Cultural Deviance Theory for Criminology PDF

Preview

Summary

Its all about the different cultural deviance that affect everyone...

Description

Cultural Deviance Theory

The cultural deviance theory states that social disorganization and delinquency are linked, resulting in crime as a normal response to the social, structural and cultural characteristics of a community. This theory uses cultural mapping to explain that people are not inherently deviant, but they are influenced by circumstance. This theory combines elements of both Strain and Social Disorganization Theory to explain how people living in slum neighborhoods react to isolation from the rest of society and economic deprivation. Because this lifestyle is extremely frustrating and draining, members of the lower class often create their own subculture (a social unit with its own rules and values). The middleclass culture emphasizes hard work, delayed gratification, and education. The lower class subculture emphasizes excitement, toughness, fearlessness, immediate gratification, and "street smarts." The lower class subculture has many followers because it is easier to fit into than the middle class culture. Slum dwellers are forced to violate the law because they obey the rules of the deviant culture in order to fit into their surroundings.

Lower Class Focal Concerns Walter Miller (1958) believed that the lower-class caused criminal behavior through culturally shared ideas. He did not focus on social conditions; instead he believed delinquency was created directly from the value system of the lower-class culture that had developed as a response to the environmental conditions of slum life. Miller argued that the lower-class had a unique identifiable culture with values quite different from the middle class. Delinquency occurs as a byproduct of lower-class goal achievement. Miller developed his lower class focal concerns to explain how lower-class interests and values perpetuate and facilitate crime and deviance. Millers focal concerns suggest that features of lower-class culture also lead to deviance through a distinct normative structure that conflicts with norms of the dominant culture. Miller's theory is grounded in learning theory and ecological data; to the extent that the norms learned in lower-class settings depart from those of the dominant middle-class culture, the stage is set for culture conflict. Miller identified six focal concerns: i.

Trouble (Interference from official social control agents of the dominant culture)

1. At the heart of trouble, however, is the potential for arrest, fines, court appearances, jail sentences, and similar inconviences generated in response to drinking sprees, fights, or other illegal behavior.

2.

Trouble represents undesirable consequences

3.

Potential for trouble serves as a negative criterion for mate selection in the lower class.

4.

Trouble is met with ambivalence in lower-class structure.

ii.

Toughness (Distorted image of masculinity)

1. May be a reaction to female-dominated households that are prominent in the lower-class environment. 2. Lacking male role models, lower-class boys develop patterns of behavior that distort masculinity. 3. Boys who are upwardly mobile, scholastically successful, or who develop artistic talents are labeled "queer", "sissy," or "pansy," while tattoos are considered masculine.

iii. Smartness (Skill and ability to dominate verbal exchanges pertinent to the lower-class environment) 1. The ability to manipulate and outwit others through skillful deployment of verbal and psychological skills. 2. Mastery of these skills can place an individual even higher in social rank than the "tough guy." 3. The "smart guy" is also admired as one who reaps benefits from others with a minimum of physical effort.

iv. Excitement (Relieving the monotonous routine of lower-class existence through emotionarousing entertainment that often violates norms of the dominant culture)

v.

Fate (Belief in little control over the forces shaping one's life)

1. One is "lucky" or "unlucky" and, although luck is seen as prone to shift, the future is not seen as subject to control.

vi. Autonomy (Ambivalence regarding freedom from external control reflected in overt resentment of control, but covert pursuit of control)

1.

Reflects resentment of the lower-class toward control and authority.

Some opponents of Miller's Focal Concerns suggest or charge that they resemble stereotyping and bigotry. These concerns put people at odds with those of the larger culture, and make them more likely to get into trouble

Middle Class Measuring Rod Are children in the lower-class destined to fail? Albert K. Cohen (1955) suggested that members of the lower-class couldn't live up to middle class expectations. At every step of life, (school, work, community) they are judged by members of the middle-class who have different cultural standards. Cohen focused on the school as a tool of lower class failure. Our educational system is built on the values of the middle class and therefore this value system is regarded as the "middle-class measuring rod". Strong emphasis is placed on reading and writing skills, and most teachers come from the middle class. Cohen believed lower-class children weren't taught the basic skills needed to thrive in middle-class culture. Thus, they are treated differently by teachers and other school administrators and learn from a very early age that they do not "measure up". Frustration over failing to meet the middle class standard causes delinquent behavior. Delinquency arises out of the cultural conflict. When they can't achieve middle-class success, lower-class children band together and form their own culture, a culture of poverty, with new measures of success that are quite different from the middle class. Crime is the result of being held to a middle class measuring rod that by definition doesn't allow the lower-class to succeed. When youth reject the middle class values because they are frustrated by the thing that can't have and they commit more fully to the lower class values this is seen as reaction formation the psychological process of rejecting the thing that you can't have.

School Drop Outs: Race, Class, and Gender—You Decide Cohen proposed that lower-class children learn at an early age that they are never going to 'measure up' to middle class values. Meeting with continual failure, they become frustrated and drop out of school. Those without high school diplomas have a difficult time functioning in modern society. A high school degree is a minimum requirement for many jobs, and those with degrees consistently obtain higher income and occupational status, while those without are more likely to be unemployed (Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy, 2008). High school dropouts are more likely to live in poverty, utilize government aid and have involvement in criminal activity (Belfield & Levin, 2007).

Theory of Culture Conflict In 1938, criminologist Thorsten Sellin wrote a book entitled Culture Conflict and Crime that clarified the culture conflict theory. According to Sellin, the root cause of crime is based upon various values and beliefs for what is acceptable behavior. The clash of these values and beliefs result in crime. Furthermore, since crime constitutes a violation of the law, the criminal act is simply a clash over what is the acceptable behavior. In addition, Sellin referred to two types of culture conflict: primary conflict and secondary conflict. Initially, primary conflict occurs when the clash involves fundamental cultural beliefs. Secondary conflict involves less fundamental beliefs. Moreover, Sellin indicated that secondary conflict exists between the middle class and lower class. The middle class goes to work every day in order to make a living through a legal manner. Meanwhile, others engage in illegal activities, such as prostitution, in order to make a living. These illegal activities have been established by laws created by middle and upper classes. According to Sellin, crime continues as these two classes clash.

Cul t ur eConfli ctTheor y  



1920s-Pr esent Cul t ur eConfl i ctTheor y ,al soknownasCul t ur al Dev i anceTheor y ,i s" as oc i ol ogi cal per spect i v et hats ugges t st hatt her ootc aus eofc r i mi nal i t ycanbef oundi nac l as hof v al uesbet weenv ar i ousl ysoci al i z edgr oupsov erwhati sac cept abl eorpr operbehavi or . " ( Sc hmal l egerp.275) Cul t ur eConfl i ctTheor yal s opr es umest hatpeopl eout si det hemai nst r eam mayadaptt o s ubc ul t ur es ,whi chhav et hei rownnor msandv al ues ,andmayc el ebr at ec r i mi nal or dev i antbehav i or ....