure of social power
by having individuals in lower social strata identify themselves with those at top
Providing pressures for conformity with cultural dictates of unslackened ambition by threat of less than full membership
Part 2: Ch. 7
Part 2: Ch. 7
Most common and widely diffusedIncludes acceptance of cultural goals and
institutional meansContinuity and stability of society
depends on this
Part 2: Ch. 7
Brought about by cultural emphasis on success-goal idea
Occurs when individual has assimilated cultural emphasis upon goal without equally internalizing institutional norms governing ways and means for its attainment
Part 2: Ch. 7
Involves abandoning or scaling down of lofty cultural goals of great success & rapid social mobility to where one’s aspirations can be satisfied
Rejects cultural obligation to attempt “to get ahead in the world,” but continues to abide almost compulsively by institutional norms
Examples: “I’m not sticking my neck out” “I’m playing it safe” “Don’t aim high and you won’t be disappointed”
Part 2: Ch. 7
Least commonIn society, but not of itIncludes rejection of cultural goals and
institutional meansExamples: vagrants, psychotics,
outcasts, drunks, drug addictsIndividual escapes from society that they
find frustrating
Part 2: Ch. 7
Individual seeks to bring a new or greatly modified social order
Presupposes alienation from reigning goals and standards
Part 2: Ch. 7
According to Merton, what is a blocked opportunity structure?
What other ways do groups adapt to their balance of means and ends?
Part 2: Ch. 7