Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Functionalist and subcultural theories of crime & deviance - Coggle…
Functionalist and subcultural theories of crime & deviance
Durkheim
- 'crime is a healthy and integral part of all societies'
Durkheim argues
crime is inevitable and found in all societies
Why is crime inevitable in society?
Not everyone is equally effectively socialised (e.g. child abuse, different cultures, religions, race, gender)
Diversity in lifestyles and values - different subcultures with deviant values from the mainstream (e.g. working-class subculture)
Modern societies tend towards anomie (breakdown in norms and values) and the framework of behaviour becomes less clear cut
Durkheim argues crime and deviance perform two key functions:
'boundary maintenance'
and
'adaption and change'
Crime performs a function of boundary maintenance by reinforcing society's commitment to the value consensus
Deviance performs a function of adaption and change by preventing social stagnation
Deviance (not crime) acts as a 'safety valve' which allows people to rebel without breaking key institutions - this allows society to identify weaknesses within institutions and change them.
People with new ideas (e.g. values which go against the mainstream) need a way to challenge current social norms (test them) and allow society to adapt to - prevents anomie
e.g. Suffragettes, being homosexual
Society's institutions adapting to new ideas - deviance is a channel for communication between the people and institutions/people in charge that something isn't working - they can then adapt!
However, crime and eviance to perform this function, it must be at the correct level:
too high
= no social solidarity or value consensus, all deviance
too low
= social stagnation, too much social control, restricted individual freedoms (important for society!)
Criticism
Durkheim never states the correct level of deviance society needs to be able to adapt and change
Criticism
Durkheim assumes people are 'passive puppets' who will all react in the same way to a crime and ignores individual reactions, therefore strengthening social solidarity is not ensured and crime may cause social divide
e.g. George Floyd's death divided society into 'All Lives Matter' and 'Black Lives Matter' rather than everyone coming together to support BLM
Criticism
Acts of deviance do not always lead to adaption and change in society, for example Insulate Britain protesters who block traffic by sitting in road have new ideas/values which are not accepted by society so cannot create change - creates annoyance and social divide - people less likely to support cause
EXAMPLE - train strikes - causes social divide and government is maintaining the protests because its cheaper than raising wages - NO ADAPTION AND CHANGE
Merton
(1938) adapted Durkheim's concept of anomie to create 'Strain Theory'
What is Strain Theory?
Strain Theory states that
deviance is the result of strain
between cultlural factors (goals society encourages people to achieve) and structural factors (what institutions/structures allow people to achieve)
i.e. some groups are blocked by structural factors to achieving society's goals
Merton uses
'The American Dream'
as an example of the goals society sets for its members to achieve (e.g. family, house, secure job); achieving goals through legitimate means (e.g. qualifications and hard work)
How do people react to strain?
Those who cannot achieve the goals society sets through legitimate means feel
frustrated
so become '
innovators
' who use deviant means to achieve society's goals
e.g. dealing drugs to earn money and buy a house and car and provide for your family
Strengths
The majority of crimes committed are utilitarian crime (economically motivated crimes) which follows Mertons theory as it shows people are using deviance to try and achieve society's goals
Explains why working-class crime rates are higher than middle-class crime rates - there is more strain between structural and cultural factors for w/c so they feel frustrated (e.g. education system)
Criticisms
Marxists
argue Merton ignores the power of the ruling class to criminalise the poor
Assumes there is a value consensus in society- that everyone wants to achieve the same goals (e.g. job, family, house) - assumes we are passive puppets with no individuality (key weakness of structural theories)
e.g. some people might want to travel, not have a family, pursue happiness differently
Postmodern society - meta narratives (American Dream) has broken down
Ignores non-utilitarian crime - what about vandalism/violence/state crimes?
Ignores group crime and only considers individual utilitarian crime- link to Cohen
Cohen
- subcultural theorist who criticises Merton and offers an explanation for non-utilitarian and group crime and deviance
Deviance is the result of a delinquent subculture with deviant values to the mainstream
(e.g. working class boys in education)
Official status hierarchy
of school labels boys as low status because their values do not align with the m/c school values -
status frustration
(socialisation, material deprivation, etc)
---> cannot gain status through
legitimate means
in this structure
---> form subculture which acts as an
alternative status hierarchy
and allows them to gain status by preforming crime and deviance - the subculture is an
illegitimate opportunity structure
(value inversion from mainstream)
Criticisms
Assumes w/c boys start off holding m/c values and goals for success - they may never see themselves as failure - no strain -
cultural deprivation theory
shows w/c hold different values to m/c school ones - w/c socialised to value different things
Strengths
Offers an explanation for non-utilitarian crime and group crime - to gain status (alternative goals)
GOOD THEORY - Knife crime big problem in UK in cities like London - could inform policy about reducing need for subcultures to form (making school more accessible for w/c children) - improvements to institutions to allow equal and fair access (true meritocracy)
Cloward & Ohlin
Crime is the result of deviant subcultres - similar to Cohen - however, suggest 3 key types of subctulre
Conflict subcultures = more disorganised, violent crimes, less
structured
e.g. yutes in Top Boy
Retreatist subcultures = drug-taking, retreated from society
e.g. undercover police in TopBoy taking drugs
Criminal subctulre =organised crime 'mafias', business-like
e.g. drug empire, built up over years, Summerhouse, Dushane and Sully
Strengths - differenciates between subcultures, which Cohen does not do
Weaknesses - the division between subcultures is not this clear cut in reality - not applicable to contemporary society - for example criminal and conflict subcultures can share features (e.g. turf wars over drug dealing - elements of violence within an organised crime structure)
Miller
- criticises Strain Theory and Subcultural Theory for assuming the w/c value the same goals as the m/c
The working-class hold different values and goals to the middle-class so cannot 'strain' from them in the first place
W/c have an independent subculture with 'focal concerns'
Delinquency is due to the nature of w/c subculture and their goals rather than 'strain' between cultural and structural factors
Fatalism - may be deviant because they know they're not knowing anywhere in the future - focal concert
trouble, toughness, smartness, excitement, fate, autonomy
Criticisms
Male-centric and ignores w/c female delinquency
- w/c women have a whole new set of issues due to their intersectional identity (misogyny and class shame) which may be the cause of delinquency (e.g. w/c young single mothers may commit minor crimes like stealing due to not being able to get a good enough job to provide for child due to both misogyny and cultural deprivation)
The middle-class may also adopt focal concerns
(e,g, being the most 'macho', immediate gratification and excitement) - think
Logan
and trust fund kids with fatalism
Strengths/contemporary application
Young people pursue a variety of goals other than money and success (e.g. popularity on social media) and failure to achieve these goals could lead to delinquence