Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Crime and Deviance - Interactionalism and Social Construction (flashcards…
Crime and Deviance - Interactionalism and Social Construction (flashcards done)
Labelling
BECKER
"
Social groups create deviance by creating the rules
whose infraction constitutes deviance, and by applying those rules to particular people and
labelling them as outsiders
."
Moral Entrepreneurs
people who push laws and rules, and can impose their definition of deviance - media, police, politicians, etc.
Have 2 effects through new laws.
Creation of a new group of 'outsiders'
Creation or expansion of a social control agency
Social Construction
labelling theorists are interested in
how and why
certain acts come to be defined or labelled as criminal or deviant in the first place.
No act is inherently criminal or deviant in in itself, in all situations and at all times.
It is not the nature of the act that makes it deviant, but the nature of society's reaction to the act.
Statistics are only a record of what the police decide to classify as deviant
- just the number of times the agents of social control decide to proceed with action
only reflects acts which are known to the police and officially recorded -
DARK FIRGURE OF CRIME
Selective Law Enforcement
BECKER
agents of social control
use considerable discretion and selective judgement in deciding
whether and how
to deal with illegal behaviour.
Police operate with
pre-existing conceptions of deviance and stereotypes
. This affects who and why they deal with, making
convictions dependent on
:
situation and circumstance
Appearance, background personal bio
CICOUREL
Negotiation of justice
police enforce the law and charge people based on
typification
those who fit the stereo
type
of a deviant are more likely to be charged than those who don't
found that the police viewed behviour of the M/C differently from W/C, even when the actual behaviour was the same.
M/C were more able than W/C parents to
convince the agents of social control
that they could monitor their children and that this behaviour was a one-off offence -
lighter or no sentence
.
As a result
, we need to look at where the police patrol, who they regard as suspicious and the resulting stop and searches
More W/C are patrolled = more W/C arrests = confirmation of the original stereotypes
crime stats do not give a valid picture of criminal behaviour - should not rely on them as fact
EFFECTS OF LABELLING
labelling theorists
interested in the effect of labelling on those who have been labelled. Claim that by labelling certain people as crime or devaent, society encourages them to become more so.
Lemert (1951)
different types of deviance
Primary deviance
- deviant acts that have not yet been labelled so by society - less effect
Secondary deviance
- deviant acts that have been publicly labelled as deviant - more of an effect.
Master Status
if someone is caught committing a form of
secondary deviance
they are
publicly labelled as deviant
. This causes them to face stigmatism, humiliation and exclusion from mainstream society.
This label of criminality becomes their
MASTER STATUS
- controls their identity and how other see them
an identity crisis occurs, and causes people to
respond by accepting their new label
, creating a SFP leading to a
deviant career
.
Labelling and SFP
those labelled as criminals will face
rejection and exclusion
from society. This leads to
less legitimate opportunities
, forcing them to resort to crime and seek support from other deviants who
identify with them.
Deviant subcultures provide role models, rewards for deviant acts, and reinforces their criminal identity
BECKER
argues that the application of a deviant label creates more deviance than it prevents.
Evidence - Young (1971)
Participant observation
of a group of hippie marijuana users in the late 1960s
Police and media derived negative stereotypes
about them, creating them as outsiders. In self-defence, they retreated into
small closed groups
, where
deviant values and norms develop.
They reacted to being labelled as outsiders by expressing themselves through bizarre clothes and longer hair. Drug use became more central to their identity, and
drug subcultures developed.
This led to the original stereotypes becoming confirmed. This allowed a
Moral Panic
to pressure the police into doing something.
SFP
confirmed as opportunities are reduced, and a
deviancy amplification spiral occurs.
Deviancy Amplification Spiral
Triplett (2000)
tendency to see young offenders as 'evil' in the USA, and to be
less tolerant of their minor deviances
. By re-classing minor offences such as truancy as more serious has led to
MORE truancy
Attempts to control deviance lead to an increase in the level of deviance
. This lead to a repeating cycle.
Cohen
Folk Devils and Moral Panics
- media distorts and exaggerated events which led to a negative societal reaction - this led to greater marginalisation and more deviance.
EVALUATION
STRENGTHS
provides different and unique insight into crime and deviance that other theories do not provide
challenges the idea that deviants are different from normal people
shows the importance in the reaction of others to the crime
reveals the importance of stereotyping
reveals the way crime statistics are a product of bias in law enforcement
WEAKNESSES
removes blame away from the offender, and onto thse who define him or her as a deviant
assumes as act is not deviant until it is labelled as such, yet many know perfectly wall that what they are doing is deviant
it does not explain the causes of deviant behaviour which originate before the labelling process
doesn't allow that some people choose to deviate and take on a deviant label
doesn't acknowledge that attached of a deviant label reults in less cirme due to the associated stigma and societal reaction
it recognises the role of power in creating and labelling deviance, however fails to analyse the source... therefore, the theory focuses on those who apply the labels and not those who create the rules (R/C according to Marxists)
Braithwaite (1989)
positive role of labelling
- identified 2 types of shaming
Disintegrative shaming
- the act and the actor are labelled as deviant
Reintegrative shaming
- labels the act but not the actor
Avoids stigmatising the individual
makes it easier for the community to separate the act from the individual
makes it easier to reintegrate into society
Makes them aware of the consequences of their act
encourages others to forgie them for their behaviour
avoids secondary deviance