Functionalist Explanations PDF

**Topic 3 -- Functionalist Explanations** ***Key questions: How can crime have positive and negative functions? Why do most people not commit crime? How do Functionalists explain crime and deviance?*** **[Introduction]** Before functionalism, much early criminology was obsessed with finding biolo...

**Topic 3 -- Functionalist Explanations** ***Key questions: How can crime have positive and negative functions? Why do most people not commit crime? How do Functionalists explain crime and deviance?*** **[Introduction]** Before functionalism, much early criminology was obsessed with finding biological explanations for crime. Some criminologists even carried out empirical studies in prisons of the physical characteristics of criminals to see what features meant you were born 'bad'. Functionalists attempt to find a ***social explanation*** for crime levels. As ***structuralists***, functionalists believe that the structures of society influence our behaviour, but they choose to believe, on the whole, that this is a positive thing because society is based on consensus***. Consensus*** refers to the shared agreement that exists within society on norms and values. It's not that they don't recognise conflict, it's just they believe the majority of the time we get along with each other for the benefit of ourselves and society as a whole. **1 Emile Durkheim (1890) -- positive and negative aspects of crime for society** For Durkheim, crime **is inevitable** in society and in many ways necessary to its harmony. He argues crime can have ***both positive and negative aspects.*** ### **Positive aspects of crime/ deviance** Durkheim argued that at the core of society was a set of shared values which guide our actions; he called these the **collective conscience,** collective meaning everyone and conscience to mean ideas. These shared values (collective conscience) distinguish between actions which are acceptable and those which are not. The problem for any society is that the boundaries are not clear, and can change over time. One of the positive functions of crime is that it **re-affirms social boundaries**. Every time that a person breaks a law and is taken to court, the resulting court ceremony and the publicity in the newspapers, publicly re-affirms the existing values. The publicity condemns a person's actions in a public arena. In contemporary society newspapers also help to perform the publicity function, with their often lurid accounts of criminal acts. In effect, the courts and the media are broadcasting the boundaries of acceptable behaviour, warning others not to breach the laws. This is particularly clear in societies where public punishments take place, where the murderer is taken out to be executed in public, or the adulterer is stoned to death. ### In support of Durkheim, **Albert Cohen** suggested carrying out deviant acts can be functional for members of anti-school subcultures because their own subculture will give each other **status** for deviant behaviour, thanks to the way they have inverted the traditional values of the school. ### **The negative aspects of crime** Durkheim stressed that it was a certain, limited amount of crime which performed positive functions for society. Too much crime, on the other hand, had negative consequences. According to Durkheim, society is based on people sharing common values (**the collective conscience**), which form the basis for actions. However, in periods of great social change or stress, the collective conscience may be weakened. In this situation, people may be freed from the social control imposed by the collective conscience and may start to look after their own selfish interests rather than adhering to social values. Durkheim called this situation **anomie. A state of normlessness describes the brief period in time which norms are suspended and previously unaccepted acts or behaviour are displayed. The riots in 2011 quickly escalated into looting and arson and the police had to be deployed on a mass scale. Many people would have walked passed those shops days before the riots and after and didn't steal things from shops, yet for that small period of time, people thought it was acceptable; this is an example of anomie.** **Refer back to the Youth Subcultures pack for information on Durkheim and anomie.** **[Criticism of Durkheim]** **Whereas Durkheim assumes that society has a shared common value system from which to deviate from, Marxists would criticise this and argue that no such shared common value system exists; the bourgeoisie (ruling class) impose their values upon the proletariat (working class) as opposed to there being consensus between groups, which Durkheim suggests. For Marx, the values of the ruling class are reflected in the criminal justice system and the laws which criminalise the poor, unlike Durkheim who believes the laws reflect the values of society as a whole. According to Marx, the bourgeoisie have the power to create laws and so they create laws which benefit them and their interests, this criticises Durkheim because it suggests that society may be biased rather than fair and meritocratic. (See Marxism and crime)** Durkheim fails to explain **why** anomie may occur, under what circumstances people fall into crime and why some individuals experience an individual anomie (breakdown of adherence to value consensus), which Durkheim suggests may lead to deviance (such as suicide), and some do not. **2 Robert Merton (1938) -- strain theory: people turn to crime when experiencing strain** Merton developed Durkheim's theory of anomie and begin to explain why some individuals are more likely to turn to crime than others. Merton suggests that people commit crime because of a **strain** between society's goals and the means of achieving them, hence why his theory is called a strain theory. For Merton, most people have the societal goal of wanting the '**American Dream'**, meaning achieving material success through purchasing high value houses, cars and having a high standard of living. The problem is not everybody has the right skills, qualifications and opportunities to achieve this legitimately (legally) through jobs. This creates what Merton calls '**the strain to anomie'**, meaning this strain causes people to deviate from society's norms and use illegitimate means, such as committing crime in order to be successful. Merton argues it is functional for those experiencing strain to turn to deviant or criminal acts in order to achieve their goal; some groups are more likely to be blocked from the American dream and these groups are more likely to have to deviate. For Merton the response to this strain is individual and categorised by five possible **adaptations;** these are the different ways people respond to the strain. - **Conformity** This is most of the population who want the goal of success (American dream) and achieve it legitimately. - **Innovation (criminal)** These are people who want the goal of success, but cannot achieve it legitimately so must commit crime in order to achieve the goal. Drug dealers and armed robbers are good examples. - **Ritualism (deviant)** These people are deviant because they reject the goal of success, but use legitimate means, a good example is a person who is in a dead end job, but isn't willing to do anything to change it. - **Retreatism (deviant/criminal)** These people are deviant because they reject the goal of success and use illegitimate means. A good example of this maybe an alcoholic, drug taker or homeless person. - **Rebellion (deviant/criminal)** These people are deviant because they reject the goal of success, but in favour of an alternative, they use illegitimate means to achieve this. Karl Marx and Martin Luther King are good examples because they rejected society's goals for alternatives (communism & black civil rights), which required using illegal methods such as protest and revolution to bring these about. Another example of rebellion is terrorism. +-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+ | ***Adaptation** | ***Goal of | ***Means*** | ***Example*** | | * | Success*** | | | +-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+ | Conformity | Accepts | Legitimate | Most people | | | | | | | (Normal) | | | | +-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+ | Innovation | Accepts | Illegitimate | Gangsters | | | | | (Mafia, Al | | (Criminal) | | | Capone) | +-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+ | Ritualism | Rejects | Legitimate | People in dead | | | | | end jobs. | | (Deviant) | | | | +-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+ | Retreatism | Rejects | Illegitimate | Addicts | | | | | | | (Deviant/crimin | | | | | al) | | | | +-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+ | Rebellion | Rejects for | Illegitimate | Karl Marx, | | | alternative | | Martin Luther | | (Deviant/crimin | | | King | | al) | | | | +-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+ **3 Cloward and Ohlin -- illegitimate opportunity structures** These Functionalist subculturalists (see Youth pack) use Merton's Strain theory to explain why some youth turn to crime. They argue that there is greater pressure for working class youth compared to middle class youth to deviate from mainstream norms and values because they have less opportunity to succeed within what they called 'the legitimate opportunity structure'. By this they mean using education, jobs and careers in order to move up the structure of society and to get money. Cloward and Ohlin suggest that working class youth are more likely to have access to a parallel opportunity structure, called the **illegitimate opportunity structure**. By this they mean that for some subcultures in society, a regular illegal career was available, with recognised illegal means of obtaining society\'s goals. The **illegal opportunity structure** had three possible adaptations or subcultures: - ***Criminal**-* this adaptation is where there is a thriving local criminal subculture, with successful role models. Young offenders can \'work their way up the ladder\' in the criminal hierarchy. - ***Conflict -*** here there is no local criminal subculture to provide a career opportunity. Groups brought up in this sort of environment are likely to turn to violence, usually against other similar groups. Cloward and Ohlin give the example of violent gang **\'warfare\'.** - ***Retreatist -*** this tends to be a more individual response and occurs where the individual has no opportunity or ability to engage in either of the other two subcultures. He is a \'double failure\'. The result is a retreat into alcohol or drugs. The type of subculture individuals joined would depend on their availability. If a criminal subculture existed in their neighborhood then it is likely that an individual would join that; if however the local subculture was based on fighting they would join a conflict subculture. Only as a last resort would an individual join a retreatist subculture as this reaps the least reward. Cloward and Ohlin are considered to be **functionalist** theorists as they suggest that joining a subculture can be functional for the individual -- it allows opportunities to develop. **[Criticisms of Cloward and Ohlin]** Whereas Cloward and Ohlin assume there is a common value system to deviate from, Marxists don't agree -- they see these values as imposed by the ruling class. **Feminists argue that Functionalist theories fail to explore female victimisation and don't focus enough on how women are disadvantaged by the criminal justice system which is dominated by men in a patriarchal society. (See Topic 10 on Feminism and crime)** **4 Venkatesh -- crime can be functional for individuals** You will recall from your Youth unit that Venkatesh called the Chicago gang lifestyle which he observed '**Outlaw Capitalism'** by which he meant an alternative opportunity structure. He argued that his sample of working-class men from ethnic minority backgrounds had few opportunities since the level of unemployment was 80% in that area. They adopted a gang lifestyle since it offered an income, daily work, a fraternity, a hierarchy and possibilities for promotion, just like a legitimate job. So Venkatesh shows that illegal drug selling gangs may serve a very sensible function for gang members who need these elements in order to function in society. Where regular services had withdrawn e.g. banks wouldn't lend to people living on this estate, the gang stepped in to provide services instead e.g. high interest loans. So this shows that some crime may be functional for some individuals. **Criticisms of Venkatesh** Venkatesh has been criticised for ignoring the negatives of gang life, and over emphasising the positives. Feminists suggest his viewpoint is too malestream, failing to consider the impact of the crimes such as prostitution upon the women who are pimped out, and he effect on children and families when they become addicted to drugs. Feminists such as **Harding** point out that gangs are rarely functional for women who are kept low in the hierarchy and often used solely for their sexual capital.