Crime and Deviance Theories PDF

**Crime and deviance:** **functionalist, strain and subcultural theories** **Functionalism** Émile Durkheim argued that crime is a necessary feature of all healthy societies. Indeed, there is more crime in modern societies because they have a more **specialised division of labour**, they're more...

**Crime and deviance:** **functionalist, strain and subcultural theories** **Functionalism** Émile Durkheim argued that crime is a necessary feature of all healthy societies. Indeed, there is more crime in modern societies because they have a more **specialised division of labour**, they're more competitive and there is greater individualism and anonymity. In these less **homogenous** societies, no two people can be equally **socially integrated** and **socially regulated**. So not everyone is equally committed to the value consensus or what Durkheim calls the **collective sentiments**. Some people will always be more susceptible to breaking the rules and breaking the law. Crime and deviance in society is determined by the extent that the collective sentiments are offended by the action. If an action is considered very offensive, then the response will be a harsh punishment. So, the function of punishment is not primarily to deal with the individual, its function is **boundary maintenance**. It is done to maintain the line between right and wrong or in Durkheim's terms to restore the **social equilibrium** (society's moral balance). However, the collective sentiments, the punishments and what is defined as a crime continually changes. Durkheim calls this the **moving equilibrium** and argues this is needed for societies to change and evolve. He argued that too much crime causes **anomie** (normlessness, which is a breakdown in the norms and values), too little crime results in society stagnating; but a functional amount of **deviance** allows for creativity, originality and a healthy evolving society. So, the collective sentiments must not become too intense and the state must not become too **repressive**. For society's moral consciousness "to evolve, individual originality must be allowed to manifest itself." For example, Oscar Wilde, the Pankhursts, Malcolm X, the Sex Pistols, the Monty Python team were all condemned as deviant or even criminal. Durkheim therefore regarded some deviance as "an anticipation of the morality of the future". Kingsley Davis also sees deviance as beneficial to a functioning society. He looked at the numbers of married men visiting prostitutes and argued, that although this is **sexual deviance**, it has positive benefits for society. His argument is that such sexual deviance acts as a **safety valve** because it relieve the sexual tension and frustration in married men which ironically actually benefits their marriages, prevents adultery and divorce and so helps to maintain functioning families. Other functionalists such as Travis Hirschi argue that for society to function effectively and avoid anomie there needs to be mechanisms of control. Hirschi's **control theory** argues that societies create **formal rewards** (the state and formal institutions) and **informal rewards** (families, friends and communities) to encourage conformity with societies norms and values. But societies also establish **formal sanctions** (penalties and punishments) and **informal sanctions**. But he argues that for these mechanisms of control to work, individuals must have **bonds of attachment** to family, community, employment, property etc. In other words the more of a stake in society an individual has such as responsibilities and commitments etc. then the less likely they are to **deviate** from the norms and values. **Strain theory** Robert Merton argued that anomie occurs as a result of the **strain** that individuals experience trying to achieve a society's **institutionalised goals**. In modern societies these are usually material goals, such as private property. In the U.S. the American Dream has been created as an attractive but supposedly achievable goal. It's the idea that any American can become wealthy; it's portrayed as meritocratic and failure to achieve the Dream brings shame on the individual for being somehow un-American. But Merton's argument is that societies limit the means of achieving the goals; gaining wealth must only be done **legitimately** (legally). This places more strain on those in structurally disadvantaged positions e.g. the working class, ethnic minorities and women. Those who fail at school and who lack the **social capital** to succeed in business or the job market are particularly susceptible to strain. Merton argued that individuals develop **adaptations** to these pressures or to this strain. One deviant adaptation may be to pursue the goals by selling illegal drugs to gain material wealth, which he called **innovation**. Another maybe to give up on the goals but avoid criminal activity by just maintaining a 9-5 job on a basic wage. This may not be criminal, but it deviates from the pursuit of the goals and he called this **ritualism**. Another maybe to abandon both the goals and the legitimate means and to drop out of mainstream society altogether and he called this **retreatism**. **Subcultural theories** Rather than individual deviance, subcultural theories argue that deviance is usually a **group phenomenon**. Within the subcultural group norms, values and customs exist and are carefully adhered to (just as in mainstream culture) but they're deviant norms and values; a common example of a deviant norm is non-co-operation with the police. Albert Cohen examined groups of **delinquents** (or deviant) boys in America and found that while the boys were reacting to strain and their lack of **status**, they did not react individually. Instead, they identified other young boys and bonded with them forming subcultural groups. He argued that young working-class males develop feelings of shame, failure and frustration as they struggle to gain qualifications and succeed in the job-market or in business. The response to this **status frustration** is more than just a rejection of society's goals and values but an **inversion of values**. For example, rather than respecting private property they set out to steal it and vandalise it. So, this explains **non-utilitarian** crime. Most crime is utilitarian which means it has some material gain. But the gangs he studied often engaged in violence and anti-social behaviour which has no material gain; this is non-utilitarian crime. He argued that this behaviour overcomes status frustration because the criminal behaviour can win the boys a reputation which means gaining status within the gang or within the **alternative status hierarchy**. Cloward and Ohlin's study showed how much more complex deviant subcultures are. They found that the cause of subculture wasn't just failure in the mainstream job market or legitimate opportunity structures, but failure in the criminal world of the **illegitimate opportunity structures**. In other words, the subculture still doesn't guarantee success and status. So, the complexity of subcultures is due to the different types of criminal activity and their positions in the hierarchies of the illegitimate opportunity structures. For example, there are low-level prostitutes and low-level pimps but there are higher level better organised sex-industry networks. There are the homeless, the drop-outs on the streets, the sex workers and drug users (**retreatist subcultures**), violent drug dealing street gangs (**conflict subcultures**) and the organisers of drug supply networks and supply of other illicit goods (**criminal subcultures**). There are also differing criminal activities that take place dependent on the locality. However, David Matza rejects these theories arguing that nobody fully exists in a subculture nor fully internalises the deviant values. Instead, they **drift** in and out of subculture activity, embracing and then abandoning **subterranean values**.